Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

ACCULTURATION AND ALLIED CONTRIBUTING

FACTORS THAT FURTHER ADVANCE CROSS-
CULTURAL MANAGEMENT LEARNING AND
EDUCATION: A CONCEPTUAL APPROACH
James R Calvin, Johns Hopkins University
Ruby L Beale, Hampton University
Kelvyn Moore, Bentley University
ABSTRACT

Globally there is critical need for new ideas, thought and research in support of practice
that integrates the domains of culture and inter-cultures, cross-cultural management and
learning and training for diverse people doing work in global assignments. We think that the
reason is that many kinds of organizations want to develop and put in place practical
approaches and ways that enable multicultural leaders and groups to communicate better to
enhance their working together around the world. The authors draw on some of our recent work
in global organizations that ranges from banking, food and snacks, higher education, retail and
manufacturing that together are being influenced by digitization amidst new technologies where
humans increasingly face competition in workplaces where there is advancing artificial
intelligence, next generation robots and machine learning. Several of the CEO led founders and
partnering organizations are Catalyst, Deloitte, the Executive Leadership Council (ELC),
Morgan Stanley, PepsiCo, Target and Hispanic Association for Corporate Responsibility
(HACR) and Leadership Education for Asian Pacifics, Inc. (LEAP). In brief, there are a number
of other leading companies and organizations that are also active pioneers and they are
mentioned later in this article.
As such, there is a parallel need in the shifting field of multicultural management which
is to sustain preparation and viability for ongoing organizational change and automation in
business and governance systems. The capacity to consider, rethink and suggest new strategies
and approaches for future intercultural understanding can be achieved by bringing people
together toward a purpose to reduce potential cultural conflict by bridging and co-creating from
knowledge insights and theory into approaches toward implementation.
The global need is critical for new research and into management practice that
integrates across domains of culture and inter-cultures, cross-cultural management and multi-
cultural management, learning and training of expatriate workforces for global assignments, as
well as preparing for ongoing organizational change in business and governance systems. In
such a way the capacity to devise and access acculturation strategies can be enabling of diverse
managers through approaches for future implementation by business that we envision as being
conceptually anchored by a number of theories, ideas and approaches.
Toward that goal, the authors in this paper present as a conceptual framing an idea for
the promoting of inventive approaches that are keys for cross-cultural management applications
and practices. The paper further seeks to place into context various skill and practice

1 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

intelligences that are combined into cross-cultural management and international management
essentials to be considered in a wide array of organizations.

Keywords: Cross-Cultural Management, Conceptual Framing, Multicultural Management,

International Management.

INTRODUCTION

Concerning cross-cultural management across the landscape, the previously mentioned

