Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp

When learning is not enough: A process model of expatriate adjustment as cultural cognitive dissonance reduction Carl P. Maertz Jr. a,*, Ahmad Hassan b,1, Peter Magnusson c,2 a

Department of Management, John Cook School of Business, 3674 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA Department of Management, Marketing, and Real Estate, College of Business, 150 University Boulevard, Morehead, KY 40351-1689, USA c College of Business, Northern Illinois University, 128 Barsema Hall, DeKalb, IL 60185, USA b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 6 September 2006 Accepted 27 May 2008 Available online 16 July 2008 Accepted by Dave Harrison Keywords: Expatriate management Expatriate adjustment Expatriate withdrawal Cognitive dissonance Cross-cultural adjustment process

a b s t r a c t Although considerable organizational research exists on the topic of expatriate adjustment and early departure, little has focused on the actual psychological processes causing change in adjustment outcomes. Specifically, researchers have not focused on cognitive dissonance that arises from adopting or condoning culturally expected behaviors that are inconsistent with the expatriate’s own values or attitudes. We propose that dissonance experiences and the methods used for dissonance reduction influence expatriates’ adjustment outcomes and, in turn, their tendency for early departure. We further specify key situational and individual difference constructs that regulate these causal relationships. Along with a greater understanding of cross-cultural adjustment, the current model suggests new directions for expatriate research and management. Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

As organizations continue to increase their international activity and presence, the cross-cultural adjustment of expatriates has become a critical issue for research (e.g., Black & Gregersen, 1999; Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; McEvoy and Parker, 1995; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Shaffer, Harrison, & Gilley, 1999; Takeuchi, Yun, & Tesluk, 2002; Tung, 1987). A key conclusion of this work is that if expatriates or their spouses do not adjust well to the host culture, they may depart prematurely (Black & Gregersen, 1991a; Black & Gregersen, 1991b; Black & Stephens, 1989; McEvoy and Parker, 1995; Tung, 1982). Even expatriates who complete their assignments may demonstrate poor job performance due to dysfunctional adjustment (Kraimer, Wayne, & Jaworski, 2001; Selmer, 2002; Shaffer, Harrison, Gregeren, Black, & Ferzandi, 2006). Not counting the costs of such poor performance, replacing an expatriate manager who departs early can still approach $250,000 (Shaffer et al., 2006). Partly because of these significant costs, researchers have focused much attention on the correlates/predictors of expatriate adjustment and early withdrawal (Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer, & Luk, 2005; McEvoy & Parker, 1995; Shaffer et al., 1999). Yet, much less work has been devoted to understanding the actual psychological processes of adjustment that expatriates

* Corresponding author. Fax: +1 314 977 1484. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C.P. Maertz), [email protected] (A. Hassan), [email protected] (P. Magnusson). 1 Fax: +1 606 783 5025. 2 Fax: +1 815 753 6014. 0749-5978/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.003

experience during the assignment (e.g., Black et al., 1991; Sinangil & Ones, 2001). Without a better understanding of precisely what expatriates go through psychologically, managing adjustment effectively remains difficult and research models are likely to be deficient in their causal explanations. Although few psychological process theories of expatriate adjustment have emerged, research models strongly suggest that expatriate adjustment processes include learning and exhibiting new behaviors in order to ‘‘fit in” with the host culture, thereby reducing acculturative stress (e.g., Berry, 1997; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Black et al., 1991; Kim, 1995). However, in learning and exhibiting culturally appropriate behaviors, internal conflicts arise when behaviors demanded in the person’s expatriate employee role are inconsistent with his/her values, attitudes, beliefs, or behavioral norms, hereafter, ‘‘VABNs”. Internal conflicts create stress in the form of arousal and discomfort that must be relieved in some way (e.g., Bazerman, Tenbrunsel, & Wade-Benzoni, 1998; Elliot & Devine, 1994). Despite the long-acknowledged need to reduce such internal inconsistencies (Festinger, 1957), this cognitive dissonance process has been largely neglected in expatriate adjustment theory. Further, balancing home vs. host cultural identifications, or integration, has been touted as a desirable outcome indicative of good adjustment (e.g., Berry, 1997; Sanchez, Spector, & Cooper, 2000), but no theory addresses precisely how this happens (or fails to happen) during the assignment period. The purpose of this paper is to address this dearth of theory. We propose a model wherein one or more of six (6) cognitive-behav-

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

ioral methods are used to maintain the self-concept against threat from a ‘‘cultural cognitive dissonance experience”. The methods chosen relatively more drive changes in intermediate adjustment outcomes over time (i.e., future frequency of dissonance experiences, attitudes toward host nationals, identification with the host culture, and interaction with nationals), and thereby, cause psychological withdrawal and intention to depart the assignment early. We next review existing research to further highlight the contribution of this model.

67

(UAM) theory (e.g., Gudykunst, 1995) states that anxiety and uncertainty must be managed consciously and mindfully in order for the expatriate to interact and communicate effectively with host nationals. Storti (1990) theorized that an expatriate’s behavioral expectations are violated during many cultural incidents, leading to fear and withdrawal. Observing behavior can lead to forming realistic expectations of nationals, which prevents such unexpected, negative stress reactions. ‘‘The process of cross-cultural adaptation, then, is essentially one of the continual resolution of internal stress. . .,” (Kim, 1995, p. 178).

