An experimental study of the acceptance of a foreign newcomer into a workgroup

We examine the acceptance of a foreign newcomer into a local workgroup. Using Social Identity and Acculturation theories, we try to identify factors that help a foreign newcomer gain acceptance of a host group. We test the model using a group-level policy-capturing technique. Our results indicated that a workgroup's attitude towards a foreign newcomer was influenced by socially attractive behaviors of the newcomer, the apparent sincerity of such behaviors, the group's culture on the individualism dimension, cultural similarity between the newcomer and the group, and cultural intelligence of the newcomer as reflected in the individual's reputation of establishing a relationship with his/her host culture.Group acceptance, Newcomer, Social identity theory, Acculturation

Some Observations on Specifying Models of Group Performance

The purpose of this paper is to identify some critical dimensions in specifying a model of group performance" The focus is not, on presenting the model of effective group performance because there is unlikely to be a model which is generalizable to different criteria and different types of groups. Rather, our interest is in discussing some of the conditions for developing models of group performance. A basic assumption in our work on groups is that one must build models of performance for a specific criterion in a specific type of group. If this is true, the best one can do in a general discussion is to indicate the processes necessary for developing models of group performance</p

Cultural Management International Journal of Cross Cultural Intelligence: Domain and Assessment International Journal of Cross Cultural Management Additional services and information for Cultural Intelligence Domain and Assessment

