Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies
http://jlo.sagepub.com/

Managerial Self-Concept in a Global Context : An Integral Component of Cross-Cultural Competencies

Michael Harvey, Nancy Mcintyre, Miriam Moeller and Hugh Sloan III
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 2012 19: 115
DOI: 10.1177/1548051811431826
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/19/1/115

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Midwest Academy of Management

Additional services and information for Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jlo.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jlo.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 19, 2012

What is This?

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

431826
et al.Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
Baker College 2012

JLOs19110.1177/1548051811431826Harvey

Reprints and permission: http://www.

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Managerial Self-Concept in a
Global Context: An Integral Component
of Cross-Cultural Competencies

Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies
19(1) 115125
Baker College 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1548051811431826
http://jlos.sagepub.com

Michael Harvey1,2, Nancy Mcintyre3,

Miriam Moeller4, and Hugh Sloan III1

Abstract
The level of sociocultural adaptation a global manager undergoes when relocating from his or her home country affects the
rate and severity of adjustment for that individual. To reduce the potentially negative impact of the lack of cross-cultural
competencies, it is critical for individuals to have a concise understanding of their self-concept, recognizing their strengths
and weaknesses. Self-concept is critical to learn how to effectively gain cross-cultural competencies. It is suggested that in
their home country a manager has three points of reference to determine ones self-conceptindividual, group, and organization.
The culture of the international posting country provides a fourth reference point.This article draws on a competency-based
view to form the basis for self-evaluation and the development of a composite self-concept. Moreover, it proposes an
implementation roadmap for developing cross-cultural competencies of global managers.
Keywords
self-concept, cross-cultural competencies, motivation theory, composite self-image

I think I can, I think I can, I think I can . . .

Piper (1954)
There may be a lot more to the moralistic childrens story
about the little, anthropomorphic locomotive engine that
could pull the big train over the mountain while repeating
its motto, I think I can, I think I can. Self-confidence provides the bedrock for success in most human endeavors
(Uhlmann & Cohen, 2007; Uskul & Hynie, 2007). Without
confidence in ones self, the probability of accomplishing
even the simplest goals comes into question. More complex
issues such as those experienced in developing cross-cultural
competencies are of particular concern for managers working
in the global marketplace (Selmer, 1999). The more difficult
the task, such as would be encountered on an overseas assignment for a prolonged period of time, the higher the level of
confidence in ones self is needed (Chen & Bliese, 2002;
Jordan & Cartwright, 1998; Luthans, Zhu, & Avolio, 2006;
Mak, Westwood, Ama, & Barker, 1999).
Without the bedrock of self-confidence, expatriate managers will suffer from lack of selfassurance, increasing their
likelihood of failure during a global assignment. In addition,
these expatriate managers will have a difficult time in developing a critical element needed to effectively manage in a global
contextthe development of a global mindset (i.e., a diverse

set of experiences, perceptions, and insights into how to

effectively compete in the global marketplace; Kedia &
Mukherji, 1999; Kefalas, 1998; Paul, 2000). A unique global
mindset becomes specifically valuable when the structure of
a global organization shifts from a multinational hierarchy
to a global network organization to support the change from
multidomestic to global and transnational strategies (Baruch
& Altman, 2002; see Figure 1).
This article is divided into four sections. First, we explore
self-concept in the context of a competency-based view of
the organization. Second, composite self-concept is developed to illustrate the multilevel analysis of self-concept that
is needed to fully understand its impact on learning and
addressing complex tasks. Third, the concept of group selfefficacy is examined to better understand the impact of the
group and the organization on ones self-concept. Finally, a
process for implementing cross-cultural competencies based
1

University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA

Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia
3
West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA
4
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
2

Corresponding Author:
Michael Harvey, University of Mississippi, 332 Holman Hall, Oxford,
MS 38655, USA
Email: mharvey@bus.olemiss.edu

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

116

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)

may include physical characteristics of the individual manager,
past experience, and specific human resources that enable the
individual to effectively develop these individual input
resources and may also include personal experience that the
person has acquired outside the work environment. The personal skill inventory represents a unique set of skills that are
difficult to duplicate and are essential to developing a positive
self-concept. These input competencies are the bedrock or
foundation for acquiring additional capabilities to differentiate
the global manager from other managers.

Managerial Competencies
Figure 1. Developing a global mindset

on self-concept is introduced. The addition of the cultural

component of the international posting country presents an
added point of reference relative to the global managers
self-concept development.

A Competency-Based View of Ones

Self-Concept
A competency-based perspective of self-concept explicitly
addresses the dynamic nature of the environment or context
of developing ones self-concept. Those competencies need
to be renewed and developed over time. This renewal suggests
that an individual should formulate a strategic intent to discover and develop new competencies of relevance to developing a positive self-concept through the development of
complementary competencies (Sanchez & Heene, 1997).
Competencies are divided into three distinct categories:
(a) input competenciespersonal attributes/demographic
characteristics, education, training/development, working
experience, personal experience, and other factor inputs to
an individuals make-up; (b) managerial competencies
work-related capabilities, social knowledge, political capital,
political skill, interpersonal networks, and social capital; and
(c) transformation-based competenciesthe ability of a manager to accomplish the tasks necessary to gain or establish
knowledge, skills, and abilities (Harvey, Speier, & Novicevic,
1999). Each of the three distinct categories of competencies
will be briefly discussed in more detail.