Literature review Black (1988, 1990) and colleagues (e.g., Black & Stephens, 1989; Gregersen & Black, 1992) have conceptualized cross-cultural adjustment to be one’s level of comfort with general (e.g., food, climate, weather, housing, and living conditions), work aspects, and interaction aspects of the assignment. Much of the expatriate management research has essentially defined adjustment as these desirable states that predict ultimate expatriate outcomes like job performance and early departure (e.g., Kraimer et al., 2001; Shaffer et al., 2006). In this stream, researchers have supported numerous predictors and consequences, expanding understanding of key constructs in the nomological net surrounding adjustment outcome constructs (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Black et al., 1991; Shaffer et al., 1999). Although we focus on process here, we do include traditional adjustment outcomes in our model. Comfort with host interactions, work, and general host culture (e.g., Black et al., 1991) are reflected in our model as restored comfort after dissonance stress experiences, and as positive attitudes toward host nationals. Berry (1980), Berry (1997) also suggests key adjustment outcomes that go beyond comfort alone, namely, some level of identification with host nationals and the culture along with continued interaction with host nationals. Adjustment as a process Far fewer studies have specifically modeled cross-cultural adjustment as a psychological process. We should point out that we are using the term ‘‘adjustment process” in the broadest sense. In the general cross-cultural literature (e.g., Tsui, Nifadkar, & Ou, 2007), researchers use the terms ‘‘acculturation” and ‘‘adaptation” as related but distinct constructs from adjustment. We realize these differences are meaningful (see Harrison, Shaffer, & BhaskarShrinivas, 2004). However, all of these concepts involve either short or longer-term psychological and behavioral changes in response to host environment stimuli (Berry, 1997; Sinangil & Ones, 2001), and we mean to include all such changes in our definition of adjustment processes. Thus, we use ‘‘adjustment” to refer to all such processes that cause change in adjustment outcomes. Although there is no overarching cross-cultural adjustment process theory, many models certainly inform our understanding of the psychological processes of adjustment. Black (1988, 1990) and colleagues (e.g., Black & Gregersen, 1999; Black & Stephens, 1989) emphasize that successful adjustment involves increasing the expatriate’s feelings of comfort, control, and degree of familiarity within the host culture vs. acculturative stress. This prevailing construct definition clearly implies that, functionally, the adjustment process reduces acculturative stress and restores feelings of comfort. Several other models from the cross-cultural psychology and communication literatures share this viewpoint. For example, Aycan (1997) and Berry (1997) both theorized that cultural interactions can cause stress that must be reduced in order to facilitate long-term adaptation. Also, uncertainty/anxiety management

Learning as a stress reducer Although some other acculturative stress coping mechanisms have been suggested (e.g., Aycan, 1997), the main process in the literature for reducing acculturative stress is learning culturally appropriate behaviors in order to ‘‘fit in” (Berry, 1997; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Church, 1982; Kim, 1995). Earley and Peterson state, ‘‘Adopting the behaviors consistent with a target culture is an important aspect of intercultural adjustment and interaction” (2004, p. 109). ‘‘Simply stated, cross-cultural adjustment involves the knowledge of which behavior to execute or suppress in given situations and the ability to effectively actualize this understanding” (Black & Mendenhall, 1990, p. 124). Clearly then, learning culturally appropriate behaviors and when to execute them plays a key role in reducing acculturative stress. To do this successfully, studies to date imply that expatriates learn to execute new behaviors that: (1) are similar to behaviors of models, perceived to be typical or successful in the host culture, (2) provide positive or analogous outcomes in the host culture as those expected in the home culture, and/or (3) allow avoidance of social sanction in the host culture (e.g., ridicule and isolation). Current contribution However, these three criteria are deficient as an explanation of how expatriates come to execute new behaviors and manage acculturative stress. In addition to these situational cues, individuals also use their own internal standards to choose or evaluate behaviors (e.g., Beach & Mitchell, 1996), and acculturative stress comes not only from uncertainty of how to behave appropriately, but also from internal conflicts (e.g., Bazerman et al., 1998; Festinger, 1957). As Project GLOBE scholars recently stated, ‘‘The dexterity to adjust one’s behavior is a critical requirement. Not everyone can do this; to many people it may bring into question one’s own identity” (Javidan, Dorfman, Sulley de Luque, & House, 2006, p. 85). Through interacting with host nationals, the expatriate is likely to encounter challenges to his/her own VABN standards that must be processed and resolved somehow (Earley, 2002; Earley & Peterson, 2004; Molinsky, 2007; Sanchez et al., 2000; Van Vianen, De Pater, Kristof-Brown, & Johnson, 2004). Therefore, the adjustment process of managing acculturative stress involves more than learning culturally appropriate behaviors. It involves resolving internal inconsistencies that arise during the assignment. Even though researchers have long acknowledged that encountering significant inconsistencies with and challenges to VABNs is very likely in expatriate assignments (e.g., Brislin, 1981; Earley, 2002; Roccas & Brewer, 2002; Sanchez et al., 2000; Van Vianen et al., 2004), no existing model describes the specific psychological processes involved. Further, no model actually explains the process by which expatriates achieve the desirable state of ‘‘integration” Berry (1980), Berry (1997) or ‘‘dual cultural identities” (Sanchez et al., 2000). Cultural cognitive dissonance provides such an explanation. See Table 1 for a summary of how the current model contributes relative to key existing theoretical approaches to expatriate adjustment.

68

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

Table 1 Relationship of current model to earlier theoretical approaches Exemplary Study(ies)

Model/theoretical approach

Key theoretical focus in expatriate literature

Relationship to cultural cognitive dissonance reduction (CCDR)

Berry (1980, 1997)

Social identity

Cross-cultural interactions challenge one’s sociocultural identity and even one’s self-concept

CCDR explains how expatriates address these challenges and why these attempts are successful or unsuccessful in terms of adjustment outcomes

Nicholson (1984)

Work role transitions

Effective work-role transitions (including expatriate assignments) demand adjustment in the form of role and personal development

CCDR explains how the identity change portion of personal development actually occurs, partially as a function of personal and situational determinants in the model

Black et al. (1991) and Shaffer et al. (1999)

Integrated model of international adjustment

Determinants of work, interaction, and general adjustment levels

Along with learning processes, CCDR explains how adjustment determinants come to bring about stress reduction

Bell and Harrison (1996)

Bi-cultural life experiences

Bi-cultural experiences can positively develop the KSAOs for expatriate effectiveness

CCDR explains the process by which one’s personal identity can be successfully maintained throughout bi-cultural experiences; effective CCDR is a key KSAO for expats, related to bi-cultural self-efficacy

Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, and Johnson (2005)

Person– environment fit

Person-group (in this case) misfit has a host of negative consequences

CCDR illustrates that striving for behavioral fit with a different cultural group can cause misfit within one’s self that must be resolved for an expat to be truly adjusted