global and globally minded organizations are joined by a number of leading global organizations
including Coca-Cola, General Electric, McDonald’s, Siemens, Unilever and Walmart among
others, who actively engage in culturally relevant learning and change management practices to
achieve more effective and capable cross-cultural management practices. In brief, the capability
derived from cross-cultural management requires the capacity to pre-identify in order to lessen
conflicts as well as to overcome conflicts generated by cross-cultural misunderstanding or bias. It
is our contention that acculturation is essential in order to remain globally competitive as
organizations. Traditional universities and corporate universities have also varied approaches to
internationalize the teaching of business skills (i.e., globalizing, adaptive curriculum,) to
internationalize their mix and method as strategy. Their necessity is guided by two factors:
corporate leaders and accreditation boards, both of which have urged a more rounded student
understanding of the global environment and subsequently a cross cultural understanding (Ely &
Thomas, 1996; Shetty & Redell, 2002; Walton & Basciano, 2006; Trompenaars & Hampden-
Turner, 2014). It is also important to encourage leader influence that helps to unlock energy and
ideas to work with uncertainty and possibility because there are no set rules or global playbook
(Calvin, 2015).
The guiding premise in this conceptual paper seeks to advance cross-cultural
management capability more widely across the spectrum of business organizations during a time
of constant disruptions across political and economic systems. Added factors include new
implementations of artificial intelligence (AI) and the Internet of Things (IOT) that further drives
conflicts as technology meets generational tensions in workplaces and the larger society of a
nation, region and world. In doing so, the conceptual framework that follows recognizes the
intensity and pace of globalization drivers of change as influence to find different ideas for
meeting people-oriented business organization needs. The meshing of cultures requires
adaptability and resilience to manage through changing conditions around the world. We
postulate that those cumulative factors bound together will continue to influence and impact
future cross-cultural management capacity needs of business organizations and all organizations.
In our view that envisioned, enhanced and strengthened approaches to ignite cross-
cultural potential, is essential to facilitating new options for cross-cultural management learning,
which is understanding and applicability as facilitative human capital. As such, the importance of
an acculturation mindset can lead to future pathways that extend forward from current models
and traditions that identify cross-cultural management that can become adequate for the future
goals and needs of business and other organizations. In concert with the aforementioned
direction is a convergence with the role for the university and other knowledge creating entities
vital incubators of knowledge, training organization programs and efforts that promote cross-
cultural management with varying degrees of effectiveness that is necessary to achieve desired
and expected outcomes. The perspective of this paper is derived from the investigation and
review of available evidence about the general development of cross-cultural management

2 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

approaches. Richard Dobbs, Sree Ramaswamy, Elizabeth Stephenson & Patrick Vigurie in a
McKinsey Quarterly article (2014) stated “the collision of technological disruption, rapid
emerging-markets growth and widespread aging is upending long-held assumptions that
underpin strategy setting, decision making and management capacity.” Methods and practices
can be derived from human relations structures that emerge from ideas and theories that achieved
prominence initially in the twentieth century with several new iterations of cross-cultural
management emerging at this time during the twenty-first century.

ACCULTURATION, LEARNING AND MYTH: ORGANIZATION PROMISE AND

NEW REALITY

In setting a baseline we put forth several theories to follow toward an idea of new
acculturation for global competitiveness. Acculturation has been defined as the process of
learning and adapting to cultural traits different from the ones with which the person was
originally reared (Ownbey & Horridge, 1997). The resulting connectivity and interrelatedness
become a transformative theory and context that emerges through bound together national and
organizational culture(s). The result is learned approaches and behavior and the importance of
knowledge building adaptive goals for a business organization as community. As a beginning,
the underlying significance gained by understanding the role of culture(s) in the present modern
era came to prominence during the late years prior to the heightening of the industrial revolution
in the developed world during the early twentieth century. Early definitions presented culture on
distinct levels such as shared behaviors and as interactions and patterns attributed to geographic,
ethnic and culture related groups of people who shared, learned and understood the world around
them essentially through a process of socialization by a given group. In this vein, Franz Boas in
the 1880’s depicted and described culture as being linked to acculturation and Boas argued for a
strong anthropological methodology that involved the rigorous collection, examination and
determination of hard evidence in line with the scientific approach and methods that could be
substantiated as justifiable conclusions about cultures.
Thus, we infer and refer to the criticality of knowing, understanding and identifying of
culture(s) influence on applied acculturation in cross-cultural management. As such, theory and
ongoing development has brought about approaches and models and from time-to-time new
applications of cross-cultural management in business organizations. Roosevelt Thomas
articulated a still standing challenge to American companies to ‘move beyond equal opportunity
approaches by pursuing strategies to help them achieve a diverse workforce (Thomas, 1990).
Susan Schneider & Jean-Louis Barsoux offer a compelling vision because of constant and
greater interdependencies across country borders that calls for doing business across borders,
there is the never ending search for new models of management (Schneider & Barsoux, 1997).
These researchers further imply that organizations like Coca-Cola, General Electric,
McDonald’s, Unilever and Walmart and other organizations, will continue to search and
implement. As the mid-twentieth century was arriving Kluckhohn & Kelly (1945) suggested that
“by culture we mean all those historically created designs for living, explicit and implicit,
rational, irrational and non-rational, which exist at any given time as potential guides for the
behavior of men.” In Kroeber & Kluckhohn (1952) offered “culture consists of patterns, explicit
and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the
distinctive achievements of human groups, including their embodiments in artifacts; the essential
core of culture consists of traditional ideas and especially their attached values.”

