Clusters are business agglomerates which not only stimulate and facilitate tangible and intangible

transactions, but are also agents of innovation, since they can reduce uncertainty and lead to more
interaction with external agents [3] [9]. (Gomes, J. S., & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2013)

Theevolutionandoperationofleadershipconceptsfollowsthemorefundamental
principlesformulatedi npsychologicaltheoriesofhumanpercepdon,cognitionand
behaviour.Thehumaninformationprocessorusescontextspecificschemataor
prototypestocategorizeperceptions(Cantor&Mischel,1979;Rosch,1978).

Experimentalstudiesexploringimplicitleadershiptheoryhavefoundthatpeople
usecategorizationprocesseswhenformingleadershipperceptions.Theymatcha
targetpersonagainstacognitiveprototypethatcontainscharacteristicleader
attributes(Lord,Foti.&DeVader,1984;Phillips&Lord,1981;fo rareviewsee
Lord&Maher,1991),andsomeonerecognizedasaleaderi salsoperceivedtobe
morepowerfulandinfluential(Cronshaw&Lord,1987).

Shaw's(1990 )theoreticalworksuggestspre-existingleadershipprototypesand
expectationstobeonepotentialsourceofvarianceacrosscultures.Whatis
characteristicorprototypicalofaleadermaybedifferentindistinctcultures.
Culturallyendorseddifl'erencesi nleadershipconceptscanaffec tthereactionsof
otherstoaforeignmanagerinawaythatimpedescross-culturalleadershipsuccess.
Theleadershipperceptionsoftheperceiversinahostcountry(e.g.higher-level
managers,colleaguesandsubordinates)determinewhetheraforeignmanageri s
labelledaleaderwhich,inturn,candeterminetheacceptanceofhis/herleadership
traitsandbehavioursandthedegreetowhichtheforeignleaderi sperceivedtobe
powerful,influentialorefficient.Furthermore,theforeignmanagers'ethnocentric
leadershipschemataorprototypescaninfluencetheprobabilitythattheybehave
inappropriatelyasperceivedi nthehostcountry.Inshort,themoreleadership
conceptsbetweenforeignmanagersandrelevantattributersinahostcountrydiffer,
thelessthelikelihoodthatcross-culturalleadershipwillbeacceptedandeffective

Generally,cross-culturalresearchsuggests
thatculturecaninfluenceleadershipconcepts(House,Wright,&Aditya,1997).
GerstnerandDay(1994)andO'Connell,Lord,andO'Connell(1990)present
Evidenceforrelationsbetweencultureandleadershipconcepts

(House,Wright,&Aditya,1997).
GerstnerandDay(1994)andO'Connell,Lord,andO'Connell(1990)


clerks in banks in Kenya (Walumbwa, Orwa, Wang, & Lawler, 2005).
The number of cross-cultural studies on the relationship between transformational leader
behavior and organizational commitment is growingbut still limited. Cross-cultural studies
provide important insight as an ever-increasing number of corporations operate in multiple
countries. The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program
looked at leadership in 62 cultures and found that attributes associated with transformational
leadership are endorsed universally across cultures as contributing to outstanding leadership
(Den Hartog, House, Hanges, Ruiz-Quintanilla, Dorfman, & GLOBE Associates, 1999).

It is common practice for large, US-based multinationals to design a leadership model
with defined leadership behaviors at the corporate level and cascade it globally. Leadership
development programs and performance managementsystems then are aligned to reinforce their
models. For organizations that depend on the success of their operations around the world,
understanding the effectiveness of US-based leadership practices in other countries is important. (Dunn,
M. W., Dastoor, B., & Sims, R. L. (2012).)

As the long-term success of many firms reliesincreasingly on their ability to operate
effectively in different countries, Conducting studies both inside and outside the US contributes to
the growing body of research on the influence of national culture on the perception and effects of
leader behavior, and strengthens existing knowledgeon the effectiveness of US-based leadership
practices in other countries.