Cognitive dissonance theory To understand and model this process of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction, we draw on a long tradition of cognitive dissonance theory. Cognitive dissonance has generally been defined as a negative state of uncomfortable arousal resulting from an inconsistency between two cognitions, or between behavior and some cognition. Further, this arousal and psychological discomfort is motivational in that it ‘‘impels the individuals to attempt to reduce and eliminate it,” (Wicklund & Brehm, 1976, p. 1) Since Festinger’s (1957) seminal work on cognitive dissonance, there have been many perspectives on the concept (Kunda, 1990) and at least three distinguishable theoretical approaches: self-consistency, self-affirmation, and ‘‘New Look”. The self-consistency approach proposes that dissonance is aroused when a discrepancy is detected between a behavior/cognition and a personal standard or self-expectancy for competence and morality (e.g., Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962; Thibodeau & Aronson, 1992). In this approach, the aim of dissonance reduction is to maintain one’s individual self-images of competence and morality against threats from inconsistency. This approach emphasizes rescuing the individual image in the self-concept that is threatened, and suggests that high self-esteem makes dissonance arousal worse. The self-affirmation approach (e.g., Steele, 1988) also proposes that dissonance is aroused by a threat to the self-concept, but disagrees that the primary goal is to rescue each specific self-image that is threatened. In this broader perspective, the goal is to restore the integrity of and protect the overall self-concept. This can be accomplished by accessing other positive cognitions about the self, not related to the individual threat. One relieves the discomfort related to the threatened self-concept through these positive affirmations. This approach suggests that higher self-esteem can be helpful in relieving dissonance. Finally, the ‘‘New Look” model emphasizes that dissonance is aroused whenever behavior is inconsistent with societal normative standards for competent or moral behavior (Cooper & Fazio, 1984), creating aversive consequences (Scher & Cooper, 1989). This model assumes that these societal standards are internalized or otherwise used as evaluative standards in judging one’s own behavior. This model implies that self-cognitions like self-esteem have no important role in dissonance arousal. The self-standards model It is a weakness that these perspectives disagree markedly with respect to the role of self-esteem, a construct particularly

relevant to dissonance. The self-standards model (SSM) of cognitive dissonance helps resolve this disagreement about the role of self-esteem in cognitive dissonance by integrating the three earlier approaches (Stone & Cooper, 2001). In the SSM model, cognitive dissonance is defined most broadly as any threat to the selfconcept from some perceived inconsistency with either societal normative standards or uniquely personal standards of competence and morality. Self-esteem is defined as the level of chronic negative discrepancy between perceptions of the actual self and standards for competence and morality, and as the number and accessibility of positive attributes in the person’s self-concept (Stone & Cooper, 2001). If the level of chronic discrepancy is low and positive attributes are many and accessible, self-esteem is higher. In this model, high self-esteem has a role in both exacerbating dissonance arousal because of higher self-expectancies for consistency and facilitating dissonance reduction through having more accessible selfaffirmations. The SSM model proposes that ‘‘dissonance begins when people commit a behavior and then assess the behavior against some meaningful criterion of judgment” (Stone & Cooper, 2001, p. 228). People can access either personal standards or normative standards of society (or another collective like a profession), against which they evaluate their behavior. The type of standard accessed, along with self-esteem level, helps determine the type of dissonance arousal and reduction processes experienced. Because the SSM represents the most comprehensive, integrative view of cognitive dissonance to date, we borrow key ideas from this model to apply in the expatriate context. The cultural cognitive dissonance reduction model During an assignment, expatriates regularly interface with host nationals in the course of social activities, work, or general activities (shopping and eating out). During these interactions, the expatriate often perceives a situational/role expectation to perform some culturally appropriate behavior not in the expatriate’s normal behavioral repertoire. It is important to note that this expectation occurs in the mind of the expatriate, not necessarily in the minds of the host national(s). Host nationals may even have considerable knowledge of the expatriate’s home culture norms or not expect any behavior at all from an outsider. But if the expatriate does not recognize this tolerance within the situation, he/she may still perceive an expectation for a host culture-consistent behavior in the moment.

69

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

This triggering expectation causes further cognition about the behavior. In the course of thinking about the behavior and the VABNs represented by it, the expatriate will sometimes perceive a discrepancy between the behavior and their own VABNs. Cognitive dissonance research proposes that this perception of inconsistency results in arousal and psychological discomfort (HarmonJones, Brehm, Greenberg, Simon, & Nelson, 1996). Silently observing and condoning inconsistent behaviors and associated VABNs may also be viewed as concealing parts of the true self or being internally inconsistent, causing psychological discomfort (e.g., Clair, Beatty, & MacLean, 2005; Norton, Monin, Cooper, & Hogg, 2003). Because condoning an inconsistent behavior may constitute a threat to the self-concept as well, we include such dissonance experiences where they stem from cultural differences. Moreover, expatriates may come to anticipate expectations in future interactions for behavior inconsistent with their VABNs, such that they may respond to anticipated dissonance as well as current inconsistencies. Thus, we define cultural cognitive dissonance as: anticipating or currently perceiving inconsistencies between one’s behaviors, executed or condoned in order to conform to the host culture situation, and one’s VABNs. Assumptions Based on significant expatriate literature we assume that situational demands for culturally appropriate behavior are bound to result in many perceptions of inconsistencies with these behavioral demands (Earley, 2002; Van Vianen et al., 2004). Given this and based on the strength of an extensive stream of cognitive dissonance research, which validates this construct across cultures (Hoshino-Browne et al., 2005), we assume that all expatriates experience multiple cultural cognitive dissonance experiences in the course of an assignment, each of which leads to negative arousal and discomfort (Cooper & Fazio, 1984; Elliot & Devine, 1994) and some attempt to relieve these feelings (Wicklund & Brehm, 1976). Boundary conditions Although cultural VABNs are certainly represented in many symbols and structures within the host culture, we do not attempt to model purely symbolic interfaces with or abstract judgments of the host culture. Instead, we focus primarily on the situational demands for behavior generated in current or anticipated interactions with host nationals. We also do not model expatriate cognitive dissonance unrelated to cultural differences, nor do we attempt to model vicarious dissonance (e.g., Norton et al., 2003). The cultural cognitive dissonance experience The focal experience begins with a perceived demand for some culturally appropriate behavior, either during a current or anticipated interaction with host nationals. For certain behaviors this will cause the expatriate to perceive that the behavior, executed or condoned, is inconsistent with a personal VABN. The resulting stress-discomfort compels the expatriate to relieve it with one or more of six dissonance reduction strategies. See Figs. 1 and 2 for depictions of initiation and resolution of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences. Methods of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction and their effects over time The research has suggested that individuals may engage in many different methods of dissonance reduction: attitude change, adding consonant cognitions from memory (or formulated from