3 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

We mention several other salient notions or ideas about culture beginning with Banks and
McGee (1989) who weighed in by stating” people within a culture usually interpret the meaning
of symbols, artifacts and behaviors in the same or in similar ways.” Leberach (1992) when
writing about conflict transformation across cultures stated “culture is the shared knowledge and
schemes created by a set of people for perceiving, interpreting, expressing and responding to the
social realities around them.” The preceding set of contextually defining examples of cultural
meaning is a synopsis rather than an exhaustive representation or presentation of what is culture.
However, there continues to be widespread discussion about the importance of culture as
national culture, as organizational culture and for our thematic interest in this paper cross-
cultural realities can be articulated and demonstrated as management learning, tools and practice
outcomes. The immediate consideration in an interconnected and inclusive world purports that
doing business in another country requires a certain amount of learning and understanding of
how and why organizational culture and differing national and local cultures can and will
influence and set how business is done in a given country or world region (GLOBE, 2004).
A recent McKinsey article titled, ‘Developing Global Leaders (Ghemewat, 2012)’ spoke
of the need for companies to take a better look at their entrance into global markets. It is a
broadly agreed that companies must cultivate and support globally diverse leaders for global
markets. The leaders we think should also be equipped to understand and utilize acculturation
advantage to achieve desired goals. The article further underlines what the author identifies as
five common myths about globalization and renders this as a good place to start. The myths
include the following:

1. My company, at least, is global.

2. Global leadership is developed through experience and practice.
3. Development is all about building standard global-leadership competencies.
4. Localization is the key.
5. We can attract the best talent.

The university has sought to position themselves based on their level of commitment to
internationalization via an all-encompassing (or at the opposite end of the spectrum) limited
strategy. This would include the university for example, adopting one of four approaches
(Moses, Moore Pleasant & Vest, 2011) in their quest to be globally directed (Table 1):

Table 1
MODELLING EPRG ALONG FOUR KEY DIMENSIONS

Ethnocentric Polycentric Regiocentric/Geocentric

Mission/Vision Home oriented Home or globally oriented
Levels of Causal Active Full-Scale/Global
Involvement
Curriculum Home oriented Host oriented Regional/Global
Faculty Home oriented Host oriented Regional/Global
Students Home Host oriented Regional/Global

We also affirm a position that cross-cultural learning and doing are central to Perry
(1999) who introduced a notion of position. Perry accepted Jean Piaget’s (1951) claim that
learners adapt and develop by assimilation and accommodating new information into existing
cognitive structures. That structure could include an understanding of the components of the

4 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

culture of a particular country. Perry also accepts Piagets’ claim that the sequencing of cognitive
structures that constitute the development process are logically and hierarchically related,
building upon previous suppositions. In our interpretation one key aspect is however that learners
approach knowledge from a variety of different standpoints. Those standpoints include gender,
race, culture, thinking and socio economic class, etc., which are activators that can and do
influence approaches to learning. Cross-culturally, individuals (and subsequently those new to a
country and that country’s presence in a new global arena participant, i.e., country) will interpret
the world from different positions with respect to their own unique experiences for acculturating.
How and how quickly people acculturate impacts their assimilation into understanding of
how business is done in a particular country. Acculturation again is the process of acquiring the
customs for adapting to and operating in an alternative society (Table 2). The concept of
acculturation is also the exchange of cultural features that results when groups of individuals
having different cultures come into continuous first hand contact; the original cultural patterns of
either or both groups may be altered, but the groups remain distinct (Kottak, 2007).