The Power Distance dimension refers to the distribution of power. The Israeli culture
scored quite low on this dimension (only one country/region scored lower). The lower ranking for
Israel (rank = 13) indicates greater equalityand cooperative interaction among various
organizational levels. The United States has a rankof 40. This is an indication that managers and
employees may typically be considered more equal in status in Israel thanin the US (Hofstede,
2005). The leader behaviors associated with Modeling the Way may be aligned with the cultural
dimension of Power Distance. Leaders who Model theWay create a sense of equality by inviting
their staff to provide them with feedback on how their actions affectothers. They ensure
everyone has a voice in decision-making and work with their teams to build consensus around a
common set of values for running the organization. Given the low ranking in Power Distance for
Israel, we anticipated Israeli employees would bemore attracted to leaders who display these
transformational leadership behaviors than would US employees.

Uncertainty Avoidance is defined as the extent to which the members of a culture feel
threatened by uncertain or unknown situations (Hofstede, 2005, p. 113).Lower scores are an
indication of weak levels of uncertainty avoidance,and higher scores are an indication of strong
levels of uncertainty avoidance. In weak uncertainty avoidance cultures, deviant and innovative
ideas and behavior are tolerated. In strong uncertainty avoidance cultures, there is an emotional
need for rules (p. 125). The lower uncertainty avoidance ranking for the US (rank = 46) is
indicative of a society that has fewer rules than some others, and does not attempt to control as
many outcomes and results. Thisdiffers from the higher uncertainty avoidance ranking for Israel,
which ranks 81, indicating a lower level of tolerance for a variety of ideas, thoughts, and beliefs.
Thus, Israel is considered a strong uncertainty avoidance culture, while the US is considered a
moderate uncertainty avoidance culture (Hofstede, 2005). The leader behaviors associated with
Challenging the Process are closely aligned with the cultural dimension of uncertainty avoidance.
Leaders who challenge the process search outside the formal boundaries of the organization for
innovative ways to change the status quo and improve the organization. They experiment and
take risks, even when there is a chance of failure. Given Israeli national culture is quite high on
uncertainty avoidance, we anticipated Israeli employees might be less attracted to leaders who
introduce innovative approaches and create unstructured, novel, or unfamiliar situations.

The difference between the US (rank = 62) and Israel (rank = 47) is smallest on the
Masculinity-Femininity dimension. A higher ranking indicates a more masculine culture, which
values assertiveness, competition, and the acquisition of material goods over modesty and
nurturing relationships. Even with the small absolute differences in scores, Israel is considered a
moderately feminine culture, while the US isconsidered a moderately masculine culture
(Hofstede, 2005). The leader behaviors associatedwith Encouraging the Heart are closely aligned
with a feminine culture as defined by Hofstede. The differences between the US and Israel are
quite small on the masculinity/femininity dimension.However, it is possible Israeli employees,
who live and work in a culture classified as moderately feminine, would better appreciate leaders
who exhibit behaviors that demonstrate genuine acts of caring, and who recognize the
contributions and accomplishments of their people.

With the differences in the cultural dimensions between the US and Israel, particularly
individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and powerdistance, we anticipated findings that would
reveal potentially significant differences in the impact of specific transformational leadership
behaviors on organizational commitment between the two countries. Thus, the following
hypothesis was proposed:




