I/O Cross-Cultural Psychology 1
Past, Present, and Future of Cross-Cultural Studies in Industrial and Organizational Psychology Sharon Glazer San Jos State University
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 2
Past, Present, and Future of Cross-Cultural Studies in Industrial and Organizational Psychology Introduction Interest in cultural research began with the Father of Psychology, Wilhelm Wundt (ngel & Smith, 1994), but pursuit in the assessment of cultural differences and similarities was put on the back burner until recently. Cross-cultural studies in Industrial and Organizational (I/O) psychology further lacks a history (cf. Erez, 1994a). Although work-related psychology research is plentiful in single-nation studies, such as the United States, United Kingdom, Sweden, Israel, India, Germany, Japan, and Finland, cross-cultural I/O psychology research may be insufficient because there are not enough theories in single nation I/O psychology studies, in general. And Berry (1989) suggests, deriving etics (i.e., universal theories) might be done by imposing a theory established in one culture to other cultures. Nonetheless, there was a thrust in cross-cultural comparative research after the 1980's when Hofstede (1980) published his research of a typology of values (individualism-collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-femininity) on which to compare more than forty nations. Most of the countries exemplified in cross-cultural research are in fields other than I/O psychology. In the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology only two I/O related articles were published in the period from 1970-1993 (ngel & Smith, 1994). Should one consider social psychology to be strongly related to I/O psychology in terms of themes addressed then one might presume that articles falling under the cross-cultural social psychology heading may be relevant to cross-cultural I/O psychology, as well. Examining only human resources and organizational behavior journals, Tayeb (1994) noted that nearly 94 percent of the articles mentioned the importance of cross-cultural research, but very few had actually tested its relevance. Erez (1994a) also found that of over 2,000 articles from thirteen English-language
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 3 journals, written by authors from eight different countries, under the heading of "Applied and Organizational Psychology," during the period of 1980-1989, only twenty-one were crosscultural studies! The purpose of this chapter is to present a review of cross-cultural and cross-national studies that have been conducted in I/O psychology-related topics and determine topics for future research. Before delving into the literature review, it would serve well to note here that while the terms "cross-cultural" and "cross-national" are very different, they will be used interchangeably as a result of their misuse in the studies reviewed. It is my belief that crosscultural research is conducted when culture variables are studied as explanations for nations' effects on other variables. Georgas and Berry (1995) argued that interchanging these terms would amount to abandoning "culture as a theoretical concept in cross-culture research" (p. 127), because the very characteristics making up a nation, do not necessarily make up a culture. Culture can be defined as values, attitudes, meanings (attributed to language), beliefs, and ways of acting and interacting that are learned and shared by a group of people over a period of history and are often taken for granted as reality by those within the `said' culture (Earley & Singh, 1995; Tayeb, 1994; Zapf, 1991). The term `nation' includes social, education, business, political, and economic factors in addition to culture (Tayeb, 1994), although many cultures can make up a nation. Culture can also be influenced by linguistic, economic, political, legal, and religious systems, but they are not necessarily characteristic of the culture at all times. Thus, a cross-national study may be a cross-cultural study if culture variables are accounted for, but not all cross-cultural studies are necessarily cross-national. When a cross-national study is conducted, assessment of variables specific to culture may not be necessary, but when striving to conduct a cross-cultural study, it will be those characteristics defining culture which one wants to examine closely to determine if any variations or similarities exist between or among them.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 4 Work-Related Terms Across Cultures Another problem with cross-cultural research is the lack of conceptual definitions for relevant terminology. For example, England and Harpaz (1990) studied the meaning of "working" in a sample of workers in Belgium, Federal Republic of Germany, Israel, Japan, Netherlands, and the U.S.A. They found three major distinctions for defining "working." These categories included: (1) reason for engaging in work (i.e., economic support or because of feelings of obligation), (2) expected outcomes for engaging in working activities, and (3) controls related to performing in work. Similarly, the word "career" can readily be translated into Hebrew, however, for Israelis it has a connotation of "egoistic, self-centered motivation that is socially undesirable" (Etzion & Bailyn, 1994, p. 1543). In a study of the European operations of Arthur Andersen and Company, Jinkerson, Cummings, and Neisendorf (1992) noted that the term, "culture," as in organizational culture, defined by the Americans, was not easily understood by all respondents. The results of these studies imply that even "simple" terms have complex and different meanings across cultures. Good translations are vital for comparing variables across cultures. Ryan, Chan, Ployhart, and Slade (1999) learned that the measurement of job satisfaction, workload and stress, quality culture, and supervisory communication (with 11 items) was invariant for USA and Australian workers of a multinational organization, but not for the Mexican and Spanish, or USA and Mexican workers of the same company. Without measurement invariance subsequent analyses are futile (see Cheung & Rensvold, 1999, for detailed description of testing factorial invariance across cultures). As research in I/O psychology develops, researchers should beware of falling into the trap of generalizing theories and research methods developed in one dominant culture to other cultures (Henderson, Sampselle, Mayes, & Oakley 1992), as different factors function
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 5 differently on the other cultures' perceptions of the world (Zapf, 1991). Using them incorrectly in research can compromise results and interpretation of findings. Thus, the greatest obstacle is transferring `meaning' (Jankowicz, 1994). "When we go across cultures, we go across lines of manifest as well as latent content" (Matsumoto, 1995, p. 228). In other words, there are as many cultural variations underlying meanings of general constructs (Antonucci, Fuhrer, & Jackson, 1990; Jankowicz, 1994). Not understanding what terms mean or finding that constructs do not hold the same meanings to people of different cultural backgrounds may be professional suicide for a consultant and misleading for the researcher. Personnel Psychology Most research in Personnel Psychology is related to training and development. Because people go across cultural and national borders, training and development appear to be important for enhancing individuals' and organizations' effectiveness. However, many researchers and companies have neglected to emphasize the importance of appropriate selection procedures and subsequent appraisal of the sojourners/expatriates' performance on overseas assignments. Through an extensive review of literature, it is apparent that little money is spent for training and developing sojourners, however, I would wager that even less money is spent for selecting the right people for an assignment abroad. Usually, the person sent or reassigned has performed well at "home," and it is assumed that he or she will perform well abroad too. This assumption relates to "The Peter Principle." Management may promote or reassign someone to the highest level of incompetence. In the case of the expatriate, he or she might return home early from an assignment, because the person did not have what it takes to fulfill the assigned role. The expatriate might feel detached from the parent company (having been away) and, by returning early, feel devastated for not completing the assignment, thereby ensuring a poor performance appraisal review, not to mention the enormous loss of money to the company who
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 6 sent the incumbent. These problems call for developing and assessing better selection tools and designing performance appraisal review systems that are relevant and appropriate for a sojourner or expatriate (and for the repatriate who returns with new skills). Training and Development Across Cultures Around the 1970's, and somewhat in the 1960's and 1950's, researchers started to develop, implement, and publish cross-cultural training programs (cf. Fowler, 1994). Because international businesses and availability of expatriate positions were increasing, so was the need for sound cross-cultural training. Cross-cultural training is a preparatory process designed to help people live, work, study, and perform well in various cultures through the development of behavioral, cognitive, and affective abilities (Fowler, 1994). A large part of cross-cultural training was established as a result of poor communication with hosts of a foreign environment (Hammer & Martin, 1992). Through quantitative and qualitative research, a number of researchers (e.g., Bhawuk, 1998; Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992; Gregersen & Black, 1990; Hammer & Martin, 1992; Watson & Kumar, 1992) illustrated that intercultural communication training can have a positive effect on an expatriate's assimilation in his or her new environment, improved performance, and effective decision-making. Noting the importance of adjustment, in 1955 Lysgaard discussed this issue for foreigners visiting the United States on a Fulbright grant. Later, in the 1960's, others also began to examine how foreign expatriates acclimated in the United States. Unfortunately, research at that time was still centered on the USA (i.e., how others adjusted in the USA). Today, scholars (e.g., Aycan & Berry, 1996; Saunders & Aycan, 1997; Ward & Kennedy, 1996; Ward & RanaDeuba, 1999; 2000) are studying expatriate, sojourner, and immigrant adjustment throughout much of the world. In particular, scholars and practitioners are recognizing that training is helpful to all who go abroad (Bhawuk & Brislin, 2000). Training programs should provide a
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 7 taste for differences across cultures and tools to handle them (Ptak, Cooper, & Brislin, 1995; Triandis & Singelis, 1998) In a review of literature on cross-cultural training, Hesketh and Bochner (1994) declared that cross-cultural training was needed, especially as the number of multinational corporations from the United States and Great Britain onto mainland Western Europe and a few select other countries increases. Unfortunately, since the 1960's cross-cultural training was rare. A lack of cross-cultural training may have led to a great loss of money for many organizations. Copeland and Griggs (1985) noted that US firms, whose expatriates could not complete their overseas job due to their inability to adjust to the new culture, lose nearly two billion dollars annually. If only more than just 30 percent of multinational organizations would invest in preparing their employees for work in a foreign country through cross-cultural training (Black, 1988, cited in Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992) would less than 20-40 percent return home early (Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992). A possible holdup of cross-cultural training is lack of evidence that it works (Black & Mendenhall, 1990). In order to acquire evidence of its effectiveness or failure, training needs to be conducted. As the problem and the solution are so intricately interwoven, organizations tend not to provide financial support to test the effectiveness of training. Often organizations do not recognize that even if cross-cultural training fails, it does not indicate that the expatriate's adjustment ability got worse, rather it probably had no change. However, we will never know of its effectiveness without developing culture theories that are applicable to cross-cultural training (Bhawuk, 1998). Not implementing cross-cultural training keeps the problem in its fury, but implementing cross-cultural training can at least, partly help, if not greatly help an expatriate in his or her assignment for the full duration. Monies spent for training an expatriate who returns early is money spent well for reassessing and developing the training program.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 8 Evidence of the usefulness of cross-cultural training has been accumulating in the past decade. Research has shown that cross-cultural skill development, adjustment, and performance better with cross-cultural training than without it (Gannon & Poon, 1997; Goldstein & Smith, 1999; Kealey & Protheroe, 1996). Although people learn from experience and the consequence of experience shapes present and future behavior (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992), not everyone has had experience abroad. Therefore, cross-cultural training is intended to shape behavior in a new cultural setting. Cross-cultural training is often divided into cognitive and experiential-based training. Goldstein and Smith (1999), in a post-test only design study, found that student sojourners attending an experiential week-long training program faired better in terms of cross-cultural adaptability and emotional resilience, than a control group and international students, in general. Moreover, adding a cognitive component to an experiential cross-cultural training program was even better than one or none, but neither experiential nor cognitive was better than the other (Hammer & Martin, 1992; Harrison, 1992). Harrison (1992) concluded that receiving explanations of behaviors increased the amount of learning that occurred in a cognitive approach and that learning occurred in the experiential training approach, but combined approaches were significantly more effective on learning measures than either of the individual methods alone. Similarly, Gannon and Poon (1997) found little difference between experiential (simulation game), integrative (lecture, discussion, group exercise), or video-based training approaches. However, MBA students in the experiential programs were more satisfied and felt it more useful and relevant than MBA students in the other conditions. Not only might people have been more satisfied with experiential based training, but also anxieties were greatly reduced when it was introduced to the cognitive-based training (Hammer & Martin, 1992). With cross-cultural