Determinants of Frequency of Demands for Inconsistent Behaviors - Cultural distance x Cultural tightness

Current or Anticipated Expectation to Execute or Condone CulturallyAppropriate Behavior

Inconsistency or Dissonance with VABN Perceived

Negative arousal and Discomfort Experienced

Determinants of the Strength of the Inconsistency Negative Arousal Relation - Normative/personal standard x self-esteem - Self-monitoring - VABN centrality to the expatriate Fig. 1. Initiation of a cultural cognitive dissonance experience.

the environment), discarding dissonant cognitions, perceptual distortion/change of cognitions to make the discrepancy less important, self-affirmation, justification of the behavior, seeking group support for the behavior, attribute the behavior to external causes, voicing support or reaffirming the challenged VABN, refusing to do the counter-attitudinal behavior, and withdrawal from the situation (e.g., Elliot & Devine, 1994; Festinger, 1957; Harmon-Jones et al., 1996; Kunda, 1990; McKimmie et al., 2003; Steele, 1988; Wicklund & Brehm, 1976). Unfortunately though, some of these overlap conceptually. Also, most cognitive dissonance studies greatly restrict responses to dissonance through using induced compliance lab designs (Kunda, 1990). Thus, we have little theoretical knowledge of the full range of dissonance reduction methods used. In addition, the expanding theoretical evolution of cognitive dissonance (e.g., Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962; Cooper & Fazio, 1984; Norton et al., 2003; Scher & Cooper, 1989; Steele, 1988; Stone & Cooper, 2001) has seemingly prevented an overall model of methods for dissonance reduction from being synthesized. For example, most dissonance research deals with dissonance responses after an inconsistency has already occurred. However, expatriates may anticipate a high likelihood of demands for inconsistent behavior in a given situation. We consider such anticipatory responses in synthesizing our six methods of cognitive dissonance reduction: (1) VABN modification, (2) perceptual modification, (3) self-affirmation, (4) rationalization, (5) confession-redemption, and (6) host VABN rejection. We expect that expatriates sometimes use multiple methods for reducing cultural cognitive dissonance. For example, one could rationalize his/her inconsistent behavior to fear of punishment, and at the same time, self-affirm saying to themselves, ‘‘I always do my job tasks well!” Our key contention is that expatriates may be distinguished on their tendencies/patterns to use some dissonance reduction methods more often than others. Further, this relative frequency of the dissonance reduction methods used has effects on changes to one’s level of intermediate adjustment outcomes over time: attitudes toward host nationals and/or identification with the host culture, frequency of future cultural cognitive dissonance experiences, and frequency of interactions with host nationals. Proposition 1: Expatriates differ in their tendency to use certain methods of dissonance reduction over time. Proposition 2: The relative frequency of dissonance reduction methods used over time helps determine whether adjustment outcomes change positively or negatively. We next give an example of how each of the six methods manifests itself in an actual cultural cognitive dissonance experience, and how the method, when used over time, influences these inter-

70

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

OVER TIME & DISSONANCE EXPERIENCES

Negative Arousal & Discomfort Experienced

Engage in Reduction Method(s): 1. VABN Modification

Regulators of Reduction Method Used - VABN centrality to the expatriate - More exemplars of host nationals - Org. incentive x family incentive - Org. incentive x intrinsic incentive - Self-esteem x openness to exp.

2. Percept Modification 3. Self Affirmation

Attitudes toward Host Nationals and Identification with Host Culture Frequency of Dissonance Experiences

4. Rationalization

Psychological Withdrawal and Early Departure from the Assignment

Frequency of Interactions with Host Nationals

5. ConfessionRedemption 6. Host VABN Rejection = Positive Relationship

= Negative Relationship

= Negative or Neutral Relationship

Fig. 2. Reduction of cultural cognitive dissonance and linkages to early departure.

mediate adjustment outcomes. Ms. Y is from a culture and tradition where women shaking hands and hugging with men not in their immediate family is prohibited, and she agrees with and fully abides by this norm going into the assignment. Ms. Y knows that her family and friends would be disappointed or would otherwise sanction her for this behavior at home, but she also feels pressure to engage in the behavior or at least accept it because she has learned that failing to give a handshake greeting to men in business situations, or pulling away from a friendly embrace could be ill-received by host country nationals. Out of a desire to fit in, she reluctantly engages in handshakes with professionals and accepts hugs from a few friends. Still, some feelings of discomfort are created from performing these inconsistent behaviors that Ms. Y must somehow reduce. VABN modification Commonly referred to in cognitive dissonance literature as ‘‘attitude change”, VABN modification makes the inconsistent behavior consonant again. Ms. Y can directly change her current VABNs in order to make them more consistent with the expectations or normative VABNs encountered within the host culture. Ms. Y could reason that her cultural behavioral norm to not allow physical contact between women and male business colleagues and others is outdated or uninformed. In fact, she may discard this norm completely and decide to initiate hugs and handshakes freely. Perceptual modification Through adding, selectively remembering, or distorting cognitions, Ms. Y can change the way she perceives the host culture’s VABN underlying the behavior in question, such that the revised host VABNs are more similar to her own. This often requires searching for a deeper attributional and empathetic understanding that can be used to change one’s own feelings and beliefs, similar to ‘‘deep acting” (see Grandey, 2003). For example, Ms. Y could alter her belief that the informality of physical contact with women indicates over-familiarity, sexual openness, or lack of respect for women. After witnessing hugging behavior in context, she could add the cognition that the underlying value conveyed by these