Research conducted by Hofstede (1980, 1993), for example, indicates that managerial and
organizational practices may be different in countries that belong to different clusters based on
cultural value similarities. Based on his classic study, Hofstede (1980) concludes that is possible to
classify work-related values into four dimensions: individualism versus collectivism, power distance,
uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity versus femininity.
Hofstede (1980) defines individualism collectivism in terms of the individual's preference for
independent or interdependent relationships. In western cultures an individual's goals take precedence
over group goals whereas in many countries in Asia, Africa and South America, cooperation, family
security and social hierarchies are important. In individualistic societies everyone is expected to look
after himself or herself and personal goals take priority over group goals. Collectivism, on the other
hand, pertains to societies in which people are integrated into strong groups, which protect them
throughout their lifetimes.
High power distance (PDI) refers to the acceptance of hierarchical structures where authority and
decision-making are centralized. In a high power distance country there is a high degree of
interpersonal inequality and hierarchy. High PDI may imply that managers will be more used to
playing their roles in teams and other collective activities, and that they are more accustomed to
working with others (Pan and Tse, 2000). Therefore, their perceptions of different dimensions of
quality may be different from those who are from low power distance countries. Hofstede (1993)
places Chinese-based cultures among the highest in power distance, while the US is low on this
dimension. High PDI scores may be interpreted to mean that individuals in leadership positions have
both authority and responsibility in the formally constituted hierarchy. This may result in continuity
and less uncertainty regarding leadership, leading to a more cooperative work environment that is
conducive to teamwork. Conversely, in high power distance cultures, workers may not find it
appropriate for anyone other than the established leader to maintain the leadership role within a
team, undermining the very concept of a team (Harrison et al., 2000).
Cultures with strong uncertainty avoidance (UA) are threatened by ambiguity and experience greater
anxiety. In countries with high UA, people tend to be rigid and prefer clear rules of behavior. In
countries with a low score on UA, on the other hand, people are less concerned about taking risks, and
structures and rules tend to be less clear and unwritten (Bowman et al., 2000). Finally, in terms of
masculinity/femininity (MAS), the Hofstede (1980) study expresses femininity as the extent to which
communities value caring for others, quality of life and people.
Hofstede (1980, 1993) suggests that these value dimensions influence preferences or tendencies
toward certain organizational practices. For example, the degree of individualism within a culture will
be related to the degree of participation in organizations and the hierarchical nature of worker-
manager relations. Research has found US managers to demonstrate little power difference and low
uncertainty avoidance, whereas Chinese managers demonstrate strong power differences and a strong
tendency to avoid uncertainty (Makino and Nuepert, 2000).


One of the main conclusions of the quality management movement is the importance of cross-
functional teams and fluid workgroups. Morris et al. (1994: 68-9) argue that in collectivist cultures
`greater synergies may occur from the combined efforts of people with diverse skills'. This implies
that collectivist societies may have a comparative advantage in forming and operating crossfunctional
teams. Conversely, Harrison et al. (2000) draw on Triandis (1993) in arguing that in collectivist
cultures groups tend to be few in number, stable and inflexible, making movement of an individual
from group to group very difficult. In individualistic cultures people belong to many groups for
different purposes and therefore move easily from one to another. It may be harder in collectivist
cultures to create teams because people may be unwilling or unable to shift their allegiance to a team.
In short, the culture perspective suggests that the scores on the individualism--collectivism (IDV
dimension are important in cross-national managerial comparisons.
Hofstede's four-dimensional framework has been used extensively in cross cultural studies. We, too,
utilize all four of these dimensions. Table 1 shows the scores of the US, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan
on each of the four cultural dimensions.


Knowledge of managers' perceptions from different cultures will improve our understanding of
managerial effectiveness and action, especially in work environments that are becoming increasingly
diverse in terms of employees' social and cultural backgrounds. As global competition increases,
managers from various countries will interact in the same marketplace. While our research suggests
that these managers will share common ground with respect to quality management practices, some
differences remain. Culture is important in understanding managerial practices, since cultural values
were found to be important determinants of such management techniques as open communications,
reward allocation, job rotation and internal training, participation in goal setting, consultative decision-
making and team activity (Beechler and Yang, 1993). Thus, if US managers would like to understand
how their Asian counterparts make decisions, it would be useful if they knew more about their value
system. Also, for multinational firms with both US and Asian managers, improved communication
could promote quality-- enhancing ingredients of different views. Watson et al. (1993) report that
diversity of teams contributes to creativity once the team members learn to cooperate. In a global
environment, success in the long run may be the outcome of being able to take advantage of cultural
diversity.


Corporate managers such as Ann Hopkins should realize that equating the stereotypical culture of a
country directly with all citizens of the country would be misleading. While culture is defined at the
national level (e.g., collectivism), whether an individual shows such a cultural orientation consistent with
the national culture needs to be measured

The concept of national culture has been very useful for the study of nations and societies. However, in
managerial situations, the reflection of culture at the individual level is more important and relevant
(see Kamakura and Novak 1992; Kamakura and Mazzon 1991). Accordingly, a strong need has been
raised to measure culture at the individual level. Business efforts would be most effective when such a
measure is developed and applied to individuals (Farley and Lehmann 1994)

Hofstedes (1980, 2001) five-dimensional measure of culture has been the overwhelmingly dominant
metric of culture. According to him, power distance is the extent to whichthe less powerful members of
institutions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally.
Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or
unknown situations.
Individualism pertains to societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected
to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family. Masculinity represents the dominant
male sex role pattern in the vast majority of both traditional and modern societies. Long-term
orientation refers to long term versus short-term orientation toward the future.
Hofstedes metric has been popular for several reasons. First, its cultural dimensions fully cover and
extend major conceptualizations of culture developed through decades
Using Hofstedes metric, researchers have found meaningful relationships between national culture and
important demographic, geographic, economic, and political indicators of a society (Kale and Barnes
1992).
This famous metric has been widely accepted and applied at both country and individual levels in cross-
cultural studies.