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 9 training, self-confidence and cross-cultural perceptions, as well as interactive skills, selfdevelopment, adjustment, and performance are improved (Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992). Utility of Training Deshpande and Viswesvaran (1992) were the only researchers found thus far to have exemplified the utility gain of cross-cultural training for expatriates in a new culture. They suggested that future studies need to incorporate measures of nature of occupation (i.e., complexity), job characteristics, cultural familiarity, nature of sojourner-host interactions, mode of adjustment, various individual (e.g., personality) and organizational factors (e.g., selection criteria), and nonwork factors (e.g., cultural novelty) as potential moderators of the effectiveness of cross-cultural training and length of sojourn. For example, "if trained employees stayed within the organization for a period of five years, a training program for one hundred managers would translate into utility gains of $390,000 (10,000 X .78 X 100 X 5) for the organization" (Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992, p. 305). Selection As human resource management (HRM) practices globalize (Aycan et al., 2000; Aycan & Kanungo, 1997; Aycan, Kanungo, & Sinha, 1999) and expatriates are making selection decisions in their host cultures, it becomes imperative to learn how adopting certain selection techniques impact applicants or trading off selection practices affect the assessor. Different means of selection and retention are still among the many new demands placed upon the increasing number of international businesses around the world (Gregersen & Black, 1990). In addition, it is apparent that early returns are partly due to adjustment problems. In this section, I discuss quantitative predictors of adjustment, as well as attitudinal factors (e.g., satisfaction and commitment) and behavioral tendencies that might be considered before selecting and sending someone overseas.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 10 As the European Community allowed its members to work anywhere in the fifteen country alliance, people began to encounter "strange" selection procedures. For example, Shackleton and Newell (1991) learned that, in Britain, interviews were usually conducted by a panel, whereas in France interviews were usually held by successive individuals. British employers used references more than French employers. French companies put more emphasis on personality tests, graphology tests, and biodata than the British, but the British relied more on formal and structured techniques (Naulleau & Criccom, 1993), as offered by assessment centers. The French relied more on intuitive-type methods of selection and abstract management styles (Naulleau & Criccom, 1993; Shackleton & Newell, 1991), although they did not consider these techniques to be logical and they rated these techniques negatively (Steiner & Gilliland, 1996). In fact, selection decisions based on work-sample tests, interviews, and resumes were considered more reliable (Steiner & Gilliland, 1996). Therefore, when designing a global selection process for a multinational firm, it is important not only to examine the validity of the selection tools, but also how favorable the various methods are in a given social context. Moreover, knowing what are acceptable and normal selection practices can help avoid any ethical and legal repercussions. Another problem in selecting expatriates is relying on professional experience and reputation (in other words, tenure and rank) of the candidate, as opposed to capabilities to do the work and adjustability (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992; Gregersen & Black, 1990). However, Gregersen and Black (1990) noted that the higher the position an expatriate held in the organizational hierarchy, the more likely he or she wanted to return home prior to completing the contracted time. People in high positions were probably sent abroad because of a long tenure with a company and seniority was probably strongly related to assignments cut short. There are a number of reasons why people cut their assignments. First, going home may reduce feelings
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 11 of loneliness from the absence of important corporate information and resources (Gregersen & Black). Another possibility for going home may be to gain access to those who determine promotions. People who are prone to feeling "left out" may not be suitable to work in another country and those deploying people for work outside of the country are most likely unaware that a good worker in one country (regardless if "good" is through merit or seniority) may not be good in another. Assessing intercultural sensitivity (e.g., Triandis & Singelis, 1998) and personal aspirations with a company prior to selecting someone to work abroad may help avoid high costs of an early return. Bhawuk and Brislin (1992) and Bhawuk (1998) proposed a measurement of sensitivity, for those considering careers in international business. Triandis and Singelis (1998) empirically supported the usefulness of assessing "subjective Individualism and Collectivism" as a way of training people to recognize that there is much variation even within culture. Thus, it is not only important to know how cultures differ, but also how people within a culture differ in terms of values held. Number of years spent abroad (i.e., more than three years), number of foods tried, and people who enjoyed working on international fair activities were important variables related to intercultural sensitivity (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992). Age, friends from other cultures, and knowing more than one language had no significant impact on sensitivity (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992). Probably, intercultural sensitivity does not stem from what and whom one knows, but one's personality to seek new experiences. Interculturally sensitive people have respect for and enjoy interacting with culturally different others. Moreover, they accept the special qualities that make each culture unique. It follows that people without extensive cross-cultural experience should be deployed to countries that are not crucial to their operation or are proximally similar in culture.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 12 People who have large cross-cultural transitions (i.e., New Zealand students studying abroad in Europe and the Americas) are more likely to have socio-cultural adjustment problems than those who made small transitions (i.e., Malaysians going to their neighboring country, Singapore) (Ward & Kennedy, 1996), because large transitions indicate fewer available cultureappropriate skills (Mak, Westwood, Ishiyama, & Barker, 1999; Triandis, 1997; Ward & Kennedy, 1996). To ease adjustment in large transitions, developing language and interpersonal skills with hosts can help sojourners adapt (Cui, van den Berg, & Jiang, 1998). Moreover, how easy it is to transfer from one culture to another positively impacts adjustment (Paik, Rody, & Sohn, 1998) and self-efficacy. Based on a study of Korean managers working in the USA, it appears that moving from a high power distance and high uncertainty avoidance, as well as feminine culture to a culture with lower uncertainty avoidance and power distance may be easier than the opposite (Paik et al., 1998; Triandis, 1997). Thus, while sensitivity may not be impacted by language knowledge (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992), intercultural communication capabilities do have an impact on adjustment (Cui et al., 1998). Furthermore, research has shown that expatriates in Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Belgium, England, Netherlands, and West Germany were more likely to complete an assignment when committed to the parent company (Gregersen & Black, 1990). Commitment to the host company did not account for a large amount of variance in intention to leave. Sojourners' relations to a host company may be seen as transient, and therefore, less committed than to the parent company (Alnajjar, 1999). Ward and Rana-Deuba's (1999; 2000) studies also showed that relations with co-nationals helped sojourners' (in Nepal) psychological adjustment and contact with their hosts helped sojourners adapt to their host nation's customs and norms. Moreover, not only was adjustment to host nationals and environment important in retaining expatriates, but also their commitment level to the parent and host organization. If one felt
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 13 greater attachment to the parent organization than to the host company and proximally distanced from the parent organization, expatriates would have less likely completed their assignment before their contract was over. Commitment to parent and host companies may be difficult to assess when the potential sojourner has not yet visited or lived in the host country. However, Orpen (1990) suggests measuring action tendency of attitudes (i.e., how one `wants to act' with respect to various job aspects). The Action Tendency of job satisfaction among fifty-three Australian employees, for example, was highly correlated with separate measures of job involvement, work motivation, and overall job satisfaction. In addition, Montagliani and Giacalone (1998) recommended looking at the predictive validity of impression management and cross-cultural adaptation measures. A more concrete way of assessing a potential sojourner for a job may be through assessment centers (Briscoe, 1997). Thus far, Briscoe has recommended that designers of assessment centers be culturally sensitive, experienced, and/or trained. Designers should take into consideration cultural sensitivity of the assessees and choose assessors who have knowledge of national and cultural issues. When implementing assessment centers, Briscoe suggested evaluating the behaviors of assessees on the basis of predetermined criteria that are justified. Another avenue for research is on risk takers (e.g., Goszczynska, Tyszka, & Slovic, 1991). A common clich is that the most successful managers were those who were not afraid to take risks. Perhaps those who adjust best in overseas assignments are those who are not afraid to take risks when interacting with people of diverse cultural backgrounds. Such studies should also examine what constitutes "risky behavior" in various cultures and how risk-taking is perceived by people of a given culture in order to interpret the data correctly. Recently, research on an expatriate's adjustment has been focusing on family adjustment (Caligiuri, Hyland, Joshi, & Bross 1998). Longitudinal research suggests that the family has a
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 14 great deal of influence on an expatriate's adjustment and assignment completion. Families that conceived of moving to a new country in a positive light, adjusted better than those who perceived the move negatively. In determining whether to send someone abroad, family characteristics appear to play a mediating role in the success of the expatriate. Although, assessing family characteristics can be dangerous to the incumbent's working relationship with the organization, especially if the family does not see the international move positively. Perhaps, then, a solution might be to provide a great deal of preparation for the family. Performance Appraisal Performance appraisal review systems (PARS) have rarely been studied in a crosscultural context or from an indigenous perspective. In this section PARS on individual's work performance is discussed. Group appraisal1 brings in numerous issues that would require more space than is available here. It should be expected that the PARS of a parent company would change in subsidiaries in light of cultural context. For example, while feedback is intended to shape performance (Earley, 1986) feedback has different effects on workers' performance in different countries (Earley & Stubblebine, 1989). Feedback may help reduce work role uncertainty and help an individual, who is from a culture valuing high uncertainty avoidance, to structure and plan his or her work-related activities. It might also reduce conflict by maintaining a formal pattern of interaction between workers and managers in a high power distance society. Also, the level of trust in one's supervisor mediates one's acceptance of feedback for improving performance (Earley, 1986). Whether the feedback is in the form of praise or criticism can be differentially effective in changing a worker's performance. However, in collectivist societies, individual feedback may post a threat to social relationships and harmony. In an individualistic
Kirkman and Shapiro's (1997) study of performance evaluations in self-directed work teams introduced concepts such as social loafing (cf. Erez & Somech, 1996) and free riding (cf. Erez, 1994b), distributive and procedural justice of rewards based on group performance (Kirkman & Shapiro, 1997), and team trust and confidentiality when conducting PARs.