behaviors in most cases is warmth and friendship, rather than licentiousness. She holds a value to be friendly and warm. Ms. Y may also add to her cognitions that failing to shake hands communicates a lack of respect or professionalism. Showing respect and professionalism in business are values that Ms. Y also holds. Her revised view is that hugging and shaking hands in this context are consistent with some of her other VABNs, reducing the perceived inconsistency and associated discomfort. In another variation of perceptual modification, expatriates can distort or change their perception of their own home-culture VABNs (e.g., ‘‘My home culture doesn’t really have a strong norm against that behavior in some contexts”). Such a perceptual modification relating to home-culture VABNs reduces the extent or importance of the inconsistency with the behavior in question. This variation also involves seeking more similarities between the expatriate’s VABNs and host national or culture VABNs. Effects of VABN modification and perceptual modification over time VABN modification and perceptual modification both involve making cognitive changes to match the culturally appropriate behavior in question. With both of these methods, the expatriate is basically increasing perceived similarity and changing to be more compatible with the host nationals and their environment. By repeatedly using these methods of increasing similarity, expatriates should develop more attraction (Brein & David, 1971) and positive attitudes toward those host nationals through behavioral consistency processes (e.g., Salancik & Pfeffer, 1978). Also, behaving consistently with host culture prototypes and recognizing similarities between cultural VABNs rather than differences can facilitate identification with the host culture (Berry, 1997; Brislin, 1981). However, we do differentiate these two methods in one meaningful way. Changing VABNs in the direction of host nationals and/or host culture norms would facilitate ‘‘assimilation” to the host culture and could even reduce home-culture identification (Berry, 1997). Thus, VABN modification should produce bigger increases in host culture identification than perceptual modification would, while both methods should tend to increase positive attitudes toward host national individuals with whom they interact.

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

Cumulative changes in VABNs or perceptions of the host (or home) culture VABNs over time mean that the VABNs move closer together in the expatriate’s mind. Thus, culturally appropriate behavioral demands are less likely to be found inconsistent with the expatriate’s VABNs in the future, thereby decreasing the probability of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences occurring in the future. VABN modification and perceptual modification can also increase the frequency of interactions with host nationals. Over time, using these methods cause more perceived similarity with host nationals with more VABNs in common provides more personal attraction (Brein & David, 1971) and more depth of content to talk about with host nationals during interactions. This should generally increase the expatriate’s motivation to interact with host nationals, and thereby, interaction frequency. Proposition 3: Over time, we propose a positive relationship between both VABN modification and perceptual modification and (a) attitudes toward host nationals, (b) host culture identification, and (c) frequency of host national interactions; and we propose a negative relationship between these methods and (d) frequency of future dissonance experiences encountered. Self-Affirmation This method includes accessing cognitions about positive attributes of the self in order to protect the overall self-concept against the threat posed by the inconsistency (e.g., Steele, 1988). Ms. Y may think that, despite the inconsistency of handshakes and hugs with home-culture norms, ‘‘I am particularly responsible in all my job duties and I always take care of my family.” This reduces emotional discomfort of the inconsistency by neutralizing the threat to the self-concept and bolstering it with offsetting positive information. Rationalization This method involves adding cognitions/attributions about situational factors that excuse or explain the inconsistency (e.g., ‘‘I need the expatriate bonus for my family and I must act inconsistently with my VABNs at times”). This reduces the associated discomfort, without minimizing or eliminating the consistency itself. Ms. Y may reason that she has no real choice in doing these behaviors. She may conclude that compromising her home-culture VABNs in the host culture somewhat is a necessary cost required to achieve the worthwhile benefits of succeeding in the assignment and bringing honor to her family back home. This is very similar to surface acting in order to follow display rules, while not changing underlying feelings (Grandey, 2003). In extreme cases, this method may even involve complete compartmentalization of identities such that the expatriate has a home-culture identity with VABNs, and a separate expatriate identity with its distinct set of VABNs (Ashforth & Mael, 1989; Roccas & Brewer, 2002). Inconsistencies can be more readily accepted as a function of having two separate selves, one ‘‘real” or ‘‘home self” and an ‘‘expatriate self” allowed to be inconsistent with certain VABNs. Effects of self-affirmation and rationalization over time Compared to the first two methods, affirmation and rationalization do not involve the same level of personal cognitive-behavioral change. The first two focus on similarities in order to reduce the inconsistency, whereas affirmation and rationalization do not directly reduce or eliminate the inconsistency. Rather than any similarity with host nationals, the focus of affirmation and rationalization is more on overcoming differences. In some cases of rationalization, the expatriate could even assign blame for his/ her inconsistent behavior directly to host nationals or the host culture. Thus, these methods focusing on differences could certainly influence attitudes toward nationals and host culture identification

71

in a negative way. However, because these methods do not directly implicate the underlying host national or host culture VABNs as being negative, we concede that, for some expatriates, repeated use of these methods may have no net negative effect on attitudes toward nationals and identification. Nevertheless, it seems clear that these methods will not produce a positive relationship with these adjustment outcomes over time. Because these methods do not directly reduce the inconsistency, their positive effects over time are more limited than the first two methods. The current discomfort is quelled, but this suggests no lasting effects for other new behavioral inconsistencies that may arise in the future. In fact, rationalization as in surface acting may entail emotional dissonance and labor (e.g., Grandey, 2003). Thus, we propose that these two methods will not reduce future frequency of dissonance experiences, but there is also no good reason to expect a positive effect on future reoccurrence of dissonance either. Moreover, we see no reason that affirmation and rationalization would cause any direct increases or decreases in interaction frequency with host nationals, apart from effects mediated through changes in attitudes toward host nationals and host culture identification. Proposition 4: Over time, we propose a weak negative relationship between both affirmation and rationalization and (a) attitudes toward host nationals and (b) host culture identification, and no relationship with the other intermediate outcomes. Confession-redemption This method implies accepting responsibility for acting inconsistent with a VABN and relieving discomfort by confessing some level of wrongdoing and promising (oneself and/or God) not to do the behavior again. This recognition of a mistake and promise to avoid such behavior in the future has the potential to provide a feeling of redemption. Ms. Y may feel regret, shame, or remorse for initially engaging in these hugs and handshakes that conflict with home-culture norms. She admits the mistake and swears that she will not do it again. Also, Ms. Y would also typically seek to avoid situations in which handshakes and hugs may be offered. Effects of confession-redemption over time Over time, confessing wrongdoing to oneself for acting consistently with host culture normative expectations is bound to reduce identification with the host culture (e.g., Berry, 1997). One may also direct some negative judgment toward individual host nationals for behaving the same way, which may cause negative attitudes or beliefs about them. This suggests a negative influence on attitudes toward nationals and host culture identification. In anticipatory terms, this method of dissonance reduction means avoiding situations in the future where demands for the inconsistent behavior might arise. This avoidance aspect will have two likely effects. Over time, it will probably succeed in producing less dissonance experiences of any kind, because avoiding situations that may reproduce past inconsistencies will likely lead to avoiding other inconsistencies that could arise in such interactions. However, it will do so at the price of inhibiting interactions with host nationals in general. This avoidance aspect suggests a negative effect of this method on the frequency of future dissonance experiences and on the frequency of interactions with host nationals. Proposition 5: Over time, we propose a negative relationship between using confession-redemption and (a) attitudes toward host nationals, (b) host culture identification, (c) frequency of host national interactions, and (d) frequency of dissonance experiences encountered. Host VABN rejection In the face of anticipated or current demands to execute or condone inconsistent behavior, the expatriate may refuse to perform or condone the behavior in question. The second part of this meth-