Table 2
THE ACCULTURATION TAXONOMY

For Managers in 21st Century Organizations Acculturation

A. The exchange process of cultural features as expressed behavior by individuals who are from different cultures in
a given host culture
B. The exchange process of learning and adapting to cultural traits different from those originally acquired and
known by two individuals in a given culture
C. The send, receive and exchange process of acquired cultural expectations for individuals born and learned from a
given culture
In general, the term acculturation encompasses intercultural interaction and adaptation
and includes assimilation of a new culture, maintenance of the old culture and/or resistance to
both new and old cultures (Penaloza & Gilly, 1999). Mintz (1978) in particular studied
acculturation in African and South American cultures. In doing business globally acculturation
by example is the intercultural contact that results in change for workers or consumers in contact
with a new culture. Acculturation may include learning a language and adjusting to different
lifestyles and mannerisms (e.g., as in different greeting behaviors and shopping behavior). Berry
(1990) interpreted acculturation as the cultural transmission experienced by an individual due to
his or her direct contact with another culture. The individual must reach some level of
accommodation to the ways of the new culture and decide what is acceptable and what is not
acceptable. In business, a mistake in interpretation of timing might result in devastating
consequences. Acculturation is a progressive learning process where values may change as
contact with a new or dominant culture increases. To sum up the above, the concept of
acculturation must be included in the discussion on globalization. Once more, the shared
influence of acculturation and culture we surmise can build a bridge of transferable values and in
doing so does not require one person or any person(s) from a different culture to lose personally
attached values.
As we look to interpret cross-cultural management in these times, the Thunderbird Model
(Javidan, Hough & Bullough, 2010) has identified a Global Mindset Inventory which has the
capacity to measure individual preferences. The identified preferences consist of Psychological
Capital (PC), Social Capital (SC) and Intellectual Capital (IC) with the impetus for developing
and improving one’s global mindset.

5 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

Again, Ghemawat in the previously mentioned Developing Global Leaders (2012)

identified five myths about globalization and the organizational imperative of attracting and
developing diversified multinational leadership talent. To do so requires experiential learning
and while this is important, it is insufficient alone for developing high levels of global leadership
skill because global sensitivity also matters. Furthermore, it is important that core competencies
be developed in the areas of self-awareness, engagement in personal transformation and
inquisitiveness as well as mental characteristics which include optimism, self-regulation, social
judgment skills, empathy, motivation to work in an international environment, cognitive skills
and acceptance of complexity and its contradictions and three behavioral competencies social
skills, networking skills and knowledge. Though some overall global leadership skills may
indeed be needed, it is unlikely that there is one set of global leadership skills that will empower
the best leaders with most desired competencies (Dewhurst, Harris & Hayward, 2012; Gibbs,
Keywood & Weiss, 2012). As for being aware it is imperative to diversify the leadership talent in
global-multi-national companies and many technically competent locals are looking for
opportunities to advance which means there are willing candidates and the right kind of cross-
cultural learning and training can assist motivated candidates in developing strong global
leadership competencies.
As such, an article by Moore, Weinberg & Berger (2012) identifies key factors in the
acculturation process which brings up useful as well as practical information and as a potential
tool source of Value Structures for Strength of Acculturation identification in four situational
contexts:

1. News/Information vehicles-which often occurs on television, radio and other mediums for learning about
how others live in other parts of the world, learning their economics and politics;
2. Popular culture-is learning about what is happening in the world concerning things around us that impact
intercultural meaning and understanding; both in and out of one’s category (which includes age, gender,
lifestyle, geographic location as rural, suburban and urban, etc.).
3. Internet/World-wide web-learning about what's new in games, gadgets and websites, events and usage.
4. Business establishments-how to act and respond in certain business environments and the changes therein
that are necessary.

In this vein, global cross cultural management requires some understanding of each of the
above for acculturation in business practices to flourish and become beneficial, practical, useful
information, in a cross-cultural environment and a potential tool source.