Culture has been studied using various approaches, including a focus on values (Rokeach, 1973), relations between
the self and others (Wong and Ahuvia, 1998), and context of communication (Hall, 1976). In a very large study of
workplace culture, Hofstede (1980) developed an approach to the study of culture that included many aspects of
these approaches and more. Originally formulated in 1980 in a study of IBM employees around the world,

Hofstedes original four dimensions, later expanded to five, consisted of power distance, uncertainty avoidance,
individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, and the late addition, long-term orientation. Hofstedes model
has become one of the most widely used approaches to the study of culture (Yoo and Donthu, 1998).

Hofstedes items were designed for the workplace with wording that focused on workplace issues although, in the
later edition of his work, he expanded the application of the model to include individual behavior, families, religion,
and politics.

Power distance
Hofstede (2001) noted that the human species is one that characteristically exhibits dominance behavior and that
pecking orders (social inequalities) are natural to us. Hofstedes power distance dimension measures a cultures or
individuals tolerance for or expectation of social inequalities. A high power distance score indicates an acceptance
of ones status and of what one currently owns. According to Hofstede (2001, p. 97), Superiors are seen as superior
persons who are deserving of better possessions, wealth, and status. People with high power distance scores are
more accepting of their lot in life, suggesting lower materialism levels overall and lower scores for them in each of
Richins and Dawsons (1992) materialism components.

Individuals in a low power distance culture, on the other hand, feel that everyone is, or could be, equal in status. A
low power distance score indicates that those individuals are more interested in advancing to the level of others
whom they perceive to be their equals and thus are sensitive to comparisons with others they perceive as superior.
Such comparisons with others possessions and status may be associated with high levels of materialism.

Hofstede (1980) focused on uncertainty at the organizational level, looking at the use of rules and strategies to
reduce exposure to an unsure future. He noted that at a personal level, high uncertainty avoidance indicates a
concern for living independently and for finances, health, and money. Individuals scoring high on uncertainty
avoidance would attach high value to the possessions that accomplish this reduction in exposure to such risks and
would thus show high levels of materialism overall and on the acquisition centrality and pursuit of happiness
dimensions of the materialism construct.

Individualism/collectivism

Hofstede (2001, p. 250) described individualism as:[. . .] stand[ing] for a society in which ties between individuals are
loose: Everyone is expected
to look after him/herself and his/her immediate family only. Collectivism stands for a society in which people from birth onwards
are integrated into strong cohesive in-groups [. . .] Individualism is associated with independence from others, whereby
individuals consider personal interests more important than those of the group. In an individualist culture, one way
to express this independence is through ones possessions, such as style choices and indicators of success such as the
quantity and quality of ones possessions. According to Hofstedes (2001) review of the work of DeMooj,
individualists are more likely to own conspicuous possessions such as detached houses, pets, and motor homes, and
are more likely to engage in do-it-yourself improvement projects. The collectivist individual, on the other hand, has
a lower need for individual recognition. Success for the collectivist is measured by group success; individuals show
a lower tendency to stand out from the group. Thus, high individualism scores are associated with high materialism
both overall and in all its components.

Masculinity/femininity
This masculinity/femininity dimension is a characteristic of both the values held about and roles expected of
men and women. Hofstede (2001) noted that in a masculine culture, males are expected to be tough, assertive, and
self-reliant while females are expected to be more tender and nurturing. The masculine gender role is one in which
men are more concerned with economic and other achievements and women [. . .] with taking care of people in
general and children in particular (p. 280). Hofstede also observed that in a work setting, males value
advancement, earnings, training, [and] up-to-dateness while females value friendly atmosphere, position security,
physical conditions and manager cooperation (p. 281). Overall, males values are more concrete and performance-
related while female values focus more on personal relationships. As well, in a very masculine culture, gender roles
are more differentiated, while in a feminine culture, gender roles are more similar to each other.