Input Competencies
Input resources play a critical role in developing positive
self-concept and the continual building of a positive selfconcept. These competencies would be identified in a resourcebased view of the individual: the bundling of tangible and
intangible internal resources that are valuable, rare, imperfectly
mobile, and inimitable (Barney, 1991). These input resources

Managerial competencies focus on the global managers vision,

decisions, and actions necessary to realize his/her effectiveness
(Lado, Boyd, & Wright, 1992). Managerial competencies may
create sustained competitive advantage directly if the global
manager is able to exploit unique and/or specific competencies.
These competencies are particularly valuable to the global
manager if he or she provides an institutional bridge between
the cultural, social, and political divides often found between
the domestic and foreign subsidiaries. As these managerial
competencies develop, the resulting outcomes from implementing new strategic visions may reshape the thinking, actions,
and even the worldview of the global manager, ultimately
evolving into a global mindset for the manager (Kefalas, 1998;
Paul, 2000). The objective for the global manager would be
to create multidimensional competencies (e.g., cross-cultural
communications skills and negotiation skills) to facilitate effective management and implementation of global goals as well
as local initiatives. Developing this multilevel competency
may result in a superior performance of the global manager
because such initiatives would be consistent with the needs
and role expectations in the global organization. The global
manager who is an effective manager while on overseas assignment has a heightened opportunity to enhance the individual
managers self-concept.

Transformation-Based Competencies
The global manager may also need to acquire and develop
competencies to more effectively address issues and collaborative relationships with external entities and institutions
(i.e., government agencies, banks, suppliers, customers, and
strategic alliance partners) and key individuals in the host
countries. This broad set of competencies has been labeled
as transformation-based competencies. Transformation-based
competencies are those that enable the global manager to
transform inputs into outputs. These may include interpersonal skills such as heightened communication skills, welldeveloped negotiation skills, political skills, and international
networking capabilities. Similarly, these competencies may
create a collective experience base and/or learning capability
resulting in an conducive learning experience that is difficult

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

117

Harvey et al.
for other managers to replicate and therefore can create a
relative competitive advantage over other global managers
(Roth & ODonnell, 1996; S. Taylor, Beechler, & Napier, 1996).
Transformation-based competencies can play a critical role
for global managers. First, there may be situations (e.g., dealing with host country government officials, working with new
environmental agencies, interfacing with nongovernmental
organizations, etc.), outside the existing managers experience/
network, that the new global managers network of relationships may have the knowledge or relationships to help the
organization. By using competent global managers who have
developed a self-concept with multiple skills, global managers
are developing a specific competency that is difficult for global
competitors to duplicate. Furthermore, the tacit knowledge
gained through having highly competent global managers
overseas can be brought back and embedded into the domestic
organization-specific routines, which in turn can facilitate
organizational learning. This would ultimately increase organizational effectiveness in global competitiveness.
By combining the three distinct categories of competencies
effectively, the global manager can configure a repertoire
of strategic skills relative to a specific national competitive
environment, while at the same time be mindful of the need
to adapt strategies that are attuned to the local needs of individual countries. The development of a global mindset
requires managers to interact with others who possess complementary competencies, while maintaining a proactive
posture relative to the value of assembling, motivating, and
retaining a multicultural management team for use in global
organizations (Kedia & Mukherji, 1999; Kefalas, 1998; Paul,
2000). Therefore, a global manager selection, development,
and staffing system needs to be developed that facilitates effective deployment of the manager-specific self-competencies
based on the individuals stage of professional development.
The focus of this development is on renewing specific social/
political competencies of global managers and heightening
their self-concept. It is envisioned that global managers selfconcept is a composite of the individual, group, and organizations (e.g., composite self-concept) conceptualization of the
self-concept of the global manager.

The Composite Self-Concept

When one is contemplating developing cross-cultural competencies, the logical starting point is to direct attention to
ones self-concept (Luthans et al., 2006; Markus & Kunda,
1986; Marsh, 1987). An awareness of and relatively permanent self-assessment of oneself is the foundation of learning,
creativity, and experimentation. Therefore, it is important to
examine what impact the development of ones self-concept
has on learning. The resulting composite self-concept is what
the individual perceives, what individuals in critical groups
think of the individual, and the assessments of the critical
decision makers in the organization about an individual (see

Individuals
Assessment of
Own SelfConcept
(Micro Level)

A Composite
Self Image

Groups
Assessment of
Self-Concept
(Meso Level)

Organizational
Assessment of
Self-Concept
(Macro Level)