1
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 15 society, where competition and individual achievement is valued, individual feedback may be better received (without losing face) (Weldon & Jehn, 1995). These results strongly suggest that it is vital to know in which cultural contexts to implement certain kinds of PAR Systems (PARS). In particular, expatriate managers should be extremely cognizant of both the organization's culture and country's cultural contexts, as HR techniques developed in one culture are not readily applied in another culture. Feedback systems, such as that of the PARS, may need to be tailored to fit the cultural milieu where an expatriate sojourns. Who does the appraising also depends on the cultural context. No research has been found to provide insight on this. However, if one is an expatriate--the immediate supervisor in the host national firm and one's immediate supervisor in the parent country might be the appropriate appraisers. Acceptance of a subordinates' or colleagues' PARs may depend on culture; ratees in some cultures might find subordinate and/or peer evaluations offensive. A selfappraisal might be appropriate in some cultural contexts, but not in others (Farh, Dobbins, & Cheng, 1991). Farh et al. found that collectivists (i.e., Taiwanese) are modest in self-ratings of performance and rarely (if at all) exaggerate their accomplishments. In fact, Taiwanese employees gave themselves lower self-rating in their job performance than their supervisors. However, when the items loading on a variable were worded negatively, leniency bias, as opposed to modesty, was shown. Furthermore, the evaluations given to subordinates by both U.S. and Taiwanese supervisors were not more or less lenient from each other. Collectivist subordinates' ratings will probably not be inflated, yet not accurate either. Using self-ratings should be considered carefully in the context of various cultures, because in some cultures--selfratings may be lenient, whereas in other cultures-- ratings may be modest. In addition, it may be prudent for HR departments to consider wording of the performance appraisal review form,
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 16 as negative wording in collectivist cultures may aid in truth reporting and greater reliability of the PARS. Another important issue to consider is conducting reviews of individuals' performance by comparing people to others and inadvertently raising or lowering the status of others (Barnlund & Araki, 1985). In an individualistic society that type of appraisal would be acceptable, as it confirms the unique contributions of each person in the society and encourages competition for the purpose of development (Gelfand, Spurlock, Sniezek, & Shao, 2000). However, in cultures that stress harmonious group relations, such comparisons could break up the group's unity. When managers and subordinates are from different countries there may be difficulty understanding each other's behaviors (Shaw, 1990). If a multinational firm relies on selfratings, there may be bias against employees who do not engage in individual aggrandizement. As a result, comparing employees' self-ratings would be an incorrect indication of true performance. Because people tend to perceive in ways that reflect what they value (Triandis, 1994), especially when making decisions regarding performance appraisal (Ralston, Gustafson, Elsass, Cheung, & Terpstra, 1992), and both the rater and the ratee have different criteria for a `good performer,' not being aware of cultural differences can be very damaging (Shaw, 1990). Thus, an expatriate going from an individualistic society to a collective society would need to learn, for example, that there is little variance in manager and subordinate behaviors across situations, while in individualistic societies, a foreign manager may have several different behavioral styles that can be used across different situations (Shaw, 1990). Next, dimensions assessed should be based mainly on important task performance dimensions that are related to a particular job (Kealey & Protheroe, 1996) or to skills needed to adjust. For the first year of being back home, repatriates should probably be appraised like
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 17 expatriates, because their behaviors, attitudes, and even values change during their overseas assignment (Black, 1992). Thus, evaluations may be based on expatriates' or repatriates' abilities to apply learned skills in the context of a new or renewed cultural environment. Some of the skills include: (1) working effectively with other people, which means enhancing one's partnership skills by developing effective exchange in decision-making and shared risk taking (Dean & Popp, 1990; Kealey & Protheroe, 199); (2) dealing with unfamiliar situations and lifestyle changes, which means adjusting or adapting to a host national by adjusting to the job, interacting with host nationals (Black, 1992; Dean & Popp, 1990), and accepting cultural rituals and integrating into the host's society by engaging in outside-work activities; and (3) expecting communication problems, because communication skills are important for building trust and understanding (e.g., listening and observing, tolerating cultural differences, dealing patiently with ambiguous situations to enhance job performance) (Dean & Popp, 1990; Kealey & Protheroe, 1996; Masterson & Murphy, 1986). These dimensions may prove to be more important in enhancing performance than the tasks needed to achieve the goal of an assignment, because a lack of skills in these areas may have direct effects on employees' work behaviors and assignment completion. There is a great need for more research on performance appraisal review systems. This review provides some possibilities for further studies on performance appraisals. Organizational Psychology Motivation and Values For the most part, work motivation researchers are concerned with eliminating factors that block people from working effectively and determining factors that motivate them to engage in more productive work. Work-related motivation has been studied from a cross-cultural perspective in terms of work values. Work values guide people's behaviors. A primary reason
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 18 to study values and attitudes held by individuals in organizations and societies around the world is to presumably gain a greater understanding and appreciation for their motivational influence on varying behaviors in an international workforce (Dahler-Larsen, 1998; Yavas, Luqumani, & Quraeshi, 1990). Understanding the meanings of people's values (Dahler-Larsen, 1998) and attitudes might help researchers learn how differently people of various cultural or national groups behave under similar situations. Likewise, when one studies organizations in another culture, one intends to learn procedures that seem to be working well for the organization in one country in order to develop and implement changes in another country that would affect organizations', groups', and individuals' abilities to produce better products and solve problems (Magyari-Beck, 1992). Consequently, learning about values, attitudes, and procedures, help consultants develop effective training and development strategies (Yavas et al., 1990). Work values and motivators differ across cultures and managers do not always know what motivates their employees (Silverthorne, 1992). For example, a large gap was found between what managers perceived motivated their subordinates and what the workers reported to be motivating in Russia and USA. In contrast, Taiwanese managers seemed to be fairly consistent with their subordinates regarding reported motivators. That is, workers' reported motivators and managers' perception of motivating factors were congruent in Taiwan. Other studies have shown that value orders do not necessarily differ across countries, and across cultures within countries, but the mean scores of the values differ significantly (Elizur, Borg, Hunt & Magyari-Beck, 1991; Maurer, Oszustowicz, & Stocki, 1994; Schwartz & Sagie, 2000; Yamauchi, 1993; Yavas et al., 1990). Not only were there differences between Far Eastern and Western cultures and Communist/former Communist and Western cultures, but even between those belonging to similar cultures, like Germany and Holland (Elizur et al., 1991), China and Japan (Yamauchi, 1993), and Poland and Germany (Maurer, et al. 1994).
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 19 Moreover, differences in the extent to which attributes and end states are valued do not only vary across regions and countries within regions, but also between cultures within a country. Shackleton and Ali (1990) found that British nationals rated low on power distance and uncertainty avoidance, Sudanese nationals rated high on power distance and low on uncertainty avoidance, and Pakistanis in Pakistan and Great Britain were completely opposite from British nationals (i.e., Pakistanis were high on power distance and uncertainty avoidance). This may imply that culture of origin had a stronger influence over work values than one's present cultural sphere, even when born in a country not of family origin. Moreover, unlike the other studies that included power countries or industrialized societies (i.e., Poland, Germany, USA, China, Korea, Taiwan, Holland, Hungary, and Israel), Sudan and Pakistan are considered Third World. Perhaps with increasing industrialization, managerial values across countries will converge with those held by workers of highly industrialized societies. Another possibility is that gross national product (GNP) is related to the differences in values. Countries with a high GNP (i.e., Germany, the United States, Britain, Australia, and New Zealand) had lower Protestant Work Ethic (PWE) scores than countries with relatively low GNPs (i.e., India, Zimbabwe, and the West Indies); Hong Kong had an intermediate score, and Israel had a low score on PWE (Furnham et al., 1993). Also, countries with high power distance and low collectivism (or high individualism) scores can be attributed with low PWE scores. Niles' (1999) recent study added that Sri Lankans valued hard work more than Australians, even though Sri Lankans saw no relationship between hard work and success (as the Australians do). Niles suggested that there may be a normative sense of "oughtness" in responses, that is, Sri Lankans are expected to value hard work, and therefore, endorse it. In other words, having a high PWE was socially desirable and therefore rated stronger by countries with low GNPs.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 20 Attitudes Satisfaction. Assessing differences in satisfaction among culturally different employees has implications for recruitment (Al-Twaijri, 1987). Job, life, and nonwork satisfaction, as with some studies on work values, across countries, have been found to be fairly similar across ten Western European countries (Near & Rechner, 1993). However, within certain countries, for example, Saudi Arabia, expatriates indicated greater job satisfaction than Saudis (Yavas et al., 1996). Wages and everyday-life benefits (housing, car, private school education for children) allotted to expatriates might have been better than for the Saudis. Saudi Arabia is a wealthy oil state, although the working class is not. In poor nations, financial satisfaction positively correlates with life satisfaction (Diener & Diener, 1995; Oishi, Diener, Lucas, & Suh, 1999), whereas in wealthy nations home-life satisfaction positively correlates with life satisfaction (Oishi et al., 1999). Most expatriates get paid well and family expenses are paid for by the parent company. These expenses are not taken care of when one works in his or her local company. Thus, future research could examine if expatriates' job satisfaction stems from having an opportunity to reach self-actualizing goals (Near & Rechner, 1993; Oishi, et al., 1999) without having to worry about financial stability. Organizational Commitment. The concept of organizational commitment has been investigated in a number countries, including Slovenia, West Germany, Israel, Hungary, Italy, England, Japan, United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Korea, Hong Kong and USA (Alnajjar, 1999; Andolsek & Stebe, 2000; Besser, 1993; Cohen, 1999; Glazer, 1995; 1999; Glazer, Daniel, & Short, 2000; Lincoln & Kallenberg, 1985; Near, 1989; Pearson & Chong 1997; Sommer, Bae, & Luthans, 1996; Tjosvold, Sasaki, & Moy, 1998). In each of these studies the measurement of organizational commitment was valid. However, not all the measurement scales were the same. For example, Glazer and Andolsek and Stebe used Allen and Meyer's (1990) questionnaire
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 21 assessing affective and continuance commitment. Near and Sommer et al. used the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974), which assesses an affective commitment component of organizational commitment. Alnajjar (1996) used an Organizational Commitment Scale he developed, which also taps into the affective commitment component. Organizational commitment has been considered a global and stable attitude toward an organization. Affective commitment is often defined as an emotional attachment, identification with, and involvement in an organization (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Continuance commitment can be defined as a calculative attitude toward the organization. That is, people tend to stay with an organization because they would lose too many accumulated benefits by leaving it, or there are no alternative jobs available. Finally, normative commitment (Allen & Meyer, 1990) has rarely been investigated cross-culturally, although research stipulates a demand for it. Normative commitment is related to feelings of obligation toward one's organization. For the most part, each of these studies showed that organizational commitment is interpreted differently across cultures and that predictors of organizational commitment differ across cultures. In particular, it appears that there are unique cultural indicators of organizational commitment. For example, in the USA freedom might be a unique predictor of organizational commitment, whereas in Japan, seniority is a unique predictor (Near, 1989). Also, social bonding has a greater effect on commitment in collectivist cultures than individualistic cultures, and structural bonding may be more predictive of commitment in individualistic cultures than collectivistic cultures (Williams, Han, & Qualls, 1998). Furthermore, the significance of values as predictors of affective and continuance commitment differs across collectivist and individualist cultures (Andolsek & Stebe, 2000; Glazer et al., 2000). The effects of organizational commitment on turnover intention are also inconclusive