FUTURE PRACTICES IN CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT

It is paramount that the potential of realizing a global mind set be identified and further
developed as cross-cultural management practice. To ascertain what understanding the ‘new to a
culture’ can make possible as cross-cultural options to be explored and adopted. For consistency
of emphasis to attain and sustain maximum effectiveness, we suggest using a multiphase, multi-
method learning and training methodology to increase global leadership cultural competency.
The type of learning that would likely be most effective can include behavioral, cognitive
constructivism, experiential learning and social constructivism. The instruction that is likely to
result in a more effective method could employ collaborative learning and working together
which is guided by a master teacher/trainer group member and by sharing that is co-facilitated by
different group members when group work is employed.

6 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

Emotional Intelligence (EI) learning and skill when joined with acculturation is the
ability to identify, assess and manage the emotions of oneself, of others and of groups. EI
consists of four core attributes, self-awareness, self-management and motivation, social
awareness and relationship management (Bradbury & Greaves, 2007; Goleman, 1995). There
continues to be extensive research work being done on EI globally as some of the data
composites empirically indicate that Asian CEOs appear to score higher on EI than American
CEOs and that EI is a validated approach to accessing knowledge and ideas for potential new
skills structures cross-culturally (this impression will require further research and substantiation).
Again, we contend that EI when combined with another model, approaches and
definitions shows great promise as an important component of cross-cultural management
learning and training. An example of a model is The Global Mindset that was created at
Thunderbird (Thunderbird Global Mindset Model, 2010). Here the authors briefly mention that
General Electric and the other business organizations are committed to future managers and top
executives of those companies guiding and managing a U.S. corporation. A linkage with the
preceding is the seminal IBM study in 1980 done by Geert Hofstede (1994) where he identified
five cultural dimensions of Power Distance, Individualism/Collectivism, Masculinity/Femininity,
Uncertainty/Avoidance and Long Term Orientation vs. Short Term Orientation. A view from
Ghemawat (2012) states it is important to note the differences within and between cultures that
seem to fall under a “common culture”. Cox & Beale (1997) explored several approaches and
focused on the developmental process of Valuing Differences as the most progressive approach.
This approach does more than provide access or entry. Valuing demonstrates and identifies an
appreciation of diversity at a level which maximizes the benefits of diversity and minimizes the
adverse conflict of diversity. Identifying and employing a valuing approach with this conceptual
framework in cross-cultural management can assist the managers in embracing the diversity as a
more effective strategy.
The identification of effective training and learning methodology is a continuing critical
process that requires updates from time to time. As previously stated, researchers have
demonstrated that people can improve their Emotional Intelligence (Bradbury & Greaves, 2010).
An emerging frontier is their Global Mindset (Javidan, Bullough & Hough, 2010). Likewise, we
believe that people can improve their capacity for attaining and increasing a global acculturation
mindset which includes a willingness to embrace value and employ supporting strategies. One of
the most important individual and group antecedents for this process to be effective is the
willingness of individuals, groups and organizations to learn to mine for future sustainability
because the value to be gained in cross-cultural management approaches, applications and
practices (at the individual, group and organizational level) is to demonstrate appreciation in
behavioral responses that are developmental and inclusive on a consistent basis.

WHAT CAN UNIVERSITY, CORPORATE AND TRAINING CONTRIBUTE TO

LEARNING AND NEW KNOWLEDGE

In our view, the second critical foundation factor to be considered for future learning and
knowledge creation toward providing attainable and sustainable cross-cultural management
models and approaches, practices and applications is the role and necessity for rapid learning and
business practices. There is also an elastic mixture of social network culture(s) and connecting
points found in the advancing technology platforms of Twitter, Tumblr, LinkedIn and Facebook
and the very fast arrival that is being derived from Big Data. We think that a primary goal of the
university or culture interested entity is to produce outcomes to overcome boundaries of beliefs