ABSTRACT The construct of cultural intelligence, recently introduced to the management literature, has enormous potential in helping to explain effectiveness in cross cultural interactions. However, at present, no generally accepted definition or operationalization of this nascent construct exists. In this article, we develop a conceptualization of cultural Over the years, many studies have alluded to the idea that there are certain attributes that some individuals have that allow them to be effective in cross cultural communication In this article, we define cultural intelligence based on a review of literature in the domains of cross cultural interactions, social cognition, and intelligence. We address fundamental conceptual issues in construct validity A Type of Intelligence Defining this new construct as a type of intelligence, as opposed to intercultural competency, global mindset or any number of other similar terms, has two advantages. First, it substitutes well-studied ideas in cognitive psychology for the more popular concepts that have made their way into the international management literature. For example the term &apos;global mindset&apos; is widely used in the management literature, but there continues to be a good deal of confusion surrounding the definition and constituent elements of this construct (see Related constructs that depart from a purely cognitive view of intelligence should be distinguished from our current focus. The first is the ability to understand oneself and others in a social situation and thus effectively interact with others -so-called social intelligence Social and emotional intelligence share some attributes with cultural intelligence as defined ahead, such as the idea that intelligence is inherently multidimensional. However, both of these constructs are specific to the culture in which they were developed and do not necessarily relate to cross cultural interactions. For example, social skills learned and honed in one country may be ineffective or even offensive in another culture with different rules for social interaction (e.g. Indicators of Cultural Intelligence By definition, the outcome of culturally intelligent behavior is more effective intercultural interaction. This statement, of course, begs the question of what indications suggest cultural intelligence in action. A good general description of such effectiveness might be drawn from the literature on successful adjustment to a foreign culture While the goals may differ from person to person and situation to situation, goal accomplishment is always a candidate as an indicator of an effective interaction, in this case, in a cross cultural setting. Based on these dimensions of self, relational, and task effectiveness outcomes, we would thus expect cultural intelligence to be positively related to expatriate adjustment, task completion by culturally diverse groups, effective decision making in a multicultural context, leadership of culturally different others and a host of other cross cultural interactions. However, these distal outcomes might also be related to a variety of factors that have little to do with cultural intelligence. For example, although specifying a motivational facet of (cultural) intelligence (e.g. Cultural Intelligence Defined We define cultural intelligence as a system of interacting knowledge and skills, linked by cultural metacognition, that allows people to adapt to, select, and shape the cultural aspects of their environment. This definition puts the construct in the domain of multifaceted conceptualizations of intelligence. Thus, not only does cultural intelligence include multiple types of knowledge (understanding of a body of information) and skills (mastery of an application of knowledge), it involves both cognitive and metacognitive (knowledge of and control over one&apos;s thinking and learning) dimensions. In our conceptualization, it is important that we differentiate between intelligence and intelligent behavior. That is, what constitutes intelligent behavior (behavior demonstrating appropriate knowledge and skills) may differ from one cultural environment to another (e.g. Thus we conceive of cultural intelligence as knowledge and skills that are developed in a specific cultural (cross cultural) context, but the effectiveness of which in the production of culturally intelligent behavior is dependent on a culture general process element called cultural metacognition. Cultural intelligence, like other domains of research that address a complex outcome (e.g. In the following, we develop the logic for the inclusion of each of the elements of knowledge, skills and cultural metacognition in our model of cultural intelligence. We also describe the nature of the interaction among these three elements that results in the emergence of cultural intelligence as a unique construct. Cultural Knowledge The cultural knowledge component of cultural intelligence includes what As culture specific content knowledge is acquired, it is categorized in order to cope with the complexity of the environment Cultural knowledge refers not only to a declarative or content component (e.g. knowledge about cultures, social interactions, personal history), but also to stored processes (i.e. culture general processes directed to the solution of specific problems). Process or procedural knowledge includes knowledge of the effect of culture on one&apos;s own nature or the nature of another as a cognitive processor, knowledge that involves cross cultural encounter or problem-solving, its demands, and how those demands can be met under varying conditions. The creation of this culture general knowledge involves learning from specific experience with culturally different others and is the result of reflective observation, analysis, and abstract conceptualization, which can create new mental categories and re-categorize others in a more sophisticated cognitive system. Ultimately, knowledge gained from specific experience is recoded into broader principles (see for example, Skills The literature on cultural adjustment and related outcomes of interaction with culturally different others or in foreign environments is replete with individual difference constructs that purport to explain or predict effectiveness. They range from attitudes such as world-mindedness In order to specify the skills elements of cultural intelligence, it is important to recognize the dynamic nature of cultural intelligence. That is, it is not static, but involves continuous learning from social interactions. Development of cultural intelligence by learning from social experience means paying attention to and appreciating critical differences in culture and background between oneself and others. This implies the importance of what we have labeled perceptual skills. Candidates for inclusion here are constructs such as open-mindedness, tolerance of uncertainty, and non-judgmentalness. Also, learning from social interaction with culturally different others and/or in foreign cultural contexts requires relational skills such as flexibility, sociability, empathy and so on. While both of these skill dimensions are important, the skill that perhaps most clearly distinguishes cultural intelligence from other related ideas is the ability to generate appropriate behavior in a new cultural setting. This adaptive skill involves being able to exhibit behavior that is chosen from a welldeveloped repertoire or is quickly developed during the course of an intercultural interaction. Candidates for subordinate dimensions of this skill include self-monitoring, behavioral flexibility and self-regulation. Rather than being simply adaptive toward behavior that is typical of a target culture, this skill manifests itself in generating new behavior that is appropriate to the cross cultural interaction context. This is an important difference in the conceptualization of cultural intelligence presented here versus other conceptualizations (e.g. A body of evidence suggests that the adoption of behavior more like that of the other culture participant (also called mimicry in Cultural Metacognition The construct of cultural metacognition is based on the more general idea of metacognition, and is related to the analytic skills mentioned previously. Metacognition is defined as knowledge of and control over one&apos;s thinking and learning activities (Flavel, 1979; Thus metacognitive thoughts are deliberate, planful, intentional, goal-directed, and future-oriented mental behaviors that can be used to accomplish cognitive tasks Consistent with Flavell (1979), we define cultural metacognitive monitoring as attention to conscious cognitive experience, as well as to affective and personal-motivational states with regard to the cultural milieu that determines the course of a strategy in intercultural interaction. This involves maintaining heightened awareness of, and enhanced attention to, the current cultural experience or present reality, including awareness of the assumptions, emotions, motivations, intentions, behaviors, and skills of oneself and culturally different others. Cultural metacognitive regulation involves processes that are used to self-regulate and control cognitive activities and to ensure that a cognitive goal (e.g. effective handling of a cross cultural situation) has been met. Selfquestioning is a common metacognitive strategy to ensure that the goal is achieved. This control of cognitive processing involves bringing to mind knowledge relevant to the focus of attention (cultural interaction), inhibiting the tendency to act automatically, evaluating possible responses with reference to motives and goals (including not responding), and withholding judgment of others. There continues to be substantial debate in the literature regarding the extent to which metacognitive processes operate at a purely conscious level (e.g. Whether the term metacognitive should be used to describe thoughts that were once metacognitive but have since become nonconscious and automatic, remains a debatable issue. Certainly, the nonconscious and automatic nature of these thoughts contrasts sharply with other, more prominent, features of metacognition; namely, the extent to which metacognitive processes involve an awareness of oneself as &apos;an actor in his/her environment&apos; and a &apos;deliberate storer and retriever of information&apos;. It seems reasonable, therefore, to adopt the convention that the term metacognitive be reserved for &apos;conscious&apos; and &apos;deliberate&apos; thoughts that have as their object other thoughts. As they are conscious and deliberate, culturally metacognitive thoughts are not only potentially controllable by the person experiencing them, but they are potentially reportable and therefore accessible to the researcher. Nonconscious reflection on one&apos;s thinking may actually represent the implementation of an adaptive skill, as opposed to the actual metacognitive process. Examples differentiating these various components of cultural intelligence are presented in Linking Function of Cultural Metacognition 2 Cultural metacognition occupies a central position in our conceptualization of cultural intelligence. The term metacognition (also called metacognitive knowledge in Cognitive Self-Regulation Cultural metacognition regulates cognition in that it refers to an understanding of one&apos;s own cognitive behavior in the planning and monitoring of performance and in the use of cognitive strategies in a particular domain (se

Cultural intelligence: a theory-based, short form measure

This article reports the development and validation of a theory-based, short form measure of cultural intelligence (SFCQ). The SFCQ captures the original theoretical intent of a multifaceted culture general form of intelligence that is related to effective intercultural interactions. The validity of the scale is established with 3526 participants in five language groups from around the world. Results provide evidence for construct and criterion-related validity of the measure, and indicate that cultural intelligence is a single latent factor reflected in three intermediate facets. In support of construct validity the measure is modestly related to but distinct from emotional intelligence and personality and correlates positively with several indicators of multicultural experience. With regard to criterion-related validity, it relates as predicted to several dimensions of intercultural effectiveness. Implications for the measurement and understanding of culture and the influence of culture on management practice are discussed