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 22 (Abrams, Ando, & Hinkle, 1998). Overall, these studies suggest that in order to develop a universal understanding of organizational commitment, data based on all organizational commitment scales, including normative commitment, and indigenous scales of commitment (not published or yet developed) must be collected. Relying on the Western approach to organizational commitment is inherently limited in scope and efficacy (Kao & Sek-Hong, 1993). For example, trust along with specific contractual obligations (which denotes a worker's relationship to the organization) is rarely studied as a predictor of commitment, yet in Japan these variables yielded greater commitment than in the USA. It appears that the cultural dimension of individualism and collectivism (Randall, 1993) might determine predictors of commitment. In individualist societies, group is not most important and thus, developing trust among group members is not essential and neither is commitment based on trust. For this reason Kao and Sek-Hong suggested that high trust was a more important factor influencing high levels of organizational commitment in the Japanese culture than in Western cultures. Another research question is whether organizational commitment is stable? Alnajjar's (1999) study on (affective) organizational commitment showed that United Arab Emirates (UAE) citizens were more committed than expatriates. This might indicate that because sojourners' relationship with a host company is transient, they might have little intentions of forging a strong bond. Instead, their bond has remained strong for the parent company. This speculation needs further investigation. Organizational Development & Team Building Organizational Development (OD), a process that has its roots in England and USA, has been taken to non-Western countries. Some practitioners have been finding that the applicability of OD is not suitable in some cultures (Bendix, 1994; Earley, 1994). For example, the Chinese cultural ethos precludes emotional self-disclosure, especially to strangers or out-group members.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 23 The Chinese values of respect for and acceptance of authority, strict hierarchical communication lines, and authoritarian rule (Westwood, Tang, & Kirkbride, 1992) go against the philosophies espoused by some OD interventions (e.g., sensitivity training). Often in team-building programs, it is expected that people air out dirty laundry (about personal, individuating issues) in order to unify a group. Such a strategy would likely fail in China, especially since groups tend to be quite unified as decision-making styles of Chinese teams tend to be adapting, that is, members make stable and consistent, reliable, precise, efficient, prude, methodical, and conforming (rarely challenging norms) decisions (Dollinger & Davis, 1998). Although the theoretical end result of team building, in the USA, may seem compatible with a collectivist culture (Earley, 1994), interventions that call for open criticism of others (e.g., confrontation meetings, role negotiation techniques, third-party interventions, and even survey feedback) might be perceived as a threat to authority or to oneself by way of selfdisclosing. One might also argue that while Western companies intervene with group-building exercises to build cohesion, the sense of cohesion already exists in Eastern work groups. Moreover, by changing the balance of power by empowering subordinates in high power distance cultures, performance decreases (Eylon & Au, 1999). This suggests that in cultures like China, where power distance is high, instituting a (U.S. style) team-building exercise, which would empower the team members, would actually have a negative impact on group performance and this might produce great anxiety and instability in group's functioning. Therefore, training should be molded in a framework that takes into account a worker's cultural background and individual differences or experiences that shape employee's values and beliefs. A universal OD theory must allow for organizations to be similar in some respects, compromise on differences, and accept differences that cannot or will not change. In other words, the keys to successful OD and change lie in three "Cs," that is, finding commonality,
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 24 reaching compromise, and considering differences. "Articulating differences...may make interactants more aware of conflicting needs, preferences, and agendas that must be accommodated" (Burgoon, Berger, & Waldron, 2000, p. 120). Naulleau and Criccom (1993) found that management styles differed between France and England, in that British participants in management development programs may be offended by abstract ideas while French participants may be frustrated by non-formalized or non-structured approaches. Likewise, Vertinsky, Tse, Wehrung, and Lee (1990) found that some norms of organizational design and management can be globalized (i.e., a process through which cross-cultural and national differences converge) to Canada, Hong Kong, and China, and others cannot. For example, the Chinese placed higher value on experimentation and innovation than Canadians and Hong Kong workers. The similar norms reflected adaptations to national economic and regulatory environments. This is also reflected in Dalbert and Katona-Sallay's (1996) study that Hungarians belief in a "just world" (i.e., justice rendered to everyone) became stronger as people adapted to political and economic changes which included the opportunity to practice religion (which was strongly related to belief in future compensation and belief in a just world). Finally, Bendix (1994) concluded that corporate changes in the USA and Denmark will be most effective when (1) government regulations or other corporate policy changes, (2) the implementation of restructuring directly impacted operations, (3) direct execution of changes led by top management appeared to be important to the permanency of the efforts, (4) corporate-wide participation made for more effective implementation, and (5) the organization's task environment is involved. However, differences were noted in the extent of change agents' involvement (higher involvement in USA than in Denmark), US organizations' reliance on prepackaged programs (e.g., total quality management and socio-technical systems redesign), and Danish organizations' employment of changes on a need by need basis and delegation of
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 25 authority. For the Danish, hearing lectures and information gathering activities (i.e., cognitive activities) played an important role in changes, whereas actual training (i.e., experiential activities) played a significant role among the US cases (Bendix, 1994). The effectiveness of OD and change will be successful to the extent to which practitioners recognize differences in cultural values. Therefore, Perlaki (1994) suggested three strategies before implementing changes. First, choose OD interventions that are relatively compatible with the culture's characteristics and/or organizational culture. Second, choose organizations, organizational units, and work groups whose culture is relatively compatible with OD values. Third, help organizational members diagnose and develop their own OD interventions that will be compatible with their own culture and their own concept of organizational change. Notwithstanding, foreign trainers should also be aware of the minute details that may normally be taken for granted within one's culture, for example, a foreign female facilitator may not be respected highly in countries where men are usually the authoritative figures in the workplace. Thus, every aspect of a training seminar, including the person who conducts it, should be piloted before an organization spends its resources to train its employees. Leadership and Conflict Management In 1994, at an international meeting, representatives from 56 countries came together to develop an international study on leadership called, "The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program" or GLOBE (House, Hanges, & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 1997; House et al., 1999). With 62 cultures embedded in about 58 countries sampled, this study promises to provide a better understanding of culture's influence on leadership behavior, universal ideals of leadership behaviors, attributes, and characteristics, culture-specific details that vary across cultures, and a large data base from which to build a global theory of leadership.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 26 Furthermore, this data will include information that could explain why cultures are different or similar on various leadership issues. GLOBE data were collected from middle managers in over 1,000 companies from two of three target industry sectors (food processing, telecommunications services, and financial services). Four levels of analyses are available for study: the individual, the industry, the organization, and the nation. The research agenda includes four major phases: (1) data collection and assessment of data's psychometric properties; (2) testing hypotheses about etic and emic aspects of leadership; (3) assessing longitudinal or causal relations between culture and organizational leadership effects, and (4) determining etic and emic leader behaviors that affect organizational consequences within and across cultures. The first phase has been completed. It was concluded that the concept of, social status of, and amount of influence that is exerted by leaders differs across cultures. The second phase of the research is underway, as papers are being published and presented at conferences by teams of GLOBE collaborators. Throughout this section, some of the papers written during the second phase of GLOBE will be reviewed, along with non-GLOBE papers. Western conceptualizations of predictors of managerial effectiveness differ across cultures (Den Hartog et al., 1999; Den Hartog et al., 1997; Drost & Von Glinow, 1998; Rahim, Antonioni, Psenicka, Kim, & Khan, 1999). Culture impacts leadership behavior and expectations for leadership behavior. Understanding how cultures vary along actual and desired leadership approaches can make international business liaisons more effective. For example, collectivist society members consider the effects of their decision on other members of the ingroup, whereas the individualistic society member makes decisions where individual interests and satiation are the most important concerns. Therefore, for members of the collectivist culture,
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 27 conflict should be avoided in order to preserve relationships, promote harmony, and foster a sense of shared responsibility (Chu, Spires, & Sueyoshi, 1999). By knowing the extent to which people of other cultures expect to be directed can help managers prepare or modify leadership styles. For example, Finnish expatriates indicated that their German, British, and French subordinates expected them to be more authoritative than participative (Suutari, 1997). These results are consistent with Schmidt and Yeh (1992) who found that English leaders emphasized the traditional bureaucratic formal authority, position power, and assertiveness in their relations with their subordinates. An authoritarian leader preference was even more pronounced in Estonia and Russia, where Finnish expatriates perceived that their host subordinates expected an almost dictatorial approach to decision-making. Moreover, the locals shirked the opportunity to take responsibility for tasks and even depended on strict rules, definitive roles, and criticism to motivate them to work (Suutari, 1997). It is possible that Eastern European workers, in general, are like Polish workers, who value power distance, but at the same time, when leaders distribute tasks, the subordinates perceive the leaders as imposing upon them, thereby causing a reduction in creativity (Savicki, 1999). These behaviors are further exemplified in Den Hartog et al.'s study (1999), whereby Polish managers are depicted as preferring "an autocratic style, diplomacy, risk avoidance, and [strong] administrative skills" (p. 262). In Japan, Japanese also preferred mediation and arbitration more than Spaniards, but they both favored negotiating and complying (i.e., conflict-reducing or harmony-enhancing), and least favored threatening, accusing, and ignoring (i.e., confrontational procedures) (Leung, Au, Fernndez-Dols, & Iwawaki, 1992). Chu et al. (1999) also found that the Japanese preferred a non-compensatory process (i.e., non conflict-confronting) to compensatory processes (i.e., conflict-confronting). The authors argued that the concern over preserving in-group harmony
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 28 would use up cognitive capacity, therefore making Japanese less likely to employ a decision model that demand high cognitive effort. This is consistent with other studies that found Japanese to prefer being bridgers over adaptors or innovators (Dollinger & Davis, 1998) and femininity (or social connectedness) over masculinity (Powell & Kido, 1994). Japanese workers placed greater emphasis on bureaucratic channels and less emphasis on sanctions than Taiwanese workers (Schmidt & Yeh, 1992). In fact, Taiwanese employees were found to perceive both transactional and transformational leadership, although they preferred transformational leadership (Singer & Singer, 1990). Japanese managers reason to subordinates by way of example, decisions are made by groups, and information is readily available so that subordinates are responsible for getting work done (Rao, Hashimoto, & Rao, 1997). That effective leadership would be negatively influenced by a coercive power base, but positively influenced by a personal power base (e.g., legitimate and expert power) in collectivist cultures (i.e., South Korea and Bangladesh) was found in Rahim et al. (1999). This might explain why Nigerians were in favor of arbitration and accepting the situation when handling conflict (Gire & Carment, 1993). Turkish managers also preferred peaceful means of dealing with conflict, such as collaboration (Kozan, 1989). This was preferred over forcing and compromise, which were favored more than avoiding styles. In Jordan, the order of preference, for conflict management styles were slightly different. Jordanian managers also used collaboration more than compromise, but these were used more than accommodation and avoiding, followed by forcing (Kozan, 1989). Olekalns (1997) notes that unequal power in an organization is more likely to result in suppression of conflict. That Japanese are more hierarchically differentiated than Germans or Americans, makes the acceptance of power inequalities more likely in the Japanese culture (Tinsley, 1998). A culture's level of hierarchical differentiation (Tinsley, 1998) and management support (Song, Xie, & Dyer, 2000) explains the preference for the deferring to
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 29 status power conflict model, that is, those with high status have the power to create and enforce their resolution. Australians emphasized friendly reasoning and bargaining with subordinates (Schmidt & Yeh, 1992). Their emphasis on reasoning may be related to Australian leaders' perceptions that their subordinates are in control of their behaviors (Ashkanasy, 1997). Trust in subordinates is important if one expects to be a transformational leader. New Zealand police officers were found to favor and be transformational leaders, as opposed to transactional leaders (Singer & Singer, 1990). Canadians also preferred conflict-management behaviors (i.e., negotiation and mediation) that aligned with transformational leadership (Gire & Carment, 1993). In general, it appears that employees of different cultural backgrounds prefer leaders who motivate them through challenging goals (Singer & Singer, 1990). Moreover, attributes related to transformational leadership styles are universal and related to the concept of an excellent leader, even though the perception of the effectiveness of these leaders vary across cultures (Den Hartog et al., 1999). Other researchers (e.g., Brodbeck et al., 2000; Den Hartog et al., 1997; TolgerdtAndersson, 1993) showed differences in leadership styles by country and geographical location. Analyzing advertisements in search for executives, Tolgerdt-Andersson (1993) concluded that although more than 50% of the advertisements for executives mentioned a demand for social and personable qualities (i.e., cooperative and ability to motivate/inspire others) in Sweden, Denmark, Norway, France, Germany, and Britain, people in Scandinavian countries preferred them more. Brodbeck et al.'s (2000) study further indicates that `team collaboration' and `team integration' are important attributes of excellent leaders among people of Nordic countries. In both Tolgerdt-Andersson and Brodbeck et al's studies, no trait was unique and specific only to Europe, as leadership requirements differed between countries and regions.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 30 Leadership and organizational position. It was once noted that leaders at different organization levels are concerned with different means of obtaining organizational goals (Etzioni, 1959). Since then little has been done to support this and related ideas. Den Hartog et al. (1999) ascertained that Dutch respondents felt that a good manager at a top level needed to achieve goals through "innovative, visionary, persuasive, longer-term oriented, diplomatic, and courageous" (p. 248) means, whereas an excellent lower level manager achieved goals by providing "attention for subordinates, team-building, and participative," (p. 248) management. Differences regarding leadership qualities at various levels of an organization's hierarchy is also apparent in a study of Mexican workers in Baja California (Drost & Von Glinow, 1998). Managers' ratings of nine leadership qualities were factored out as two distinct constructs, consideration (i.e., relationship-oriented leadership) and initiating structure (i.e., task-oriented leadership). However, non-managers' ratings did not show a distinction, instead initiating structure was embedded in consideration, as the authors described was congruent with the Mexican culture that imbues authoritative, yet friendly supervisors. Finally, these studies have strong implications in understanding cultural similarities. It appears that most people prefer peaceful ways of handling conflicts or making decisions. People also prefer leaders to be transformational. Unfortunately, reality usually differs from preferences (Albaum, Murphy, & Strandskov, 1990; Den Hartog et al., 1997; Den Hartog et al., 1999; Powell & Kido, 1994; Singer and Singer, 1990; Suutari, 1997; Tolgerdt-Andersson, 1993) and more attention needs to be paid to both reality and preferences. The reality is that the enactment of leadership styles differs (Drost & Von Glinow, 1998; Rao et al., 1997; Savicki, 1999; Schmidt & Yeh, 1992). Thus, just because a certain style is said to be preferred, when it comes to behavior, subordinates might unconsciously suggest they need more authoritative leaders (through nonverbal or actual communication). The studies reviewed provide information