7 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

about diverse peoples. Now and in future years there can be a role for action research as well as
deepening research to add useful knowledge for societies as practical learning and life skills in
support of people, organizations and communities. The domain of technology as a driver of
cross-cultural learning and application through still to be envisioned models applications to
business also accrues to companies and organizations themselves which shifts the paradigm that
business is primarily taught and learned in business schools and universities.
In conducting a literature review on learning and how people learn there appears to be a
number of different approaches to learning that have been adapted from and that stem from three
basic kinds and types of learning theory approaches: behaviorist, cognitive constructionist and
social construction according to the western canon and tradition. This assumption is not new and
there is growing evidence from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) and The World Bank that western learning can and does meet eastern (Asia) ideas of
learning, as well as southern (Africa) ideas of learning that may minimally be as fundamental as
cross-cultural learning 101, the bare basics of agreement and meaning.
Briefly, the behaviorist approach (Watson, 1924; Skinner, 1938) views knowledge
acquisition as behavioral, responses to environmental stimuli and learning as passive absorption
of predefined body of knowledge by a learner through repetition and positive reinforcement (A
conjecture is that early diversity training in the US and in Europe was keyed to a behavioral
learning mode). The cognitive constructivist approach (Piaget, 1950; Berger & Luckmann, 1967)
involves behaviorist, cognitive constructionist and social construction knowledge systems and
structures (Vygotsky, 1978; Jackson & Sorenson, 2007) actively referenced by learners based on
existing structures. Learning in one of the approaches or modes involves active assimilation and
accommodation of new information through discovery by learners (An approach applied in many
training approaches and formats). In the social construction mode knowledge is socially
constructed by integrating learners and students into knowledge communities. The emphasis is
on collaborative assimilation and accommodation of new information through group work (Some
aspects of this may appear in learning organization approaches).
The authors next point to a US National Research Council study titled ‘How People
Learn: Bridging Research and Practice (2004) that provided recommendations for consideration
and future adoption for implementation. Toward this goal, there is further potential and
possibility for transformative learning and cultural knowledge and components that appear
promising through Howard Gardner (1995) multiple intelligence theory which looks at multiple
learning modes. Thus, a second question for inquiry by the authors is given the need for
continuous learning, learning that enables adaptability and cross-cultural learning what is the
potential for learning that will need to take into consideration an expanding breadth and pace of
globalization. As such the capacity and abilities of an increasing number of people who have
access to knowledge and skills are able to, or will need to be able to take knowledge and skills
learned beyond their home country and cultural surroundings. The conjecture we offer is that
acculturation expands to region or place of origin and is capable of being expanded into rooted
and formed cross-cultural environments where knowledge and skills are needed to actualize
cross-cultural cooperation rather than conflict(s).