In masculine cultures, Hofstede (2001) observed that status purchases such as jewelry, cars, and travel are made
more frequently. This suggests a higher need to show off, particularly for males. Other studies of materialism
(Ogden, 2003) support the view that males are more materialistic than females. Thus, masculinity is associated with
higher levels both in materialism overall and, particularly, in its success dimension. Hofstede (2001) also observed
that masculinity scores are lower for both genders in higher age groups. This suggests lower levels of materialism
with age.

Long-term orientation
This dimension was a later addition to the Hofstede (1980) model, one he added in the second edition in 2001.
Based on the philosophy of Confucius, this dimension is described as an Eastern way of thinking that stresses
perseverance, thrift and regard for the future (p. 361). A culture with a high long-term orientation score avoids
conspicuous consumption in favor of moderation and heavy savings. High long-term orientation scores are therefore
associated with low levels of materialism both overall and in all its components.

As can be seen above, a large difference on the individualism/collectivism score is apparent whereby Taiwans score
was one of the lowest of all the countries studied while Canadas tended to be toward the top of the individualism
scale. On the other four dimensions, the differences between the countries were somewhat smaller, but Taiwan
outscored Canada on uncertainty avoidance and power distance, while Canadas score on masculinity was slightly
higher than that of Taiwan. These differences in the cultural dimensions between the two countries suggest different
levels of materialism, as discussed below.

Table I shows that Taiwan scored much higher than did Canada on the power distance score, much higher on
uncertainty avoidance, much lower on individualism, slightly higher on masculinity, and much higher on long-term
orientation. From the discussion above, these patterns point to a lower level of materialism in China than in
Canada. This effect would also be consistent with Ger and Belks (1996, p. 55) observation that materialism is
generally seen as a Western trait, suggesting that:


Culture serves as a socially shared knowledge schema giving meaning to incoming stimuli and
channeling outgoing reactions Triandis 1972. Most nations have their own unique culture as a result of
sharing a common history and a series of common struggles and successesHofstede and Hofstede 2005.
Every national culture describes distinct beliefs what is true, values what is important, and norms what
is appropriatethat are deeply embedded in peoples mind and demonstrated in their behaviors
accordinglyTrompenaar 2004.
Cultural beliefs, values, and norms are three central ingredients that drive cultural group members in
both the choice of strategies of appropriate social actionShank and Abelson 1977and the interpretation
of the situation and the behavior of others Fiske and Taylor 1991.

To measure the cultural orientations of people, Hofstede
1983first proposes a set of human constants, or so-called cultural dimensions, including power distance,
collectivism versus individualism, femininity versus masculinity or relationship versus achievement
orientation, and uncertainty avoidance. Later, on the basis of another research among students in 23
countries centered in the Far EastHofstede and Bond 1988, a fifth dimension, long-term versus short-
term orientation, is added. Rooted inthe three central ingredients, they form a five-dimension model of
differences among national culturesFig. 1. Each country in this model is characterized by a source on
each of the five dimensions

Organizational culture refers to then underlying values, beliefs and principles that serve as a foundation
for a companys social system as well as the set of practices and behaviors that both exemplify and
reinforce that organization (Fairfield-Sonn2001,12).

Recent data suggests that expatriates play an integral strategic role in an organizations efforts to
compete internationally, and may have a direct impact on the organizations financial performance
(Morley & Heraty, 2004).

According to GLOBE findings, the U.S. is part of the Anglo cultural cluster, which in turn, is part of the
North-Western meta-configuration, along with the Germanic and Nordic clusters (Gupta & Hanges,
2004). Thus, countries from the Anglo, Germanic and Nordic clusters share significant cultural
similarities, such as a strong emphasis on individualism and performance orientation, as compared to
countries from other clusters.
As a result, expatriates from North-Western national cultures are more likely to have values similar to
those of U.S. employees than expatriates from other types of national cultures.