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 31 that can help people interact with leaders or subordinates of different national or cultural backgrounds, at home or abroad. Managers will be better prepared to predict ethical, political, social, or economic issues prevalent for the maintenance of an effective multinational company (Albaum, et al., 1990). More study needs to be conducted on what leadership should entail, the effectiveness of leaders, what traits are universal versus culture specific, what type of organization needs what type of leader, which leadership style is preferred and by whom, and what relationships between different leadership styles and outcomes are moderated by various cultural dimensions. In addition, research is needed on the interaction of leaders and followers of different ethnic or cultural backgrounds, as cultural differences might explain problems in interaction (Chong & Thomas, 1997). These ideas for leadership research topics are by far inconclusive. However, through the GLOBE data set, answer to many of these and other questions can be investigated. Group Research As companies move from individual work to teamwork, an area that should be of interest to the company is the effect of changes performance. on Erez and Somech (1996) concluded that giving specific goals, communicating information that others might need, and providing incentives can help eliminate any threat to social loafing in individualistic cultures. In collectivist cultures, performance will not be deterred by social loafing, but it might increase with incentives, as well as specific and difficult goals. As more and more organizations from individualistic societies look upon the success of organizations in collectivist societies, a key element to remember is that the importance of performing well differs across cultures. In collectivist cultures, people perform well, so as not "to cheat" other in-group members (Hui & Graen, 1997), whereas in individualistic cultures, people perform well, because they either want to receive a reward or show that they can be held accountable for achieving goals. Also, in
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 32 individualistic cultures, reward that is associated with a valued outcome would likely increase individuals' performance in their groups. It is possible that with regulations, deadlines, and reward opportunities, individualists might feel that they need to behave in a way that is normative in their culture (Gelfand & Realo, 1999). Negotiation. Negotiating across cultures is a topic that has rarely been investigated. Thus far, research has shown that individualists tend to compete when they are held accountable, yet they often do not succeed in cooperating (Gelfand & Realo, 1999). Even Probst et al. (1999) noted that vertical individualists do not cooperate well within their own group, but instead compete against each other. An anomaly to this is that Americans (erroneously) perceive themselves to be concerned over their negotiating partners, but Greeks perceive their American counterpart as not being concerned for them (Gelfand & Christakopoulou, 1999). In other words, it might be that Americans do not even realize that being held accountable makes them more competitive nor do they realize that they are not showing any interest in building relationships with their opponents. Moreover, Americans, possibly without recognizing it, seemed to consider themselves to be better than their colleagues (Gelfand & Christakopoulou, 1999). In fact, like an American sport, Americans racked up points or claimed negotiated gains for themselves, whereas, Greeks, shared information. Thus, Americans engaged in more individuating behaviors than relational behaviors (Gelfand et al., 2000). Gelfand and colleagues research on negotiation is only the beginning. More research is needed with samples from many more countries. Impression Management Impression management is defined as one's tendency to present oneself in the best possible light so as to be socially accepted. In the organization, people play roles, and to perform well one must adhere to certain social standards. Thus, national culture may have an
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 33 impact on one's impression management. For example, inexperienced sojourners may present themselves in ways that are appropriate for their home country, but not their host country. Mendenhall and Wiley (1994) maintain that training expatriates about how host nationals engage in impression management behavior would facilitate their adjustment with the host, give them a better understanding of the appropriate normative behavior and how to build relationships with host nationals on the basis of normative behaviors. Ability to control communication patterns (i.e., impression management) is related to cross-cultural adaptation (Montagliani & Giacalone, 1998). Occupational Stress Laungani (1993) wrote that in addition to unique values and ideologies held by people within each culture are unique sets of stressors or demands on individuals. The ways in which individuals react to these stressors are, therefore, also culture-specific. In other words, culture might impact the perceptions of stressors and development of strains (Bhagat et al., 1994; Keinan & Perlberg, 1987), but that has not been studied enough. Further, it is realistic to suggest that one would find that the stress process (i.e., stressors leading to appraisal, which might produce strains and consequence) is the same across cultures (Baba, Galperin, & Lituchy, 1999; Bhagat et al., 1994; Glazer, 1999; Xie, 1996), but that the intensity of stressors (Ghadially & Kumar, 1989; Hurrell & Lindstrom, 1992; Keinan & Perlberg, 1987), appraisal and coping with stressors and strains are different between cultures (Bhagat, Moustafa, Krishnan, Harnisch, & Ford, 2001; Bhagat et al., 1994; Ghadially & Kumar, 1989; Laungani, 1993; Hurrell & Lindstrom, 1992; Kawanishi, 1995; Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992; 1993; Kirkcaldy, Brown & Cooper, 1994; Lindstrom & Hurrell, 1992). The management of stress also differs across cultures (Laungani, 1993). For example, in India, stress (i.e., strain) is not perceived as a problem requiring the attention of experts (as it is
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 34 perceived in Britain or other Western countries, for that matter). Rather, they engaged in homeopathic treatments such as yoga, a popular form of treating psychological disorders, including stress (Laungani, 1993). The collectivist cultures of Indians and Taiwanese were also found not to engage in "scientific" coping strategies, as the Americans had (Ghadially & Kumar, 1989), although Bhagat et al. (1994) would argue that the problem-focused coping ameliorates the effects of stressors on strain in collectivist cultures (e.g., India, South Africa, and Spain). It appears that while the overall associations between stressors and strains are similar, there are significant differences across cultures as to which stressors and strains relate. In fact, it can be concluded that stressors, strains, and coping strategies are neither the same nor significantly related the same way in the USA and Finland (Lindstrom & Hurrell, 1992; Hurrell & Lindstrom, 1992), Germany and the United Kingdom (Kirkcaldy et al., 1994; Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992; 1993), Israel and the USA (Keinan & Perlberg, 1987) and Poland and the Netherlands (Schaufeli & Janczur, 1994). In Hurrell and Lindstroms' studies, both Finnish and Americans had the highest level of job demands during the mid-career stage (Lindstrom & Hurrell, 1992). For Americans, job demands had little effect during the first and last career stage, but they did have an effect early in one's career in Finland. Also, Type A behavior and internal locus of control were high for both UK and German managers and police (Kirkcaldy et al., 1994; Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992). Moreover, in both countries, the correlations between Type A behavior and job-related pressures were not significant and locus of control did not moderate the relationship between job-related stressors and work satisfaction (Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992). Finally, subjective work stressors (i.e., uncertainty, imbalance between investments and outcome, and lack of control), personality variables (i.e., self-esteem and reactivity), and work situation variables (i.e., work experience, affiliation time, number of hours employee per week, team size, and intensity of patient contact)
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 35 were equally important in predicting burnout in Poland and Holland (Schaufeli & Janczur, 1994). Other than these similarities, Finnish and American managers had different stressor and strain symptoms, as well as different ways of coping and managing them. German managers and police officers differed significantly from their UK counterparts (Kirkcaldy, et al., 1994; Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992), in terms of stressors, strains, and coping styles, including leisure activities (Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1993). Also, Polish and Dutch nurses had different levels of stressors associated with different levels of strains (Schaufeli & Janczur, 1994). Noting that the reporting, perception, and importance of job-related demands and control variables differed across these national cultures (Hurrell & Lindstrom, 1992; Kirkcaldy et al., 1994; Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992; 1993), researchers must become sensitive to unreported stressors. Stressors that are not acknowledged might still exist. Observational field research may be necessary to study unreported stressors in the workplace. Moreover, as Bhagat et al., (1994) suggested, cross-cultural research would be most beneficial to concentrate on emic aspects of stress and coping, as the information would be more informative to expatriates than would an overall model of stress. As cross-national business exchanges increase, it will become more important than before to know which stressors a worker from one country may perceive, as this knowledge will help his or her counterpart of another country be more sensitive to his or her needs, by minimizing potential sources of strain in business interactions (Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992). Social Support. A moderator of stress, that may be culture-dependent, is social support (Beehr & McGrath, 1992). However, the relationship between social support and stressors and strains has not been established. Social support may prove to have great differences in various cultures (Beehr & McGrath, 1992; Fischer & Shavit, 1995). Antonucci et al. (1990) suggested
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 36 that in some cultures social support works through a process of reciprocity. Some cultures value the social behavior of reciprocity, however, they found that it is augmented by sociodemographic variables, for example, age. Another study discussed earlier showed that Germans seek more social support from friends, whereas English managers seek social support from family (Kirkcaldy & Cooper, 1992). Liang and Bogat (1994) found that among Chinese with an external locus of control, perceived availability of potential support resources produced both main and buffering effects. However, received social support yielded negative buffering effects. For the American sample, perceived and received social support buffered the effects of stress, but only for internals. Researchers of this study suggest that future investigations on the buffering model of social support can examine cultural factors as they related to its provision, perception, receipt, and utilization (Liang & Bogat, 1994). In other words, future research should examine how culturally specific values moderate the relationship between stressors and strain. By studying variations in social network formations in Israel and America, Fischer and Shavit (1995) exemplified the importance of understanding how culture and societal norms frame individual's social worlds. Their study helps one understand the values Israelis and Americans hold that shape their perception of stress. Fischer and Shavit depicted the differences in social network formations between Israelis and Americans by discussing the kinds of social interaction each society engages in over the course of their lives (e.g., scouts, military, and neighborhood friendships in Israel vs. more autonomy in America). The analysis suggested that Israelis have a stronger social network than Americans, and would, therefore, probably perceive less stressors (Fischer & Shavit, 1995; Keinan & Perlberg, 1987), because they engaged in many more social activities throughout their lives than Americans.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 37 When researchers engage in cross-cultural studies, that is, comparing results of within country analyses, variables that were developed in one country must be invariant across the cultures studied. However, few researchers, have reported the validity of the stress variables, as Green, Walkey, and Taylor (1991) did with the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) in New Zealand, Great Britain, Estonia, and USSR. The results of their study were successfully and reliably replicated cross-culturally. In 1995, Peterson and colleagues conducted a 21-nation study to determine the predictive validity of role ambiguity, role overload, and role conflict. To test the invariance of the models, they performed confirmatory factor analysis. They contended that role stressors "contain a core of meaning wrapped up in the nature of relationships within formal organizations" (Peterson et al., 1995, p. 448). More studies are needed to confirm the generalizability of stress measures. Researchers cannot assume that translated concepts carry the same meaning across cultures. For example, the term "stress" in Hebrew ("lachatz") can be translated back into English as "tension." Thus, if a researcher designs a survey in England and intend to ask about stressors, but uses the term stress, this term would be translated into Hebrew, but the meaning of the word would likely be interpreted as a strain, i.e., tension. The data from the Hebrew language surveys and from the English language surveys, would therefore, not be equivalent. Justice Organizational justice has been a growing topic of study in I/O psychology, since the mid-1980s. It had its beginnings primarily in Adams' (1965) equity theory and Thibaut and Walker's (1975) theory of procedural justice. However, cross-cultural studies of justice have not been based on organizational justice. Through the review of the following studies, implications for further study of justice in organizations (i.e., organizational justice) can be derived.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 38 It is apparent that culture exerts influence over the perceptions of justice. Bond and Smith (1996), in their literature review, noted that the concern of people in collective cultures for maintaining harmony should result in egalitarian resource division. Distributing equally to in-group members preserves harmony and positive "guanxi" (or relationships) (Hui & Graen, 1997). However, members of a collectivist society should only show an egalitarian division of resources when allocating to in-group members who are also co-workers or when dividing a fixed amount of reward, otherwise they resemble North Americans (Hui & Graen, 1997; Hui, Triandis, & Yee, 1991). Vertical collectivists (conceptualized as sharing and benevolence to ingroup and recognizing a hierarchy in status) tend to be cooperative when working within their own group, but less cooperative when they had to work with other groups (Probst, Carnevale, & Triandis, 1999). Moreover, when the allocator's personal input is low, distributions to in-group members follows an equity rule (Morris & Leung, 2000). Like the Chinese, Indians are variable in their conception of justice and fairness; a group level analysis is insufficient and misleading (Singh, 1996). The concern of people in individualistic cultures for performance should result in equitable resource divisions. Allocation of rewards based on performance, (i.e., merit-based rewards) is further supported by Berman and Murphy-Berman's (1996) research. Vertical individualists compete for personal gain (Probst et al., 1999), thereby justifying merit-based rewards. The concern for oneself is so great, as is individual freedom and humanism, that even when someone commits an immoral behavior, the behavior is not expected to be punished nor rewarded. Instead, reward would go to the individual who competed fairly and maintained moral behaviors (Lee, Pepitone, & Albright, 1997). Additional studies on procedural justice (e.g. Azzi, 1992) and a review of research (e.g., Morris & Leung, 2000) can be found in social psychology journals. The studies reviewed,