72

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

od is often to verbally assert the VABN at stake and explain one’s unwillingness to perform or condone the behavior, in order to fully restore consonance. This is because it may break other VABNs to simply ignore perceived host expectations during an interaction, giving no response at all. Ms. Y could have refused and pulled away from hugs or handshakes initially. She could mention politely that it is not in her custom to hug or shake hands with men outside her family. Effects of host VABN rejection over time VABN rejection amounts to a very explicit rejection of the host culture’s VABNs, and is thus likely to strengthen identification with the home culture, while weakening any identification with the host culture or the host nationals who execute the behaviors and espouse the underlying VABNs. It is difficult to like people if you do not like their VABNs. Further, ‘‘host VABN rejection” and ‘‘confession-redemption” both may be followed and reinforced by support-seeking while socializing in expatriate enclaves. This may well include seeking verbal support for maintaining home-culture VABNs and/or some denigration or ‘‘making fun” of the host culture. Thus, repeatedly rejecting, along with such follow-up behaviors, would lead to more negative attitudes toward host nationals and decreased identification with the host culture. In our example, Ms. Y may want to continue to engage host nationals similarly, asserting her home-culture VABNs again; this may be even more likely given that she has crossed a ‘‘threshold of discomfort” in doing it already. This choice made repeatedly would tend to produce more frequent cultural dissonance experiences, as she continually resists and/or confronts host nationals about VABN differences. Finally, although Ms. Y may want to engage host nationals and test or assert her personal or home-culture VABNs in this way, it may be upsetting or off-putting to some host nationals, logically reducing the frequency of interactions. However, it is possible that other host nationals may seek out the expatriate who exemplifies the foreign culture in order to learn and compare their own values. If the expatriate is perceived as a cultural prototype and is popular enough with at least a few host nationals who are interested in learning from him/her, there may be no net negative effect on frequency of interactions. Proposition 6: Over time, we propose a negative relationship between using host VABN rejection and (a) attitudes toward host nationals & (b) host culture identification; we propose a weak negative relationship with (c) frequency of host interactions; and we propose a positive relationship with (d) frequency of dissonance experiences encountered. Regulators of causal relationships within the model We searched the cross-cultural literature for key constructs that were most likely to influence the causal relationships in the model. Although an exhaustive list of potential constructs is impossible and future research may discover more such moderators, we include those we judged most important in the nomological net and for the expatriate research area. Determinants of average demands for inconsistent behaviors During the assignment, the likelihood that situational demands for a culturally appropriate behavior will result in a perception of inconsistency with an expatriate’s VABN depends on two interactive environmental factors. First, the expatriate may be assigned to a host culture that is relatively similar to or very different from his/her home culture. Cultural distance has been defined as the degree to which the cultural values and norms in one country differ from those in another country (Kogut & Singh, 1988). Research suggests that the greater the cultural distance between home

and host cultures, the more difficult and stressful adjustment is for the expatriate (Black et al., 1991; McEvoy and Parker, 1995; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). Implicit in this research is the assumption that expatriates will hold the normative VABNs from their home culture to some extent. If true, as cultural distance increases, the chances increase that the expatriate will encounter VABNs inconsistent with his/her own. However, distant from the home culture of the expatriate though, host nationals may allow for cultural differences and expect a wider range of behaviors from foreigners. This could be communicated to the expatriate and reduce perceived pressure to behave in a culturally appropriate way. Thus, we must consider another interactive factor. Cultural tightness (and looseness) refers to the degree to which norms are clearly defined and reliably imposed (Chan, Gelfand, Triandis, & Tzeng, 1996). In tight societies normative pressures for homogeneous, culturally appropriate behavior is relatively greater than in loose cultures (Triandis, 1977). Sanctions for defying norms and behaving in unexpected ways are also greater in a tight culture (Triandis, 1989). In a loose culture a larger array of VABNs and behaviors is tolerated. Thus, in a tight culture, expatriates are likely to feel more negative social pressure to behave in a culturally appropriate manner. In sum, cultural distance provides greater opportunities on average to behave inconsistently (while fitting in), and cultural tightness increases the average situational pressure to do so. Together these factors produce the greatest likelihood that demands for culturally appropriate behavior will be perceived as inconsistent with expatriate VABNs. Proposition 7: For expatriates in culturally distant and tight host cultures, culturally appropriate behavior will be perceived as inconsistent with their VABNs more often than for expatriates in less distant or looser cultures. Determinants of the strength of the inconsistency—negative arousal relationship The self-standards model (SSM) proposes that both normative and personal standards are used to judge consistency of behavior. Normative standards are generally accessed in judging inconsistency of behavior (Stone & Cooper, 2001), which here would mean expatriate home-culture VABNs, internalized through societal socialization processes (Roccas & Brewer, 2002). The expatriate may also internalize their professional standards as VABNs used to evaluate behaviors. Finally, uniquely personal standards or VABNs may also be used to evaluate behaviors (Stone & Cooper, 2001). The type of standard being used interacts with self-esteem to influence the level of arousal of dissonance, given an inconsistency. Stone and Cooper (2001) also proposed that self-esteem implies higher self-expectations with personal standards. This suggests that those with low self-esteem may come to expect such inconsistencies with personal standards, causing less negative arousal. Those with high self-esteem expect more of themselves when it comes to consistency with personal VABNs, causing more arousal. However, Stone and Cooper (2001) propose that there should be no difference in dissonance arousal by self-esteem for those accessing normative standards. Thus: Proposition 8a: For those accessing personal standards (VABNs), expatriates with higher self-esteem will experience more negative arousal from a perceived inconsistency than those with low selfesteem. Proposition 8b: For those accessing purely normative standards (perceived host culture VABNs), there will be no difference in negative arousal from a perceived inconsistency based on self-esteem. Snyder (1987) proposed that high self-monitors (i.e., those who pay attention to situational cues and base their behavior accordingly) are likely to value attitude–behavior consistency less intensely than low self-monitors (i.e., those who value consistency