Figure 2. Multiple levels of self-concept

Figure 2). The three levels that make up the composite selfconcept can be consistent (i.e., all three levels have similar
perceptions), or in some cases, they may be inconsistent (i.e.,
viewpoints at various levels are in conflict with each other).
When self-concept is consistent among the three entities,
the strength of self-concept is stronger and the individuals
confidence in their ability to accomplish tasks or to take on
new problems is heightened. The more complex or difficult
the task, the more important it is that the individual has a
consistent composite self-concept (Marsh, 1987; Uhlmann &
Cohen, 2007). Therefore, one is attempting to build crosscultural competencies consistent with ones self-concept
across all levels of the composite self-concept (see Figure 3),
leading to the following research propositions.
Research Proposition 1: Consistency of self-concept
across three levels of analysis will increase the effectiveness of expatriate managers while on foreign
assignment.
Research Proposition 2: Inconsistency among the three
levels of the expatriate managers self-concept will
need to be resolved or the expatriate manager will
experience stress and conflict as to what his/her role
is to be during the foreign assignment.
As is illustrated in Figure 3, individuals have three points
of reference in determining their self-concept. One reference
point is their own assessment of how competent they feel

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

118

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)

Individuals Self-Concept
(Micro)

High
Competence

High Self-Concept
Moderate
Competence

Moderate
Collective SelfConcept

Low Self-Concept
_

_
+

High Group
Collective SelfConcept

Low Competence

Low Collective
Self-Concept

Organizational
Assessment of Individual
(Macro)

Group Assessment
of Individual
(Meso)

Figure 3. Assessment of self-concept consistency: macro, meso, and micro levels

relative to a variety of different tasks. At the same time,

individuals look for cues from their work group as well as
from the organization itself. Figure 3 illustrates that cues
from the group and organization can be positive or negative.
The key consideration in determining ones composite selfconcept is the consistency of the cues. When the individual
has conflicting signals from the group and his own perception, the damage to self-concept can prove to be detrimental
to the goal. It should also be noted that the level of influence
of groups/organizations can vary at different times. The key
to the temporal dimension of assessing self-concept is to
identify those individuals/groups/organizations that have an
impact and to delineate the time periods when each entity
has direct impact on the individuals self-concept. At the
same time, one must recognize that there is an ongoing cumulative (over time) impact that various entities may have on
ones self-concept (Gross, 1984; Harvey & Novicevic, 2001;
Lee & Liebenau, 1999; Mosakowski & Earley, 2000), leading to the following research proposition.
Research Proposition 3: The accumulative impact of
inconsistent self-concept can jeopardize overall performance of expatriate managers while on overseas
assignments.
The inhibitors of developing a strong, consistent selfconcept vary across the three levels of competencies as well
as across different timeframes/horizons. Figure 2 illustrates
the three levels of the composite self-concept as well as the
impact of lack of knowledge, lack of ability/skills, and the
expertise needed to effectively work in a cross-cultural context. Without knowledge, it is practically impossible to have
the self-confidence to successfully undertake the problems
associated with developing cross-cultural competencies.

The lack of knowledge may be attributed to the absence of

education, training, or a social network to learn from by the
individual. At the same time, at the group level, knowledge
may be inhibited by the composition of the group (e.g., too
homogeneous, no difference in viewpoints or by contrast,
too heterogeneous/diverse and the inability to relate to each
other to learn). The lack of learning at the organizational
level may be due to the people who are recruited to the organization and the lack of investment in developing and/or
improving the human capital once they join the organization
(Luthans et al., 2006; Uhlmann & Cohen, 2007). For example,
third-country nationals are frequently referred to as hired
guns who are used due to their knowledge of the global
marketplace but are frequently less attuned to organizational
politics or long-run goals.
As one learns, one must convert such learning into abilities
or skills or the value of the information is negated (E. Taylor,
1994). A stepping-stone for building self-concept is to employ
knowledge to improve ones ability to successfully perform
tasks. The more difficult the task, the greater the level of skills
needed to be successful (Mak et al., 1999; Stier, 2003). The
inhibitors to translating knowledge into abilities or skills can
also be found in all three levels of self-concept (see Table 1).
To gain the highest level of self-confidence, one must convert
skills into functional expertise (Griffith & Harvey, 2001;
Harvey & Novicevic, 2005). The lack of expertise varies from
one level of analysis to another in the composite self-concept,
but most inhibitors appear to be related to a lack of communication between the individual, group, and organization,
leading to the following research proposition.
Research Proposition 4: Inhibitors to the development
of self-concept reduce the level of abilities and skill
levels related to functional expertise.

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

119

Harvey et al.
Table 1. Inhibitors to Development of Individual, Group, and Organizational Cross-Cultural Competency
Type of Inhibitor
by Level
Individual
variables

Group variables

Organizational
variables

Lack of Knowledge

Lack of Ability/Skills

Lack of education

Lack of job experience

Lack of certification

No professional association

Lack of training
Limited Network of
Relationships
No incentive to join
organization
Composition of the group
(demographic character)
Number of group members

Lack of promotion
Limited Responsibility

Stability of the group

Group viewed as not adding value

Formal/informal group
processes not established
Lack of leadership
Corporate reputation that
hinders recruiting/retention
Lack of investment in human
capital or development
Process oriented

Lack of rewards for group

productivity

Lack of development of internal/

external personal networks
Group capabilities and experiences
limited
Limited group synergy

Lack of organization development

programs
Limited perspectives of the right
way
Lack of learning organization culture

The Impact of Group and

Organizational Efficacy on
Managers Self-Concept

Lack of Expertise
Low level of organizational
responsibility
Lack of recognition for
accomplishments
No mentoring
Little to no personal
development
Group not integral to the
success of the organization
Group considers a failure by
other groups
Decrease in influence, power of
the group in the organization

Not benchmarking to top

organization (in/out of industry)
Not aware of value-added by
intangible capitals
Not developing intangible capitals
Increase intangible capitals

self-concept and can play an instrumental role in improving

the effectiveness of the expatriate manager over time, leading
to the following research proposition.