8 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

CONCLUSION

While the abovementioned culture and cross-cultural management theories, ideas and
suggested competencies are debated and further discussed in the literature, the field would
benefit from an addition of new knowledge for business organizations to consider as
transformative tools and processes for accessing cross-cultural management. Meanwhile, there
continues to be widespread discussion about the importance of culture and globalization in terms
of national cultures and organization culture. The CEO’s of Coca-Cola, Deloitte, General
Electric, McDonald’s, PepsiCo, BP, Unilever, Walmart and other companies around the world
will need to confront and grapple with cross-cultural realities in order to recognize, navigate and
overcome conflicts and challenges. The thought is to promote understanding for more effective
mitigation through cross-cultural management learning, tools and practices, as a necessity to
yield better and sustainable business and management results in an organization and in global
society. Therefore, it is our collective view that there is a continuous central question of inquiry
identified by the provided Acculturation Taxonomy that is directly related to the adaptability,
efficacy and usefulness of learning and understanding of ways to engage cross-cultural
management through understanding, adaptability into practices.
Still, we think that there will be future relevance of the import of emerging cross-cultural
management ideas as practices to be developed and still to be advanced. We hold this view in
concert with (Christopher Bartlett, 2011; Richard Mead, 2005; David Thomas, 2002). More
recently, Erin Meyer presents an idea in her book, the Culture Map (2014) for breaking through
the invisible boundaries of global business and taping into the power of culture.
In a collective thought, we join the aforementioned scholars and acculturation idea
contributors who advocate and explore resets to reshape and propose future baseline relevance
for purposeful cross-cultural management knowledge and skill that adds to the direction and real-
time efforts made by business organizations. Moreover, it is our shared view that it is necessary
for our inquiry, work and practice is centered on the factor of acculturation bound together with
micro-aggression and other dynamics, is a differentiator for our ongoing research and work
inside some of the previously mentioned leading organizations. At present, the environment can
continue to benefit from different ideas and efforts that seek to shed light on cross-cultural
management that can simultaneously be cutting edge while also offering practical insights and
adaptations. We also see more potential to be contributors to the dialogue and discovery of a
plethora of ways forward that expand interest to meet the need to suggest and build sustained
action that advances cross cultural management strategies in a time of rapid change. In doing so,
we are participants in a community that university and non-university organizations such as
Cook-Ross, Motorola University and The Center for Creative Leadership, Inc., The Hay Group
and Personnel Decisions, Inc., among other cross-culturally minded human and organizational
development organizations.

9 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

REFERENCES
Banks, J.A., Banks, A. & McGee, C.A. (1989). Multicultural education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Barta, T. Markus, K. & Neuman, T. (2012). Is there a payoff from top-team diversity? McKinsey Quarterly: The
Online Journal of McKinsey & Company, 1-4.
Bartlett, C.A. (2011). Transnational management (Sixth Edition). New York: Richard D. Irwin.
Berger, P.L. & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. A treatise in the sociology of knowledge.
Berry, J.W. (1992). Acculturation and adaptation in a new society. International Migration, 30(S1), 69-85.
Boas, F. (1940). The aims of ethnology. In F. Boas (Eds.), Race, language and culture (pp. 626-638). New York:
Macmillan.
Boas, F. (1966). The mind of primitive man race, language and culture. New York, NY: Collier-Macmillan.
Bradberry, T. & Greaves, J. (2003). Emotional Intelligence. Talent Smart, San Diego.
Calvin, J.R. (2001). Leadership diversity. In Angeles Arrien (Eds.), Working together diversity as opportunity. San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Calvin, J.R. (2015). Leadership for developing empowering culture in organizations: Outreach empowerment.
Academy of Business Journal, 2, 7-15.
Cox, T. & Beale, R.L. (1997). Developing competencies for managing diversity. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler
Publishers.
Dewhurst Harris, M. & Heywood, S. (2012). The global company’s challenge. McKinsey quarterly: The Online
Journal of McKinsey and Company, 1-5.
Dobbs, R., Ramaswamy, S., Stephenson, E. & Vigurie, S.P. (2014). Management intuition for the next 50 years. In
McKinsey Quarterly. New York: McKinsey&Company.
Gardner, H. & Hatch, T.T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of
multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-9.
Gardner, H. (1995). Multiple approaches to understanding. In N.J. Erlbaum (Eds.), Instructional design theories and
models: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Reigeluth, Mahwah.
Gardner, H. (1990). Are there additional intelligences? In J. Kane (Eds.), Education information and transformation.
Upper Saddle River, N. J., Prentice Hall.
Ghemawat, P. (2012). Developing global leaders. McKinsey quarterly: The online journal of McKinsey & Company,
1-17.
Gibbs, T., Heywood, S. & Weiss, L. (2012). Organizing for an emerging world. McKinsey quarterly journal: The
online journal, 1-6.
Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Tenth anniversary edition: Why it can matter more than IQ. New
York: Bantam Books, Bantam Dell.
Graduate student instructor teaching and resource center (2009). Sproul hall. University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Herskovits Melville, J. (1937). The significance of the study of acculturation for anthropology. American
Anthropologist, 39, 259-264.
Hofstede, G. (1980a). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1980b). Motivation, leadership and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? Organizational
Dynamics, 9, 42-63.
Hofstede, G. (1984). National cultures and corporate cultures. In L.A. Samovar & R.E. Porter (Eds.),
Communication between cultures. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
House et al. (2004). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations. Project GLOBE.
Jackson, R. & Sorensen, G. (2007). Introduction to international relations: Theories and approaches (Third
Edition). USA: Oxford University Press.
Javidan, M., Hough, L. & Bullough, A. (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring global mindset: Development of the
global mindset inventory. Thunderbird Global Mindset Institute.
Kluckhohn, C. & Kelly, W.H. (1945). The concept of culture. In R. Linton (Eds.), The science of man in the world
crisis (pp. 78-105). New York: Columbia University Press.
Kottak, C. (2007). Cultural anthropology. McGraw Hill publishers.
Kroebar, A.L. & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. Boston, MA: Harvard
University Papers in the Peabody Museum of American Archeology and Ethnology.
Lederach, J.P. (1995). Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse University Press.
Linton, R. (1945). The cultural background of personality. New York: D. Appleton-Century.