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 39 though based on student samples, have implications on future organizational justice research. Expatriates will likely perceive justice from their own cultural lenses, but understanding how people of other national cultures perceive justice will help expatriates adjust to the realities of a new environment and different organizational (unwritten) policies. Additional Work-Related Issues Gender Issues I/O psychologists have sometimes delved into gender issues, especially as related to equity and equality (Clark, 1991) and sexual harassment (Gelfand, Fitzgerald, & Drasgow, 1995). In a 57 nation study, Clark (1991) found that world-wide (i.e., country was the unit of analysis), women's access to high-status positions had been favorable from 1960-1980. However, Jacobs and Lim (1992) found that the chances of men being employed in a predominantly "female" occupational or industrial group is greater than for women in "male" occupations. Nevertheless, as the size of an organization increased, so did integration of women into a predominantly male workforce. A hindrance to women's chances of growing in high-status positions, may be the increasing number of multinational corporations (Clark, 1991), but their entrance to higher education institutions strengthens their chances, or so it would seem. Wright, Baxter, and Birkelund (1995) examined the low representation of women in positions of authority as a possible predictor of gender inequality in seven nations, including the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia, Sweden, Norway, and Japan. The gender gap for authority in the English-speaking countries was smaller than in the Scandinavian countries and much smaller than in Japan where the gender gap was large, despite that equality of gender roles (which is clearly a culture value) was most pronounced in Scandinavia, particularly Sweden and lowest among Americans (in relation also to Canada and Australia) (Baxter & Kane, 1995). Gender inequality in positions of
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 40 authority may be due to political and economic factors (Wright et al., 1995), whereas women's ties to men may be explained by a culture value for egalitarianism (Baxter & Kane, 1995). It appears that valuing equality does not necessarily lead to equality in reaching positions of authority and vice-versa. As Etzion and Bailyn (1994) pointed out, American female technical workers were neither socially supported nor socially opposed in taking on work and family roles, they simply did it. Some might argue that women do not achieve high status because of their own work values. Women, in Hungary, Israel, and Netherlands, rated affective values (e.g., esteem, relations with co-workers and supervisors, opportunity for interaction with people, and recognition) higher than men (Elizur, 1994). They also rated some of the instrumental values (e.g., hours of work, pay, benefits, work conditions, and job security) higher than men, but men ranked pay value higher than women did (Elizur, 1994). Finally, men ranked most of the cognitive values (e.g., work and organizational influence, independence, and responsibility) higher than women, but women ranked meaningful work higher than men (Elizur, 1994). Men had a stronger motivation to achieve power (and have influence) than woman (Bruins et al., 1993; Elizur, 1994), and for that reason might not have reached many authority positions. However, when it comes to egalitarianism, it appears that people in progressive Western European countries, for example, Holland, nominated females for a vacant leadership position, more often than Eastern Europeans from Poland. Pay Differentials. It has been established that women are, for the most part, paid less than men in most industrialized societies, but according to Clark (1991) their wages will eventually even out with men. Thus an area for future research is to find out how people view unequal pay. Do people believe women are underpaid, or simply paid less, but equitable in relation to their job requirements? Furthermore, the word "underpaid" may be a reflection of the
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 41 values held by members of a society; clarification of this term across cultures, can help one understand issues of gender equality. Sexual Harassment. Gelfand et al. (1995) conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire in the USA and Brazil. The purpose was to determine if Brazilian and US women would rate the scales such that three factors would be derived, including gender harassment, sexual harassment, and sexual coercion. Researchers concluded that the scale was invariant between USA and Brazil, which meant that when studying the concept of sexual harassment, using this survey, comparability of results could be assumed. Future studies should examine how countries differ both on a cultural and an individual level on this type of survey. It is not unusual for business people who go abroad to learn that touching a woman is or is not tolerated. However, little is known about how these behaviors are perceived by the recipients, nor how the recipients would tolerate or accept the "gesture" from someone not of the same national background. Dual-Career Families. Thus far little cross-cultural research has been conducted on the stress of men's and women's shifting or dual roles as careerist and spouse/parent. Future research will probably start to show a greater interest in this topic on a cross-cultural level than it has ever before, especially when more working mothers are assigned overseas positions. Etzion and Bailyn's (1994) research can be used as a model for future studies, as they examined how American and Israeli women deal with the stressors of career and family. American women were found to emphasize career and compromise family, whereas Israeli women compromised "getting ahead" in a career in order to have a family. For the Israelis, having to compromise a career is not perceived as a sacrifice, but for their American counterparts, not having a family is a sacrifice and more American women than Israeli women opt not to have children. Moreover, although career and family are socially desirable for Israelis, career is not expected to dominate
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 42 family life. However, in America, holding both a career and family is accepted, but they are given little support for either. Thus, Israeli women, expecting success in work, personal, and family life domains, are supported. Yet, Israeli women choosing both and wanting to succeed in both have higher burnout than their American counterparts the further along the hierarchical ladder they moved. At the same time, one needs to consider that more professional Israeli women than American women were married (75% and 52%, respectively) and few American women had children (31%) compared to Israeli professional women (77% had children) (Etzion & Bailyn, 1994). Future research on gender issues and income ought to examine how women are supported and perceived by society for having a career. If workers are not needed in the workplace, perhaps women workers will be thought of as taking away jobs from men. Safety and Health Another important topic for I/O psychologists is that of safety. Safety research can have many implications for multi-national organizations, as it must be a priority in the work environment. Janssens, Brett, and Smith (1995) examined whether predictors of workers' perceptions of safety in manufacturing plants varied between the USA, France, and Argentina. In France, the concern for safety was weak as a result of diffused responsibility over safety management. In Argentina, however, productivity was everyone's responsibility so that management could be more attentive to safety needs. Thus, it appears that when managements' role is not to emphasize productivity, but safety, accidents are low. Understanding how safety is perceived by people of different cultures may help expatriates adjust accordingly when working in new cultures where safety standards and management differ from expatriate's country of origin. Further, knowing the relationship between people's feelings of responsibility for maintaining safety can help a facilitator develop a
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 43 strategy for training others on safety issues in the workplace. In some cultures, even if management cared for safety more than productivity, unsafe behaviors and accidents may be high because "guanxi" was not developed between managers and subordinates (Hui & Graen, 1997). Guanxi is loosely translated as "relationship." When managers are not thought of as ingroup members, Hui and Graen suggested, deviant behaviors might arise, but not out of spite for the out-group, rather, in order to do something good for members of the in-group. In other words, if it seems that an in-group member needs something and to get it requires doing something, even knowingly, immoral or hazardous, it might be done. Finally and relatedly, an area of great concern is the perception of safety by immigrants within countries. Many countries, like the USA, have strict safety laws. However, when someone emigrates from a country where these laws are not in place or enforced, safety behaviors decrease. Understanding people's approaches to safety will make the solution less challenging. Another question on safety issues deals with violence in the workplace. What constitutes violence in the workplace and how is it handled? Conclusion This literature review was conducted with the aim of bringing to light cross-cultural research that has been conducted with respect to Industrial and Organizational psychology. Cross-cultural research in work-related psychology is glaringly weak and has a great deal of room for expansion, innovation, and improvement. The road for future studies is apparently plentiful. First of all, as scholars in pursuit of generalizing human behavior in the workplace, it is important to maintain a respectable level of scientific analysis, if only by giving a priori hypotheses and explanations as to why theories or relationships should or should not be found. Second, as the advent of technological advancements are making the world more accessible to researchers than ever before, communication between researchers becomes a diminishing excuse
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 44 for not conducting cross-cultural research. Third, it is clear that the need for "transferable" (Bendix, 1994) theories and application of theories is more relevant than ever before, as consultants, employees, and organizations cross national borders. As the internet and other forms of technology make cross-cultural research "easier" to conduct, methodological issues in conducting cross-cultural research will become more stringent. Stricter methods for carrying out cross-cultural research, including language translations, will facilitate the understanding of human behavior. Studies reviewed here should be replicated and conducted more precisely with culture variables and a priori predictions need to be tested, in order to build cross-cultural theories in I/O psychology. Fourth, theories developed by studying populations within one context and/or one culture must be generalized and compared to other cultures. In order to maximize international business collaboration and to understand the framework of differences and similarities, current organizational culture and national culture should be evaluated (Silverthorne, 1992) cross-culturally. Throughout the chapter I addressed possible directions for future studies in cross-cultural I/O psychology research. Some topics not reviewed, but demand cross-cultural attention include, but are not limited to, entrepreneurship (Bhawuk & Udas, 1996), career-choices (Leong, Austin, Sekaran, & Komarraju, 1998), communicating over the internet (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999; Kersten & Noronha, 1999) and organizational citizenship behavior. Moreover, more research is needed that assess culture and human values and norms, as they might have implications for selection and training programs. One culture and personal values scale that is becoming recognized in the literature was developed by Schwartz (1992). His scale assesses 10 human values and seven cultural values. At both the individual level of analysis and cultural level of analysis, the values have guided our understanding of societies, as the magnitude of importance each value had to individuals and to cultures differed (Schwartz, personal
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 45 conversation, June 25, 1997). Unlike Hofstede's (1980) dimensions, Schwartz's values are specific and involve either the individual as the unit of analysis or the culture as the unit of analysis, depending on how one's study is constructed. Thus, I suggest that future research use Schwartz's Values Survey to test hypotheses and explain cross-cultural findings. Finally, the sophistication of research techniques has led some researchers to analyze the utility of cross-cultural training. This step is important as many business decision-makers are skeptical about introducing cross-cultural training due to the lack of evidence showing that it is worthwhile and cost-saving. With the recent trend toward increasing multinational firms (Deshpande & Viswesvaran, 1992; Tolgerdt-Andersson, 1993), I believe more research in I/O psychology will naturally emerge. "The activity of working and the outcomes flowing from working are of fundamental significance to many if not most individuals in industrial societies" (England, 1990, p. 30). This activity will inevitably call for research in areas such as selection, appraisal, motivation, stress, interpersonal interactions, etc. The conduct of cross-cultural studies will require a competent research team as the one studied by Bantz (1993). The advantages of cross-cultural research are great. In order to gather meaningful data, researchers will somehow have to not only work across cultures (as House et al., 1997; House et al., 1999; Peterson et al., 1995, have done), but also across time and space (Bantz, 1993).