In the previous sections, we have examined a managers selfconcept based on his/her perceptions of his/her skills, although
such perceptions provide a point of reference in determining
ones self-concept. Groups and organizations also provide
feedback. Groups and organizations also influence the development of self-concept, which will change over time and may
vary given the level of contact the individual has with each
(Gross, 1984; Stalk, 1988; Stalk & Hout, 1990). Group behavior is a manifestation of group culture. A groups culture may
have a decidedly different orientation than that of expatriate
managers (Kim & Slocum, 2008). For example, the groups
cultural orientation may be very tight (see Gelfand, Nishii, &
Raver, 2006) with clear/unambiguous social norms, sanctions
that are severe with strict discipline characterized by resistance
to change. While at the same time the expatriate might have
a more loose cultural perspective, where social norms lack
formality, have a high tolerance for deviation, supportive attitude toward change, and a positive attitude toward change.
Then, the individual and group norms are in a conflict state,
and the expatriate managers self-concept can be slow to
develop and reduce the managers effectiveness. Group culture
can retard or accelerate the development of an effective global

Research Proposition 5: Conflict between macrocultural orientations (i.e., tight vs. loose) will have
a negative impact on expatriate managers selfconcept and in turn on his/her performance.
To encourage the development of self-efficacy in a group,
it is necessary to identify and understand influential antecedents. The most significant antecedents of individual selfefficacy include the following: (a) Performance experiences
on tasks in the groupbuilding skills, knowledge, and
processes for addressing similar problems in the future;
(b) Vicarious experienceobservational learning, modeling,
and imitating others in the organization; (c) Imagined experiencethe ability for some individuals to conceptualize and
visualize an experience, commonly referred to as symbolic
cognitive activity; (d) Verbal persuasion (social)receiving
positive cues from others who are experts and trustworthy;
(e) Physiological statethe openness, willingness, and
acceptance of an individual to the environment, whereby
others can influence the level as well as rate of learning as a
precursor to self-efficacy; and (f) Emotional statemoods

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

120

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)

I.
Initial Assessment of Self-Concept of Potential
Expatriates
II.
Initial Assessment of C3 of Potential Expatriates

Feedback

III.
Cluster Cultures by Level of Novelty

IV.
Develop Organizational Support Packages for
Expatriates
V.
Develop Cultural Training/Exposure for Expatriates

VI.
Short-Term Experiential Cultural Emersion
VII.
Monitor/Audit Self-Concept and C3 Development in
Expatriates

Figure 4. Step-by-step process for developing cross-cultural

competencies

that positively influence receptivity and learning (Griffith &

Harvey, 2001; Ormrod, 2006). Each of these factors is important, and many of them can be shaped by the corporate culture
of the organization and the managers group in particular
(Jarnagin & Slocum, 2007), leading to the following research
propositions.
Research Proposition 6: Improved self-concept is
directly/indirectly affected by positive performance
experience while on foreign assignment.
Research Proposition 7: Improved self-concept is
directly/indirectly affected by observation of others
in a novel environmental context of the foreign
assignment.
Research Proposition 8: Improved self-concept is
directly/indirectly affected by verbal interaction and
persuasion with local nationals while on the foreign
assignment.
Research Proposition 9: Improved self-concept is
directly/indirectly affected by the level of receptivity of the expatriate manager while on the foreign assignment.

A Process to Support CrossCultural Competency Development

The following process (illustrated in Figure 4) provides an
implementation roadmap for developing cross-cultural
competencies of global managers.

I. Initial Assessment of
Potential Global Self-Concept
The first issue that must be addressed when selecting managers
for overseas assignments is the potential global managers
self-concept. Research has shown that individuals with high
self-evaluations tend to be better performers (Judge, Erez,
Bono, & Thoresen, 2002), are more satisfied with their work
(Rode, 2004), are better able to recover from job loss (Wanberg,
Glomb, Song, & Sorenson, 2005), and are happier in life
(Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2003; Judge & Hurst, 2008).
Given the complex tasks associated with international postings
and the development of cross-cultural competencies, a strongly
held self-concept would be essential to improve the likelihood
of success in the global arena (Javidan & House, 2001).
Given the fact that the external environment may be very
different from the managers home country environment, it is
important to consider whether a managers self-concept is inneror other-directed. When the international posting is to a country
with a culture very different from ones home culture, difficulties may arise if a global managers standard of reference is
other-directed. When this is the case, the manager is likely to
seek feedback from others who may have very different goals
and expectations. This conflict may cause stress for the manager.
When the international posting is to a country with a similar
culture and similar expectations or when the global manager
is inner-directed, cognitive dissonance and stress would mostly
likely be reduced due to the lack of meaningful interaction with
locals, leading to the following research proposition.
Research Propositions 10: The greater the divergence
between the expatriate managers home and host
countries, the greater the possibility for assignment
failure.