10 1939-4691-21-2-110
Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict Volume 21, Issue 2, 2017

Mead, R. (2005). International management cross-cultural dimensions (Third Edition). Malden: Blackwell
Publishing.
Meyer, E. (2014). The culture map: Breaking through the invisible boundaries of global business. New York: Public
Affairs.
Merriam, S. & Caffarella, R. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (Second Edition). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Mintz, S.W. (1978). Ethnicity leadership: An afterward in America in John Higham (Edition). Ethnic leadership,
John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
Moore, K., Weinberg, B.D. & Berger, P.D. (2012). The mitigating effects of acculturation on consumer behavior.
International journal of business and social science, 33(9).
Moses, C., Moore, K., Pleasant, J. & Vest, P. (2011). Adapting the EPRG paradigm to internationalizing business
schools: A conceptual framework. International journal of business and social science, 2(23).
National academy of sciences (2004). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. U.S. National Research
Council: Washington, D.C.
Ownbey, S. & Horridge, P.A. (1997). "Acculturation levels and shopping orientations of Asian-American
consumers." Psychology & Marketing, 14, 1-8.
Penaloza, L. & Gilly, M.C. (1999). Marketer acculturation: The changer and the changed. Journal of Marketing, 63,
84-104.
Perry, W.G. (1999). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in college years. Jossey-Bass Publishers: San
Francisco.
Piaget, J. (1951). Principal factors determining intellectual evolution from childhood to adult life. Columbia
University Press, New York.
Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. New York: Routledge.
Redfield, R., Linton, R. & Herskovits, M.J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American
Anthropologist, 38, 149-152.
Schneider, S.C. & Barsoux, J.L. (1997). Managing across cultures. New York: Prentice Hall.
Segal, J. & Smith, M. (2012). Emotional intelligence: Five key sills for raising emotional intelligence. Help guide
resources.
Shetty, A. & Rudell, F. (2002). Internationalizing the business program-A perspective of a small school. Journal of
Education for Business, 78(2), 103-110.
Skinner, B.F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis: Appleton-Century-Crofts. University of
Michigan.
How people learn: Bridging research and practice (2000). The national academy press. Retrieved from
http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309065364/html
Thomas, D.C. (2002). Essentials of international management a cross-cultural perspective. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications.
Thomas, R.R. (1990). From affirmative action to affirming diversity. Boston: Harvard business review.
Trompenaars, F. & Hampden-Turner, C. (2012). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global
business. New York: McGraw Hill.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. London: Harvard University Press.
Walton, J. & Basciano, P. (2006). The internationalization of American business education: Are U.S. business
students less ethnocentric? The Business Review, 5(1), 282-287.

11 1939-4691-21-2-110
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
prohibited without permission.