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

between their attitudes and behavior regardless of the situational cues). High self-monitors value behaving appropriate to the situation and would be less susceptible to strong feelings of negative arousal and discomfort from behaving inconsistently with VABNs than low self-monitors (Kahle, 1984; Snyder, 1987). Proposition 9: Expatriates low on self-monitoring will experience more negative arousal from a perceived inconsistency than those high on self-monitoring. We also expect that the nature of the VABN in question would play an important part in determining the strength of arousal created from a perceived inconsistency (Kunda, 1990). Specifically, challenges to more surface-level attitudes and behavioral norms, which are more transient and which pose less of a threat to the integrity of the self-system (Steele, 1988), should produce less intense negative arousal. If however, deeper-level values or beliefs that are more central to the self-concept are challenged, negative arousal and discomfort should be greater (Van Vianen et al., 2004). Proposition 10: When cultural cognitive dissonance involves inconsistency with a deeper VABN, central to the self-concept, negative arousal will be greater than when the VABN is more surface-level and less central to the self-concept. Regulators of dissonance reduction method used Several individual and situational factors help determine how the expatriate comes to utilize some methods more than others to relieve a given instance of negative arousal. First, if a culturally appropriate behavior violates a personal value central to the expatriate’s current self-concept, this would cause particularly acute cultural cognitive dissonance. In such cases, reducing dissonance is less likely to result in attitude or behavior change (Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). This strongly suggests that expatriates will not use VABN modification when other methods are available. Because of the inconsistency and negative affective arousal, the expatriate could be less motivated to look for common ground in VABNs behind the behavior, which is the mechanism of perceptual modification. Thus, the more central the expatriate VABN in conflict, the less likely that the person will use VABN modification or perceptual modification methods. Proposition 11: When the cultural cognitive dissonance involves a value central to the self-concept, expatriates are more likely to use methods other than VABN modification or perceptual modification. Second, attitude representation theory (ART) proposes that when evaluating an object and considering attitudes toward it, people activate a mental representation, or exemplar, of the attitude object, which includes assumptions about the object’s identity and characteristics (Lord & Lepper, 1999). In this case, the expatriate will consider an exemplar or prototype of a host national when evaluating host nationals in general or the host culture itself. Empirical research in this area has supported that the presence of unstable exemplars makes attitudes more susceptible to new information and attitude change (Lord, Paulson, Sia, Thomas, & Lepper, 2004). This means that the more different exemplars that have a probability of being activated (more unstable), the better the probability that new information about the attitude object will be incorporated. That is, knowing more varied host nationals makes it more likely that new information about the host culture will be accepted and incorporated. This information would be positively associated with the types of cognitive changes represented in the first two methods. Proposition 12: Expatriates who have more exemplars of host nationals are more likely to use VABN modification and perceptual modification than expatriates with fewer host national exemplars. Third, expatriates may be motivated to adjust and complete their assignments in order to obtain valued organizational incentives that are contingent on successful completion. What is not apparent in traditional approaches to adjustment is that incentives

73

may have complicated, and even negative effects on adjustment, particularly when the family situation of the expatriate is considered. Still, after the assignment has begun, incentives are the primary levers that managers possess to influence adjustment processes and the chronic early withdrawal problem. Thus, the effects of incentives on cultural cognitive dissonance reduction are important to understand. Expatriate incentives may include organizational advancement, bonuses, education allowances, salary premiums, and other benefits (Guzzo, Noonan, & Elron, 1994; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985). With respect to reducing cognitive dissonance, early theory suggested that large extrinsic incentives would not lead to attitude change in the face of cognitive dissonance (Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959). If the incentives are large enough to be sufficient justification, the expatriate may fully attribute his adoption of new behaviors to getting the incentives. This directly suggests rationalizing the inconsistency. In contrast, reinforcement theory suggests that expatriate attitude change would be higher when an expatriate is offered large incentives to stay. Wicklund and Brehm concluded that ‘‘attitude change should increase with monetary, scientific, or other incentive for performance” (1976, p. 42). The motivation to get incentives through staying may reinforce/encourage adjustment. Out of self-interest the expatriate may desire to change themselves to make their adjustment, and achieving contingent rewards, easier. According to this perspective, high organizational incentives should facilitate personal change and using VABN modification or perceptual modification. We believe that these seemingly contradictory predictions for high organizational incentives can be reconciled by considering whether other key ‘‘incentives” favor staying or leaving the assignment early. Family variables have been shown to be critical in explaining expatriate adjustment and withdrawal as well (e.g., Black & Stephens, 1989; Palthe, 2004). Thus, when considering the effects of incentives it is important to remember to consider the entire range. For example, expatriates may perceive that their families have a real investment in their success, and early return may bring shame to the whole family. In contrast, where family members also living in the host culture are unhappy in the host culture location, they may exert normative pressure to leave early (Maertz & Griffeth, 2004), which may be direct (e.g., saying, ‘‘let’s go back home”) or indirect (e.g., talking negatively about the assignment or host culture). Net normative pressure from family or friends amounts to a more intrinsic ‘‘incentive” that must be considered. We argue that when perceived family pressures favor staying in the assignment, along with organizational incentives, an expatriate is less likely to attribute their behavior to the organizational incentives alone. Expatriates can see any internal changes as supporting the rest of their life and goals, and thus, may even be more consciously motivated to use VABN or perceptual modification. In contrast, when the net family pressure is to leave the assignment, the tangible organizational career or monetary incentives become a larger relative justification for staying in the assignment. Overall, the expatriate is likely to rationalize that the organizational incentives will benefit the family in the long run even if they don’t know it yet and attribute inconsistencies to achieving this long-term goal. Unlike an induced compliance lab setting where, attitude change is the norm following drops in justification. In this realworld setting, attitude change would be inhibited by family pressure for expatriates to distance themselves from the host culture. Yet, high organizational incentives may remain sufficient justification for rationalizing behavioral inconsistencies. Proposition 13: When family pressures favor staying in the assignment, high organizational incentives for assignment completion facilitate use of VABN modification or perceptual modification, but