II. Initial Assessment of Cross-Cultural

Competencies of Potential Global Managers
The second issue that needs to be addressed when selecting
managers for overseas assignments is the cross-cultural competencies profile. A profile of each candidate should be developed as a guide for hiring as well as for planning a developmental
program for each overseas candidate. The execution of the
development plan may take several years and could provide
the basis for selecting among potential candidates for overseas
assignments.
A profile based on a global managers knowledge of
a particular country or area encompasses five categories:
(a) material aspects (i.e., technology, economic development,
available level of standard-of-living) of a society; (b) social
institutionseducational, political, and religious; (c) aesthetic
values in a society; (d) the official and unofficial languages
of a culture; and (e) the cultural belief or philosophy of local

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

121

Harvey et al.
groups of influence. To have a high social/cultural IQ, managers need to have insights into the foreign countrys culture/
social context and how to translate or integrate the specific
cues of that culture with the general frame in the home country
of the headquarters of the organization.
The cultural and social discrepancy between two countries
increases the stress experienced by managers responsible for
the foreign culture market, resulting in difficulties to effectively
manage strategy implementation in the foreign culture (Searle
& Ward, 1990; Ward & Chang, 1997; Ward & Kennedy, 1993;
Ward & Searle, 1991). To assess cultural/social IQ of a global
manager, the following comparisons between the two cultures
must be determined: (a) the degree of cultural variability
or stability in each of the national cultures; (b) the level of
cultural complexity (i.e., high vs. low content) of each culture;
(c) cultural hostilitythe degree to which conditions in the
foreign culture are threatening to the individual (or organizations culture) in terms of norms, goals, values, and the like;
(d) the level of cultural heterogeneity or level of differences
between the two cultures; and (e) the interdependence or sensitivity of one culture to changes or differences in the other
culture. For an overview of personal assessment and development tools, see Landis, Bennett, and Bennett (2006).
The level of sociocultural adaptation a global manager has
to make when relocating from the headquarter home country
affects the rate and severity of adjustment for that individual
in the respective subsidiary. When two countries are culturally
distant, it is anticipated that sociocultural adjustment will be
great and there will be a negative impact on the global managers performance (Ward & Kennedy, 1999). The more hostile the subsidiary culture is to the host country culture, the
more the global cultural learning and social skills acquisition
will be retarded (Berno & Ward, 1998; Ward & Kennedy,
1994). Therefore, the cultural impact on low social/cultural
IQ global managers could directly impact their performance
over an extended period of time, making them of less value
for actions in the emerging country.
Global managers with high self-concept are those who
understand how the organization functions and the role organizational culture plays in operation of the entity. An organizations culture may vary across organizational units, and
therefore, the internal culture of the foreign subsidiary can
prove to be an impediment to those corporate managers who
do not have tacit knowledge of how variations in the organizational culture operate. The commonly held overt behaviors
that constitute the subsidiary-specific organizational culture
are the following: (a) the language, customs, and traditions
of the organization; (b) group norms; (c) the espoused values;
(d) formal philosophy of the organization; (e) the rules (i.e.,
policies, procedures, and processes) by which the organization
operates; (f) the climate or atmosphere (i.e., degree of formality
among various groups within the organization); (g) embedded
skills and core capabilities of the management and employees
of the organization; (h) mental models or decision-making

heuristics used by the organization as a whole and by individual groups within the organization; and (i) shared meanings, norms, and beliefs of the organizational culture (Schein,
1992). Differences between home country and host country
cultures can be significant particularly when there is a high
level of cultural distance between the two national cultures.
A global manager who understands the home country
culture and has insights into the differences and similarities
between the home and the host country culture can provide
valuable insights to the top management team. As these managers have social knowledge (i.e., ones ability to understand
and predict the others general pattern of behavior) of both
organizational units, foresight about the foreign subsidiary
managements decision making frame-of-reference can be
derived (Frank, 1988, 1989). These high social IQ global
managers can provide additional value, when the mechanism
of social control is designed, by helping to predict the behavior of subsidiary employees and managers in emerging markets (Sohn, 1994; Tolbert, 1988).

III. Clustering of Cultures

by Cultural Distance/Novelty
One of the key considerations in developing a program/process
to increase global managers self-competencies is to ascertain
what markets/countries the global managers are most likely
to be relocated to by the organization. By determining the
(dis)similarities within the likely set of host countries that the
global manager will be relocated to, international human
resource management can better assess the cultural distance/
novelty the global manager will be exposed to during his/her
global career. In addition, some estimates can be made on the
sequences of the relocation and the individual duration of
specific assignments. The level of cross-cultural competencies
necessary can then be determined for each group of global
managers (Kim & Slocum, 2008).
When selecting the set of host countries that the global
manager might be relocated to, a consideration of the frameof-reference of the global managers self-concept should be
considered. Individuals with inner-directed self-concepts
would not be likely to be negatively influenced by vastly dissimilar cultures because their standards tend to be internally
set. Individuals with other-directed self-concepts might be
better fit to similar cultures with similar standards of evaluation
for success (e.g., United StatesEngland, United States
Australia, United StatesCanada). They might be more effective in tight cultures rather than those considered to be loose
(Gelfand et al., 2006).