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 46 References Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press. Abrams, D., Ando, K., & Hinkle, S. (1998). Psychological attachment to the group: Cross-cultural differences in organizational identification and subjective norms as predictors of workers' turnover intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1027-1039. Albaum, G., Murphy, B. D., & Strandskov, J. (1990). A note on cross-cultural perceptions of influence of leadership groups. Journal of Managerial Issues, 11, 337-344. Allen, N. J. & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Alnajjar, A. A. (1999). The impact of selected psycho-social variables upon employees' organizational commitment in The United Arab Emirates. Social Behavior and Personality, 27, 523-532. Al-Twaijri, M. (1987). A cross-cultural comparison of American-Saudi managerial attitudes in US-related firms in Saudi Arabia: An empirical investigation. Proceedings of the 1987 Annual National Conference, The Council on Employee Responsibilities and Rights, 247258. Andolsek, D. M. & Stebe, J. (2000). Insecurity, values, and commitment. In I. Adigun, I. Svetlik (Ed.), Managing Cultural Diversity: Implications for the EU Integration. University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences, Ljubljana, Slovenia. Antonucci, T. C., Fuhrer, R., & Jackson, J. S. (1990). Social support and reciprocity: A cross-ethnic and cross-national perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 519-530.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 47 Ashkanasy, N. M. (1997). A cross-national comparison of Australian and Canadian supervisors' attributional and evaluative responses to subordinate performance. Australian Psychologist, 32, 29-36. Aycan, Z., & Berry, J. W. (1996). Impact of employment-related experiences on immigrants' psychological well-being and adaptation to Canada. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 28, 240-251. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., & Kurshid, A. (2000). Culture on human resource management practices: A 10-country comparison. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 192-221. Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., Sinha, J. B. P. (1999). Organizational culture and human resource management practices: The model of culture fit. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 501-526 Azzi, A. E. (1992). Procedural justice and the allocation of power in intergroup relations: Studies in the United States and South Africa. Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 736-747. Baba, V. V., Galperin, B. L., & Lituchy, T. R. (1999). Occupational mental health: A study of work-related depression among nurses in the Caribbean. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 36, 163-169. Bantz, C. R. (1993). Cultural diversity and group cross-cultural team research. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 1-20. Barnlund, D. C., & Araki, S. (1985). Intercultural encounters: The management of compliments by Japanese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 16, 9-26. Baxter, J., & Kane, E. W. (1995). Dependence and independence: A cross-national analysis of gender inequality and gender attitudes. Gender and Society, 9, 193-215.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 48 Beehr, T. A., & McGrath, J. E. (1992). Social support occupational stress and anxiety. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 5, 7-19. Bendix, H. W. (1994). Large-scale change in major Danish and American Corporations: Findings and perspectives of a comparative case study. Organization Development Journal, 12, 63-70. Berman, J. J., & Murphy-Berman, V. A. (1996). Cultural differences in perceptions of allocators of resources. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 494-509. Besser, T. L. (1993). The commitment of Japanese workers and U.S. workers: A reassessment of the literature. American Sociological Review, 58, 873-881. Bhagat, R. S., Moustafa, K. S., Krishnan, B., Harnisch, D., & Ford, D. (2001). Organizational stress and coping processes in eight countries: Implications for a cultural theory of stress. Unpublished Manuscript. Bhagat, R. S., O'Driscoll, M. P., Babakus, E., Frey, L., Chokkar, J., Ninokumar, B. H., Pate, L. E., Ryder, P. A., Fernandez, M. J. G., Ford, D. L., & Mahanyele, M. (1994). Organizational stress and coping in seven national contexts: A cross-cultural investigation. In G. P. Keita & J. J. Hurrell (Eds.), Job Stress in a Changing Workforce: Investigating Gender, Diversity, and Family Issues. Washington, D.C.: APA. Bhawuk, D. P. S. (1998). The role of culture theory in cross-cultural training: A multimethod study of culture-specific, culture-general, and culture theory-based assimilators. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 630-655. Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Brislin, R. (1992). The measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 413-436.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 49 Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Udas, A. (1996). Entrepreneurship and collectivism: A study of Nepalese Entrepreneurs. In J. Pandey, D. Sinha, & D. P. S. Bhawuk (Eds.), Asian Contributions to Cross-Cultural Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Black, J. S. (1992). Coming home: The relationship of expatriate expectations with repatriation adjustment and job performance. Human Relations, 45, 177-192. Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in Japan. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 277-294. Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review and a theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management Review, 15, 113136. Bond, M. H., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Cross-cultural social and organizational psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 205-235. Briscoe, D. R. (1997). Assessment centers: Cross-cultural and cross-national issues. In R. E. Riggio & B. T. Mayes (Eds.), Assessment centers: Research and application [Special issue]. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 261-270. Brodbeck, F. C., Frese, M., Akerblom, S., Audia, G., Bakacsi, G., Bendova, H., Bodega, D., Bodur, M., Booth, S., Brenk, K., Castel, P., Den Hartog, D., Donnelly-Cox, G., Gratchev, M. V., Holmberg, I., Jarmuz, S., Jesuino, J. C., Jorbenadse, R., Kabasakal, H. E., Keating, M., Kipiani, G., Konrad, E., Koopman, P., Kurc, A., Leeds, C., Lindell, M., Maczynski, J., Martin, G.S., O'Connell, J., Papalexandris, A., Papalexandris, N., Schramm-Nielsen, J., Schultz, M., Sigfrids, C., Szabo, E., Theirry, H., Vondrysova, M., Weibler, J., Wilderom, C., Witkowski, S., & Wunderer, R. (2000). Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 1-29.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 50 Bruins, J., Ouden, M. D., Dpret, E., Extra, J., Grnik, M., Iannaccone, A. Kramarczyk, E., Melcher, W., Muoz, J., Ng, S. K., & Steller, B. (1993). On becoming a leader: Effects of gender and cultural differences on power distance reduction. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 411-426. Burgoon, J. K., Berger, C. R., & Waldron, V. R. (2000). Mindfulness and interpersonal communication. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 105-127. Caligiuri, P. M., Hyland, M. M. Joshi, A., & Bross, A. S. (1998). Testing a theoretical model for examining the relationship between family adjustment and expatriates' work adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 598-614. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold. R. B. (1999). Testing factorial invariance across groups: A reconceptualization and proposed new method. Journal of Management, 25, 1-27. Chong, L. M. A., & Thomas, D. C. (1997). Leadership perceptions in cross-cultural context: Pakeha and Pacific Islanders in New Zealand. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 275-293. Chu, P. C., Spires, E. E., & Sueyoshi, T. (1999). Cross-cultural differences in choice behavior and use of decision aids: A comparison of Japan and the United States. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 147-170. Clark, R. (1991). Contrasting perspectives on women's access to prestigious occupations: A cross-national investigation. Social Science Quarterly, 72, 20-32. Cui, G., van den Berg, S., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Cross-cultural adaptation and ethnic communication: Two structural equation models. The Howard Journal of Communication, 9, 69-85. Dahler-Larsen, P. (1998). What 18 case studies of organizational culture tell us about counter-intentional effects of attempts to establish shared values in organizations. Current Topics in Management, 3, 151-173.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 51 Dalbert, C. & Katona-Sallay, H. (1996). The "belief in a just world" construct in Hungary. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27, 293-314. Dean, O., & Popp, G. E. (1990). Intercultural communication effectiveness as perceived by American managers in Saudi Arabia and French managers in the US. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 405-424. Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., et al. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10, 219-256. Den Hartog, D. N., Maczynski, J., Motowidlo, S. J., Jarmuz, S., Koopman, P., Thierry, H., & Wilderom, C. P. M., (1997). Cross-cultural perceptions of leadership: A comparison of leadership and societal and organizational culture in the Netherlands and Poland. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 28, 255-267. Deshpande, S. P., & Viswesvaran, C. (1992). Is cross-cultural training of expatriate managers effective: A meta analysis. International Journal of Intercultural relations, 16, 295310. Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and selfesteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653-663. Dollinger, M. J., & Danis, W. (1998). Preferred decision-making styles: A crosscultural comparison. Psychological Reports, 82, 755-761. Drost, E. A., & Von Glinow, A. (1998). Leadership behavior in Mexico: Etic philosophies-emic practices. Research in International Business and International Relations, 7, 3-28.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 52 Earley, P. C. (1994). Self or group? Cultural effects of training on self-efficacy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 89-117. Earley, P. C. (1986). Trust, perceived importance of praise and criticism, and work performance: An examination of feedback in the United States and England. Journal of Management, 12, 457-473. Earley, P. C., & Singh, H. (1995). International and intercultural management research: What's next? Academy of Management Journal, 38, 327-340. Earley, P. C., & Stubblebine, P. (1989). Intercultural assessment of performance feedback. Group and Organization Studies, 14, 161-181. Elizur, D. (1994). Gender and work values: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 201-212. Elizur, D., Borg, I., Hunt, R., & Magyari-Beck, I. (1991). The structure of work values: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 21-38. England, G. W. (1990). The patterning of work meanings which are coterminous with work outcome levels for individuals in Japan, Germany, and the USA. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 39, 29-45. England, G. W., & Harpaz, I. (1990). How working is defined: National contexts and demographic and organizational role influences. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 253266. Erez, M. (1994a). Toward a model of cross-cultural industrial and organizational psychology. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Vol. 4 (2nd ed., pp. 559-608). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 53 Erez, M. (1994b). Work motivation from a cross-cultural perspective. In A. Bouvy, F. J. R. van de Vijver, P. Boski, & P. Schmitz (Eds.), Journeys into Cross-Cultural Psychology (pp. 386-403). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Erez, M., & Somech, A. (1996). Is group productivity loss the rule or the exception? Effects of culture and group-based motivation. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 15131537. Etzion, D., & Bailyn, L. (1994). Patterns of adjustment to the career/family conflict of technically trained women in the United States and Israel. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1520-1549. Etzioni, A. (1959). Authority structure and organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 4, 43-67. Eylon, D., & Au, K. Y. (1999). Exploring empowerment cross-cultural differences along the power distance dimension. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 373385. Farh, J., Dobbins, G. H., & Cheng, B. (1991). Cultural relativity in action: A comparison of self-ratings made by Chinese and U.S. workers. Personnel Psychology, 44, 129147. Fischer, C. S., & Shavit, Y. (1995). National differences in network density: Israel and the United States. Social Networks, 17, 129-145. Fowler, S. M., (1994). Two decades of using simulation games for cross-cultural training. Simulation and Gaming, 25, 464-476, 536-541. Furnham, A., Bond, M., Heaven, P., Hilton, D., Lobel, T., Masters, J., Payne, M., Rajamanikam, R., Stacey, B., & Daalen, H. V. (1993). A comparison of Protestant work ethic beliefs in thirteen nations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 185-197.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 54 Gannon, M. J., & Poon, J. M. L. (1997). Effects of alternative instructional approaches on cross-cultural training outcomes. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 21, 429-446. Gelfand, M. J., & Christakopoulou, S. (1999). Culture and negotiator cognition: Judgment accuracy and negotiation processes in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79, 248-269. Gelfand, M. J., & Realo, A. (1999). Individualism-collectivism and accountability in intergroup negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 721-736. Gelfand, M. J., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Drasgow, F. (1995). The structure of sexual harassment: A confirmatory analysis across cultures and settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47, 164-177. Gelfand, M. J., Spurlock, D., Sniezek, J. A., Shao, L. (2000). Culture and social prediction: The role of information in enhancing confidence in social predictions in the United States and China. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 498-516. Georgas, J., & Berry, J. W. (1995). An ecocultural taxonomy for cross-cultural psychology. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 121-157. Ghadially, R., & Kumar, P. (1989). Stress, strain and coping styles of female professionals. Indian Journal of Applied Psychology, 26, 1-8. Glazer, S. (1999). A cross-cultural study of job stress among nurses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan. Glazer, S. (1995). Antecedents and consequences of job stress among Israeli registered nurses: A structural equation model. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 55 Glazer, S., Daniel, S., & Short, M. (2000, February). A cross-cultural study of the relationship between organizational commitment and human values. Presented at the Society for Cross-Cultural Research, New Orleans, Louisiana. Gire, J. T., & Carment, D. W. (1993). Dealing with disputes: The influence of individualism-collectivism. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 81-95. Goldstein, D. L., & Smith, D. H. (1999). The analysis of the effects of experiential training on sojourners' cross-cultural adaptability. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 157-173. Goszczynska, M., Tyszka, T., & Slovic, P. (1991). Risk perception in Poland: A comparison with three other countries. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 179-193. Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. (1990). A multifaceted approach to expatriate retention in international assignments. Group and Organization Studies, 15, 461-485. Green, D. E., Walkey, F. H., & Taylor, A. J. W. (1991). The three-factor structure of the Maslach Inventory: A multicultural, multidimensional confirmatory study. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 453-472. Hammer, M .R., & Martin, J. N. (1992). The effects of cross-cultural training on American managers in a Japanese-American Joint Venture. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20, 161-182. Harrison, J. K. (1992). Individual and combined effects of behavior modeling and the cultural assimilator in cross-cultural management training. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 952-962. Henderson, D. J., Sampselle, C., Mayes, F., & Oakley, D. (1992). Toward culturally sensitive research in a multicultural society. Health Care for Women International, 13, 339-350.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 56 Hesketh, B., & Bochner, S. (1994). Technological change in a multicultural context: Implications for training and career planning. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Vol. 4 (2nd ed., pp. 191-240). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., & Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A. (1997). GLOBE: The global leadership and organizational behavior effectiveness research program. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 28, 215-254. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M. Dickson, M., Gupta, V., et al. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE. Advances in Global Leadership, 1, 171-233. Hui, C., & Graen, G. (1997). Guanxi and professional leadership in contemporary SinoAmerican joint ventures in mainland China. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 451-465. Hui, C. H., Triandis, H. C., & Yee, C. (1991). Cultural differences in reward allocation: Is collectivism the explanation? British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 145-157. Hurrell, J. J., & Lindstrom, K. (1992). Comparison of job demands, control, and psychosomatic complaints at different career stages of managers in Finland and the United States. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment, and Health, 18, 11-13. Jacobs, J. A., & Lim, S. T. (1992). Trends in occupational and industrial sex segregation in 56 countries, 1960-1980. Work and Occupations, 19, 450-486. Jankowicz, A. D. (1994). The new journey to Jerusalem: Mission and meaning in the managerial crusade to Eastern Europe. Organization Studies, 15, 479-507.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 57 Janssens, M., Brett, J. M., & Smith, F. J. (1995). Confirmatory cross-cultural research: Testing the viability of a corporation-wide safety policy. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 364-382. Jarvenpaa, S. L., &Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, 791-815. Jinkerson, D. L., Cummings, O. W., & Neisendorf, B. J. (1992). A case study of methodological issues in cross-cultural evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 15, 273285. Kao, H. S. R., & Sek-Hong, N. (1993). Organizational commitment: From trust to altruism at work. Psychology and Developing Societies, 5, 43-60. Kawanishi, Y. (1995). The effects of culture on beliefs about stress and coping: Causal attribution of Anglo-American and Japanese persons. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 25, 49-60. Kealey, D. J., & Protheroe, D. R. (1996). The effectiveness of cross-cultural training for expatriates: An assessment of the literature on the issue. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 141-165. Keinan, G., & Perlberg, A. (1987). Stress in academe: A cross-cultural comparison between Israeli and American academicians. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18, 193207. Kersten, G., & Noronha, S. (1999). Negotiation via the world wide web: A crosscultural study of decision making. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 251-279. Kirkcaldy, B. D., Brown, J., & Cooper, C. L. (1994). Occupational stress profiles of senior police managers: Cross-cultural study of officers from Berlin and Northern Ireland. Stress Medicine, 10, 127-130.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 58 Kirkcaldy, B. D., & Cooper, C. L. (1992). Cross-cultural differences in occupational stress among British and German managers. Work and Stress, 6, 177-190. Kirkcaldy, B. D., & Cooper, C. L. (1993). The relationship between work stress and leisure style: British and German managers. Human Relations, 46, 669- 680. Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. (1997). The impact of cultural values on employee resistance to teams: Toward a model of globalized self-managing work team effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, 22, 730-757. Kozan, M. K. (1989). Cultural influences on styles of handling interpersonal conflicts: Comparisons among Jordanian, Turkish, and U.S. managers. Human Relations, 42, 787-799. Laungani, P. (1993). Cultural differences in stress and its management. Stress Medicine, 9, 37-43. Lee,Y. T., Pepitone, A., & Albright, L. (1997). Descriptive and prescriptive beliefs about justice: A Sino-U.S. comparison. Cross-Cultural Research: The Journal of Comparative Social Science, 31, 101-120. Leong, F. T. L., Austin, J. T., Sekaran, U., & Komarraju, M. (1998). An evaluation of the cross-cultural validity of Holland's theory: Career choices by workers in India. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 441-455. Leung, K., Au, Y., Fernndez-Dols, J. M., & Iwawaki, S. (1992). Preference for methods of conflict processing in two collectivist cultures. International Journal of Psychology, 27, 195-209. Liang, B., & Bogat, G. A. (1994). Culture, control, and coping: New perspectives on social support. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 1994.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 59 Lincoln, J. R., & Kallenberg, A. (1985). Work organization and workforce commitment: A study of plants and employees in the U.S. and Japan. American Sociological Review, 50, 738-760. Lindstrom, K., & Hurrell, J. J. (1992). Coping with jobs stress by managers at different career stages in Finland & the U.S. Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 18, 14-17. Lysgaard, S. (1955). Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees visiting the United States. International Social Science Bulletin, 7, 45-51. Magyari-Beck, I. (1992). Identifying the blocks to creativity in Hungarian culture. Creativity Research Journal, 5, 419-427. Mak, A. S., Westwood, M. J., Ishiyama, F. I., & Barker, M. C. (1999). Optimising conditions for learning sociocultural competencies for success. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 77-90. Masterson, B., & Murphy, B. (1986). Internal cross-cultural management. Training and Development Journal, 40, 56-60. Matsumoto, D. (1995). Lazarus's vexing research problems are even more vexing than he thinks. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 228-230. Maurer, A., Oszustowicz, B., Stocki, R. (1994). Gender and attitudes toward work. International Journal for the Advancement of Counseling, 17, 35-46. Mendenhall, M. E., & Wiley, C. (1994). Strangers in a strange land: The relationship between expatriate adjustment and impression management. American Behavioral Scientist, 37, 605-620. Montagliani, A., & Giacalone, R. A. (1998). Impression management and cross-cultural adaptation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 598-608.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 60 Morris, M. W., & Leung, K. (2000). Justice for all? Progress in research on cultural variation in the psychology of distributive and procedural justice. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 100-132. Naulleau, G., & Criccom, J. H. (1993). A comparison of British and French management cultures: Some implications for management development practices in each country. Management Education and Development, 24, 14-25. Near, J. P. (1989). Organizational commitment among Japanese and U.S. workers. Organization Studies, 10, 281-300. Near, J. P., & Rechner, P. L. (1993). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: An historical view of differences among West European countries. Social Indicators Research, 29, 109-121. Niles, F. S. (1999). Toward a cross-cultural understanding of work-related beliefs. Human Relations, 52, 855-867. Oishi, S., Diener, E. F., Lucas, R. E., Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 980-990. Olekalns, M. (1997). Conflict at work: Defining and resolving organizational conflicts. Australian Psychologist, 32, 56-61. ngel, ., & Smith, P. (1994). Who are we and where are we going? JCCP approaches its 100th issue. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 25-53. Orpen, C. (1990). The cross-cultural validity of the action tendency measure of job satisfaction: Further evidence. Psychological Studies, 35, 133-136.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 61 Paik, Y., Rody, R., & Sohn, J. J. D. (1998). The influence of overseas assignment on self-efficacy of expatriate managers: The case of Korean managers in U.S. subsidiaries. Current Topics in Management, 3, 329-344. Perlaki, I. (1994). Organizational development in Eastern Europe: Learning to build culture-specific OD theories. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 30, 297-312. Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 603-609. Powell, G. N., & Kido, Y. (1994). Managerial stereotypes in a global economy: A comparative study of Japanese and American business students' perspectives. Psychological Reports, 74, 219-226. Probst, T., Carnevale, P. J., & Triandis, H. C. (1999). Cultural values in intergroup and single-group social dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 171-191. Ptak, C. L., Cooper, J., & Brislin, R. (1995). Cross cultural training programs: Advice and insights from experienced trainers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 19, 425453. Rahim, M. A., Antonioni, D., Psenicka, C. Kim, N., & Khan, A. A. (1999). Bases of leader power and subordinates' organizational commitment and effectiveness: A cross-cultural study. Current Topics in Management, 4, 327-346. Ralston, D. A., Gustafson, D. J., Elsass, P. M., Cheung, F., & Terpstra, R. H. (1992). Eastern values: A comparison of managers in the United States, Hong Kong, and the People's Republic of China. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 664-671.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 62 Randall, D. M. (1993). Cross-cultural research on organizational commitment: A review and application of Hofstede's value survey module. Journal of Business Research, 26, 91-110. Rao, A., Hashimoto, K., & Rao, A. (1997). Universal and culturally specific aspects of managerial influence: A study of Japanese managers. Leadership Quarterly, 8, 295-312. Ryan, A. M., Chan, D., Ployhart, R. E., & Slade, L. A. (1999). Employee attitude surveys in a multinational organization: Considering language and culture in assessing measurement equivalence. Personnel Psychology, 52, 37-58. Saunders, D. M., & Aycan, Z. (1997). New approaches to employee management: Expatriate management: Theory and research, Vol. 4. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Savicki, V. (1999). Cultural work values for supervisors and managers: A crosscultural look at child and youth care agencies. Child and Youth Care Forum, 28, 239-255. Schaufeli, W. B., & Janczur, B. (1994). Burnout among nurses: A Polish-Dutch comparison. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 95-113. Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: JosseyBass. Schmidt, S. M., & Yeh, R. (1992). The structure of leader influence: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23, 251-264. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1-65). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Schwartz, S. H., & Sagie, G. (2000). Value consensus and importance: A crossnational study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 465-497.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 63 Shackleton, V. J., & Ali, A. H. (1990). Work-related values of managers: A test of the Hofstede model. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 109-118. Shackleton, V., & Newell, S. (1991). Management selection: A comparative survey of methods used in top British and French companies. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64, 2336. Shaw, J. B. (1990). A cognitive categorization model for the study of intercultural management. Academy of Management Review, 15, 626-645. Silverthorne, C. P. (1992). Work motivation in the United States, Russia, and the Republic of China (Taiwan): A comparison. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 16311639. Singer, M. S., & Singer, A. E. (1990). Situational constraints on transformational versus transactional leadership behavior, subordinates' leadership preference, and satisfaction. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 385-396. Sommer, S. M., Bae, S., & Luthans, F. (1996). Organizational commitment across cultures: The impact of antecedents on Korean employees. Human Relations, 49, 977-993. Steiner, D. D., & Gilliland, S. W. (1996). Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 134-141. Suutari, V. H. T. (1997). Finnish expatriate managers' experiences of the implications of cross-cultural differences in leadership. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 28, 307-312. Tayeb, M. (1994). Organizations and national culture: Methodology considered. Organization Studies, 15, 429-446. Thibaut, J. & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 64 Tinsley, C. H. (1997). Understanding conflict in a Chinese cultural context. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 6, 209-225. Tinsley, C. (1998). Models of conflict resolution in Japanese, German, and American cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 316-323. Tojosvold, D., Sasaki, S., & Moy, J. W. (1998). Developing commitment in Japanese organizations in Hong Kong: Interdependence, interaction, relationship, and productivity. Small Group Research, 29, 560-582. Tolgerdt-Andersson, I. (1993). Attitudes, values, and demands on leadership: A cultural comparison. Management Education and Development, 24, 48-57. Triandis, H. C. (1997). Where is culture in the acculturation model? Commentary on `Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation' by John W. Berry. Applied Psychology, 46, 55-58. Triandis, H. C. (1994). Culture and Social Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Triandis, H. C., & Singelis, T. M. (1998). Training to recognize individual differences in collectivism and individualism within culture. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22, 35-47. Vertinsky, I. Tse, D. K., Wehrung, D. A., & Lee, K. (1990). Organizational design and management norms: A comparative study of managers' perceptions in the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong, and Canada. Journal of Management, 16, 853-867. Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1996). Cross cultures: The relationship between psychological and socio-cultural dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment. In J. Pandey, D. Sinha, & D. P. S. Bhawuk (Eds.), Asian Contributions to Cross-Cultural Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ward, C., & Rana-Deuba, A. (2000). Home and host culture influences on sojourner adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 291-306.
Cross-Cultural I/O Psychology 65 Ward, C., & Rana-Deuba, A. (1999). Acculturation and adaptation revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 422-442. Watson, W. E., & Kumar, K. (1992). Differences in decision making regarding risk taking: A comparison of culturally diverse and culturally homogeneous task groups. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 53-65. Westwood, R. I., Tang, S. F. Y., & Kirkbride, P. S. (1992). Chinese conflict behavior: Cultural antecedents and behavioral consequences. Organization Development Journal, 10, 1319. Williams, J. D., Han, S., Qualls, W. J. (1998). A conceptual model and study of crosscultural business relationships. Journal of Business Research, 42, 135-143. Wright, E. O., Baxter, J., & Birkelund, G. E. (1995). The gender gap in workplace authority: A cross-national study. American Sociological Review, 60, 407-435. Xie, J. L. (1996). Karasek's model in The People's Republic of China: Effects of job demands, control, and individual differences. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1594-1618. Yamauchi, H. (1993). Work values of Japanese, Korean, and Chinese business workers. Psychologia--An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient, 36, 250-258. Yavas, U., Luqumani, M., & Quraeshi, Z. (1990). Organisational commitment, job satisfaction, work values: Saudi and expatriate managers. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 11, 3-10. Zapf, M. K. (1991). Cross-cultural transitions and wellness: Dealing with culture shock. International Journal for the Advancement of Counseling, 14, 105-119.