The present study seeks to explore whether the type of national culture in an expatriates home country
plays a moderating role in the relationship between person- organization value congruence and
perceived overall fit. Cross-cultural research has identified clusters (i.e., groupings) of national cultures
that are relatively similar in their national-level broad cultural value profile (e.g., Gupta & Hanges, 2004;
Hofstede, 1980; Ronen & Shenkar, 1985). Thus, different cultural clusters represent different types of
national cultures. Clusters provide a useful way of summarizing intercultural similarities, as well as
differences, and can serve as sampling guides in cross-cultural research to nsure adequate cultural
variability within samples (Gupta, Hanges & Dorfman, 2002).
Findings from GLOBE, a large-scale cross-cultural research project which examined the broad cultural
values of 62 national cultures, provide the most recent typology of cultural clusters (House, et al., 2004;
Gupta & Hanges, 2004). GLOBE researchers identified eleven distinct cultural clusters that can be
grouped into four meta-configurations (i.e., North-Western, Latin, South-Eastern, and Asian meta-
clusters) (Brodbeck, Frese, Ackerblom, Audia, Bakacsi & Bendova, 2000; Gupta & Hanges, 2004; Gupta,
Hanges & Dorfman, 2002).


It is proposed that expatriates home country cultural cluster influences the importance of a given value
dimension with respect to individual well-being. The importance of value dimensions, in turn, influences
individuals perceptual and evaluative processes, such that information pertaining to important value
dimensions is processed more carefully and thoughtfully. As a result, congruence or incongruence on
important value dimensions is expected to play a stronger role in the formation of overall fit
perceptions. Thus, it is hypothesized that the effect of person-organization fit on a particular value
dimension is either enhanced or diminished depending on expatriates home country cultural cluster.

According to GLOBE findings, the U.S. is part of the Anglo cultural cluster, which in turn, is part of the
North-Western meta-configuration, along with the Germanic and Nordic clusters (Gupta & Hanges,
2004). Thus, countries from the Anglo, Germanic and Nordic clusters share significant cultural
similarities, such as a strong emphasis on individualism and performance orientation, as compared to
countries from other clusters.
As a result, expatriates from North-Western national cultures are more likely to have values similar to
those of U.S. employees than expatriates from other types of national cultures. This implies that
person-organization fit on work-related value dimensions, such as those assessed by the OCP, should be
more predictive of outcomes for expatriates from North-Western countries in comparison to expatriates
from other cultural clusters.

According to GLOBE findings, North-Western national cultures tend to be highly individualistic (i.e., low
on collectvism), as well as relatively low in power distance (i.e., have a relatively egalitarian view of
power and status in society), as compared to Latin, South-Eastern and Asian cultures which tend to be
more collectivistic and higher in power distance (i.e., differences in power and status are emphasized)
(Gupta & Hanges, 2004; House, et al., 2004; Hofstede, 1980). Expatriates from individualistic cultures
are more likely to endorse values related to openness to change, such as self-direction and stimulation
(Oyserman, et al., 2002; Van Vianen et al., 2004). An emphasis on openness to change values is more
congruent with North-Western cultures, which are more highly individualistic and lower in power
distance than other types of cultures (Hofstede, 2001; House et al., 2004; Oyserman et al., 2002). This
implies that person-organization value congruence on the openness to change value dimension is likely
to have a stronger effect on perceived overall fit for expatriates from North-Western cultures, than for
expatriates from Latin, South-Eastern or Asian cultures.

Since Asian cultures are considered both highly collectivistic and relatively high in power distance, it is
likely that expatriates from Asian cultures will place a relatively high importance on conservation values
as compared to expatriates from non-Asian cultures. As a result, it is likely that
In summary, the present study explores whether outcomes related to expatriates success (i.e., cross-
cultural adjustment, job satisfaction and turnover intentions) can be predicted based on person-
organization value congruence assessed on the work-related value dimensions traditionally studied in fit
research, as well as broad cultural value dimensions typically explored in cross-cultural research.

Business leaders tend to underestimate the time and skills for effectively managing overseas projects
and assume processes can be easily replicated in foreign countries the unintended consequences
include uncooperative vendor behavior, unsatisfactory delivery of services, and higher than expected
costs (Gurung and Prater, 2006). India is a country of diversity, and many times foreign business leaders
will make the mistake of assuming a single Indian culture, thinking individuals and social groups will
behave the same throughout the country a form of unconscious stereotyping that can hinder
performance outcomes.