IV. Development of Organizational Support

Packages for Global Managers
To effectively develop self-competencies, the support from
the organization should be geared not only to the individual

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

122

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)

needs of the global manager but also to their immediate family.

Research has shown that international reassignment effectiveness is heavily affected by the trailing spouse, leading
to heightened stress and tension that may translate into an
unpleasant work/family environment (Harvey, 1996;
Takeuchi, Wang, & Marinova, 2005). In hopes of mitigating
the adjustment process, the organization must therefore build
the self-concepts of all family members involved, not just
that of the global manager, through cross-cultural competency
learning opportunities.
To effectively support the global manager and his/her
family, there must be organizational components (i.e., formal
organizational support packages) as well as support from
individuals close to the global manager/family (i.e., informal
personal support). An organizational support package for
both the global manager and his/her family may comprise
items that cover the following areas: (a) awareness training
of the world view of ones own home country as well as the
host country, (b) assessment of the attitude toward cultural
differences, and (c) targeted session to develop cultural competence in order to increase understanding of and/or interact
with people in a particular culture (e.g., language training).
The packages offered across the global manager pool need
to be perceived as equitable among global managers and
relative to resources extended by the organization. The global
manager and family must sense the value of the support to
help instill in them a commitment to the overseas assignment.
As a result, these efforts exhibited by the organization allow
for a smoother transition and therefore a greater chance for
short-term as well as long-term organizational success. The
individuals who have stronger self-concepts will have less
need for inclusive expatriate support packages than novices
on their initial overseas assignments.

V. Development of Cultural Training/Exposure

for Global Managers
Training techniques that are frequently used in a cross-cultural
context are the following: (a) Informational background/facts
(e.g., economic, cultural, history, level of economic development, etc.) on the country/countries that are included in the
global managers assignment. There are a number of sources
(e.g., United Nations, U.S. CIA fact book, the World Bank,
OCED, national banks, Transparency International, just to
name a few) that can be used to collect this factual information. (b) Attribution training that focuses on the behavior of
the host country nationals to gain an understanding of the
cognitive standards by which the host nationals process behavioral input. This would develop an understanding of adaptation
in the global managers behavior to effectively interact with
host country nationals on a personal level. (c) Cultural awareness training that studies the values, attitudes, and behaviors
of host country nationals to gain insight into the cultural
mosaic of the host country. This training frequently will have

an in-country component to immerse the global manager in

a culture to provide him/her with a more realistic culture preview. (d) Cognitive-behavior modification training is used to
develop means of illustrating what is rewarded/punished in the
global managers own culture and to compare these outcomes
with what is expected in the host country. This examination of
motivation is essential for the global manager to adjust to the
expectations of the host country culture. (e) Cultural simulations
and interaction training will provide the global manager with
the ability to make decisions in a simulated environment to
gain insights into the decision-making processes and how they
could/will be interpreted in the host country.

VI. Short-Term Experiential Cultural Emersion

Given the history of perceived failures of global managers,
global organizations are taking the time to invest in sending
global managers and their families to potential assignment
locations 2 to 3 years in advance of the actual assignment.
This realistic cultural preview provides insights to the manager/family that helps illustrate their level of cross-cultural
competencies and hopefully provides the motivation to return
home and redouble their efforts relative to learning more.

VII. Monitoring/Auditing Self-Concept

and Cross-Cultural Competency
Development by Global Managers
One of the hallmarks of an effective human resource management program is to establish a process program ex ante for
managers/employees to assess their cross-cultural competencies. In an effort to provide due process for those developing
their cross-cultural competencies in organizations, the following steps should be formally introduced as standard operating procedure: (a) provision for forewarning managers
about the organizations policies on assessing/developing/
maintaining their cross-cultural skills portfolio, (b) the process for review of ongoing competency training and retraining, (c) the mechanism for reviewing conversion of skills into
competencies, (d) establishing a standardized review process
for skill development by global managers, and (e) development of an auditing/review process open to managers to
expand their cross-cultural competencies skills base at each
stage of training.
To help ensure a continued due diligence on the part of
employees and management throughout the global network
of operating units, a formalized human resource management
auditing process should be developed. This would move the
assessment of cross-cultural skills development from an ad
hoc (case-by-case) system into a fully integrated management
standard operating procedure. Once again, this may help
elevate the awareness and interest in creating a work environment that encourages ongoing training/learning relative to

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

123

Harvey et al.
cross-cultural skills. By instilling the process of assessing
the value of cross-cultural skills across the system, employees/
managers cannot turn a blind-eye or deaf-ear to everyones
need to actively participate in cross-cultural competencies.

Summary/Conclusion
The future of global business may rest on finding and developing an adequate number of qualified global managers to
lead the growth of global organizations in the more complex
environments of emerging markets. The gage of these managers will shift to externally focused capabilities (i.e., those of
anticipatory cultural awareness and evolved relational skills
to develop, maintain, and build relationships with an array of
external institutions and stakeholder in host countries). The
resulting market-based architecture of (cultural) knowledge
will thus become the one of the ultimate values in a global
organization. The article fundamentally proposes that the idea
of self-concept aids in facilitating a global managers awareness of the learning complexities involved in cross-cultural
competencies.
With the shift in emphasis on management processes
opposed to purely functional expertise, the establishment of
cross-cultural competencies is an irreplaceable managerial
attribute sought after in global managers in the 21st century.
This article draws on ideas of self-concept to form the basis
for self-evaluation and the development of a composite selfconcept. The rationale being that without an understanding of
ones identity, it is difficult to imagine learning the complexities
of cross-cultural competencies. An individuals cultural adaptability and strength to face the inevitable psychological phenomenon better known as culture shock play a vital role in an
individuals attempt to counteract the inevitable feelings of
confusion, self-doubt, and decreased self-esteem from working
in a new and unfamiliar setting. The self-concept of an individual is built up over time and requires a multilevel analysis
to fully understand its impact on learning and addressing complex tasks such as cross-cultural competencies.
An individuals self-concept can be described using four
characteristics: the level (i.e., high/low) of belief, strength (i.e.,
weak/strong), frame of reference (i.e., inner directed/other
directed), and type of standard (i.e., fixed/ordinal), whereby
the key consideration in determining ones composite selfconcept is the consistency of the cues from the individuals
reference points (i.e., the individual, group, and organization).
Furthermore, either the global managers own expectations
and/or the expectations of their reference group are responsible for constructing the ideal self. The fulfillment of these
expectations are then dependent on the processes of goalsetting and feedback-seeking behavior, self-assessment and
interpretation of feedback, as well as the resulting behavior
or lack of behavior. This implies that the proposed dyadic
relationship between goal-setting and feedback-seeking
behavior can simultaneously measure feedback and/or

performance goals against either the individual itself or

others (i.e., a reference group).
The consideration of a global managers self-concept provides a richer basis for assessment of the potential ability
to develop cross-cultural competencies. An awareness of
and effort to improve managers composite self-concept may
provide better candidate assessment and more successful
foreign assignment outcomes. Essentially, a shift of an organizations mindfulness has to occur in that attempts at unifying home and host organizations are insufficient unless
organizations put forth efforts to create an awareness of host
countries cultural sensitivities. Instilling cultural awareness
in global managers could possibly be the difference between
success and failure of a foreign assignment. In conclusion,
a global executive adds to an organizations viability by not
only understanding the field of human relations as is but also
by taking one step further and acknowledging the need for
resilient and resourceful ways to deal with the complexities
of cultural sensitivities.
Authors Note
The authors would like to thank John Slocum for his invaluable suggestions and assistance in the final stages of developing this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Barney, J. (1991). The resource-based model of the firm: Origins,
implications, and prospects. Journal of Management, 17(1), 97-98.
Baruch, Y., & Altman, Y. (2002). Expatriation and repatriation in
MNCs: A taxonomy. Human Resource Management, 41, 239-259.
Berno, R., & Ward, C. (1998). Psychological and sociocultural adjustment of international students in New Zealand. Paper presented
at the Annual Conference of the Society of Australasian Social
Psychologists, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Chen, G., & Bliese, P. (2002). The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: Evidence for
discontinuity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 549-556.
Frank, R. (1988). Passions within reason: The strategic role of
emotions. New York, NY: Norton.
Frank, R. (1989). Frame-of-reference and the quality of life.
American Economic Review, 79, 80-85.
Gelfand, M., Nishii, L., & Raver, J. (2006). On the nature of
cultural tightness-looseness. Journal of Applied Psychology,
91, 1225-1344.
Griffith, D., & Harvey, M. (2001). A cross-cultural communication
model for use in global interorganizational networks. Journal
of International Marketing, 9, 87-103.

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

124

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19(1)

Gross, D. (1984). Time allocation: A tool for the study of cultural

behavior. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13, 519-558.
Harvey, M. (1996). The selection of managers for foreign assignments:
A planning perspective. Columbia Journal of World Business,
31(4), 44-53.
Harvey, M., & Novicevic, M. (2001). The impact of hypercompetitive timescapes on the development of a global mindset.
Management Decision Journal, 39(6), 70-82.
Harvey, M., & Novicevic, M. (2005). The challenges associated with
the capitalization of managerial skills. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 16(1), 1374-1398.
Harvey, M., Speier, C., & Novicevic, M. (1999). The role of inpatriation in global staffing. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 10(3), 87-98.
Javidan, M., & House, R. (2001). Cultural acumen of the global
manager. Organizational Dynamics, 29, 289-305.
Jarnagin, C., & Slocum, J. (2007). Creating corporate cultures through
mythopoetic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 36, 288-302.
Jordan, J., & Cartwright, S. (1998). Selecting expatriate managers:
Key traits and competencies. Leadership & Organizational
Development Journal, 19(2), 89-96.
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002). Are
measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and
generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 693-710.
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2003). The
Core Self-Evaluations Scale (CSES): Development of a measure.
Personnel Psychology, 56, 303-331.
Judge, T. A., & Hurst, C. (2008). How the rich (and happy) get richer
(and happier): Relationship of core self-evaluations to trajectories
in attaining work success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93,
849-863.
Kedia, B., & Mukherji, A. (1999). Global managers: Developing a
mindset for global competitiveness. Journal of World Business,
34, 230-251.
Kefalas, A. (1998). Think globally, act locally. Thunderbird International Business Review, 40, 547-562.
Kim, K., & Slocum, J. (2008). Individual differences and expatriate assignment effectiveness: The case of U.S. based Korean
expatriates. Journal of World Business, 43, 109-126.
Lado, A., Boyd, N., & Wright, P. (1992). A competency-model of sustainable competitive advantage: Toward a conceptual integration.
Journal of Management, 18, 77-91.
Landis, D., Bennett, J., & Bennett, M. (2006). Handbook of intercultural training. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lee, H., & Liebenau, J. (1999). Time in organisational studies:
Towards a new research direction. Organization Studies, 20,
1035-1058.
Luthans, F., Zhu, W., & Avolio, B. (2006). The impact of efficacy
on work attitudes across cultures. Journal of World Business,
41(1), 121-132.
Mak, A., Westwood, M., Ama, F., & Barker, M. (1999). Optimizing conditions for learning socio-cultural competencies for

success. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Relations,

23(1), 77-99.
Markus, H., & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the selfconcept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 858-866.
Marsh, H. W. (1987). The hierarchical structure of self-concept and
the application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis.
Journal of Educational Measurement, 24(1), 17-39.
Mosakowski, E., & Earley, C. (2000). A selective review of time
assumptions in strategy research. Academy of Management
Review, 25, 796-812.
Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners
(5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Paul, H. (2000). Creating a global mindset. Thunderbird International
Business Review, 42, 187-200.
Piper, W. (1954). The little engine that could. New York, NY: Grosset
& Dunlap.
Rode, J. C. (2004). Job satisfaction and life satisfaction revisited:
A longitudinal test of an integrated model. Human Relations,
57, 1205-1230.
Roth, K., & ODonnell, S. (1996). Foreign subsidiary compensation
strategy: An agency theory perspective. Academy of Management
Journal, 39, 678-703.
Sanchez, R., & Heene, A. (1997). Reinventing strategic management:
New theory and practice for competence-based competition.
European Management Journal, 15, 303-317.
Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The predictions of psychological
and socio-cultural adjustment during cross-cultural transactions.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449-464.
Selmer, J. (1999). Effects of coping strategies on socio-cultural and
psychological adjustment of western expatriate managers in the
PRC. Journal of World Business, 34(1), 41-52.
Sohn, J. (1994). Social knowledge as a control system: Propositions
and evidence from the Japanese FDI behavior. Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 295-324.
Stalk, G. (1988). Time: The next resource of competitive advantage.
Harvard Business Review, 66(4), 41-51.
Stalk, G., & Hout, T. (1990). Competing against time: How timebased competition is reshaping global markets. New York, NY:
Simon & Schuster.
Stier, J. (2003). Internationalization, ethic diversity and the acquisition of cross-cultural competencies. Cross-Cultural Education,
14, 77-92.
Takeuchi, R., Wang, M., & Marinova, S. (2005). Antecedents and
consequences of psychological workplace strain during expatriation: A cross-sectional and longitudinal investigation. Personnel
Psychology, 58, 925-948.
Taylor, E. (1994). Intercultural competencies: A transformative learning process. Adult Education Quarterly, 44, 154-174.
Taylor, S., Beechler, S., & Napier, N. (1996). Toward an integrative
model of strategic international human resource management.
Academy of Management Review, 21, 959-985.

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012

125

Harvey et al.
Tolbert, P. (1988). Institutional sources of organizational cultures
in major law firms. In L. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns
and organizations (pp. 101-113). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
Uhlmann, E., & Cohen, G. (2007). I think it, therefore, its true: Effects
of self-perceived objectivity on hiring discrimination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 207-223.
Uskul, A., & Hynie, M. (2007). Self construal and concerns elicited
by imagined and real health problems. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 37, 2156-2189.
Wanberg, C. R., Glomb, T. M., Song, Z., & Sorenson, S. (2005).
Job-search persistence during unemployment: A 10-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 411-430.
Ward, C., & Chang, W. C. (1997). Cultural fit: A new perspective
on personality and sojourner adjustment. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 21, 525-533.
Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1993). Wheres the culture in crosscultural transition? Comparative studies of sojourner adjustment.
Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 24, 221-249.
Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1994). Acculturation strategies, psychological adjustment and socio-cultural competence during crosscultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 18, 329-343.
Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of socio-cultural
adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23,
659-677.

Ward, C., & Searle, W. (1991). The impact of value discrepancies

and cultural identity on psychological and socio-cultural adjustment of sojourners. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 15, 209-225.

Bios
Michael Harvey, Distinguished Chair of Global Business,
University of Mississippi and Bond University, Australia.
Research interests, global business strategy, IHRM, and
Entrepreneurship.
Nancy McIntyre, Associate Professor of Management, West
Virginia. Research interests, organizational behavior, aberrant manager behavior and the role of curiosity in learning and improving
management decision-making.
Miriam Moeller, Lecturer University of Queensland, Australia.
Research interests, IHRM, impaired managers and their impact on
organizations, and the role of inpatriated managers on the global
management team.
Hugh Sloan III, Associate Professor of Marketing, University of
Mississippi. Research interests, global positioning technology
applied to marketing decision-making, channels of distribution and
logistics.

Downloaded from jlo.sagepub.com at U.A.E University on February 23, 2012