74

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

when family incentives favor leaving, high organizational incentives facilitate use of rationalization. Similarly, to the extent there are other key intrinsic justifications for adjusting functionally and continuing the assignment, expatriates should be less likely to attribute behavior primarily to extrinsic incentives. They should be more motivated to embrace internal change that fits with the rest of their lives. These other justifications include: personal enjoyment of activities in the country, friendship/romantic attraction to host nationals, attachment to the work being done in the particular location, or a personal career goal of being a successfully adjusted expatriate abroad. Thus, like family pressure: Proposition 14: When other intrinsic incentives favor staying in the assignment, high extrinsic incentives facilitate use of VABN modification or perceptual modification, but when other intrinsic incentives are absent or favor leaving, high organizational incentives facilitate use of rationalization. If none of these ‘‘intrinsic incentives” are at work though, most cognitive dissonance research would predict that VABN modification would be most likely in the context of small organizational incentives, which provide insufficient justification for inconsistency. Fourth, there is considerable evidence that expatriates encounter many situations where individual difference traits can be influential on their adjustment outcomes (Shaffer et al., 2006). Here, we propose that openness to experience and self-esteem are the two most important individual difference traits that help determine which dissonance reduction methods are used, particularly with all situational factors equal. One key distinction between those low and high in self-esteem is that those with higher self-esteem have more positive attributes accessible in their self-knowledge, facilitating self-affirmations (Stone & Cooper, 2001). Those with lower self-esteem have fewer such positive attributes of self in their working self-knowledge and therefore less opportunity to make self-affirmations. Proposition 15: Expatriates with high self-esteem are more likely to use affirmation than those with low self-esteem. We propose that another construct would moderate the likelihood of high self-esteem expatriates using affirmation vs. VABN and perceptual modification. Individuals high on openness to experience have intellectual curiosity and a preference for variety, while individuals low on openness tend to be conventional, conservative, and prefer the familiar to the novel (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Curiosity and preference for variety or newness may lead to the endorsement of a ‘‘change is good” value, which may extend to personal VABNs during an expatriate assignment. Those high on openness may also be more likely to consider a wide variety of cognitions and change their perceptions about the host culture’s VABNs. Cultural intelligence (Earley, 2002; Earley & Peterson, 2004), flexibility, and ethnocentrism (reverse) (Shaffer et al., 2006) constructs each reflect openness to experience. ‘‘Flexibility of self-concept and ease of integrating new facets into it are associated with high CQ since understanding new cultures may require abandoning pre-existing conceptualizations of how and why people function as they do,” (Earley, 2002, p. 275). Clearly, openness to experience should be positively related to use VABN modification and perceptual modification over time. Conversely, those low on openness or more ethnocentric may be more resistant to changing their VABNs and accepting of new views of the host or home culture (Lord et al., 2004). Because those with high self-esteem will typically be more aroused by internal inconsistencies, they are likely to want to completely resolve the inconsistency more than those with low self-esteem who expect some persistent inconsistencies. Thus, those with high self-esteem and high openness would be most likely to use VABN or perceptual modification methods. In contrast, those with high self-esteem and

low openness are more likely to use affirmation and host VABN rejection more than changing VABNs or perceptions or other methods. Those low on self-esteem but high on openness to experience would have these change-oriented methods available, but the relative willingness to accept and not be negatively aroused by inconsistency would remove some motivation to seek out new information about the host nationals (i.e., perceptual modification). However, simply adopting a new attitude/belief that fits the behavior or adding a ready situational explanation for acting inconsistently are both possibilities for those with high openness. These expatriates are likely to utilize VABN modification and rationalization more than other methods. For those low on self-esteem and openness, self-affirmations and adding new cognitions of any kind would be less likely. For these expatriates, the most likely choices then would be confession-redemption and possibly host VABN rejection. We believe that the former is more likely because low self-esteem may prevent them from standing against situational pressures required to use the latter method. Thus, we propose, all situational factors equal: Proposition 16: (a) Expatriates high on self-esteem and openness to experience are more likely to use VABN modification or perceptual modification than other methods, (b) expatriates high on self-esteem but low on openness to experience are more likely to use affirmation or host VABN rejection than other methods, (c) expatriates low on self-esteem and high on openness to experience are more likely to use VABN modification or rationalization than other methods, (d) expatriates low on self-esteem and low on openness are more likely to use confession-redemption than other methods. Relationships among intermediate adjustment outcomes Less frequent recurrence of cultural cognitive dissonance experiences over time means less expected threats to the self-concept, limiting fear of uncomfortable interactions. This should facilitate more frequent interactions with host nationals. In addition, positive attitudes toward host nationals and identification with the host culture lead the expatriate to perceiving more similarity with the host nationals on VABNs. This will increase attraction to host nationals (Brein & David, 1971) and motivation to interact with them. Over time, positive attitudes toward host nationals and identification with the host culture should be positively related to frequency of interactions with host nationals. Intermediate adjustment outcomes and early departure Consistent with past research, we propose that positive attitudes toward host nationals/identification with the host culture and more interactions with host nationals will help prevent psychological withdrawal and early departure from the assignment. First, identification with the host culture can prevent psychological withdrawal from the assignment through expatriates not wanting to lose this part of their identity through unnecessary early departure (e.g., Berry, 1997). More positive attitudes toward nationals should promote affective and other attachments to these ‘‘constituents” of the assignment, serving to reduce withdrawal tendency (Maertz & Griffeth, 2004). Finally, there are at least three research streams supporting that frequent interactions with host nationals should inhibit early departure from the assignment. First, researchers have found significant positive empirical relationships between interaction adjustment levels and intention to stay on the assignment (Berry, 1997; Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Black & Stephens, 1989). Second, increased interactions with nationals indicate more ‘‘linkagesembeddedness” within the host national social network, which

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

75

would inhibit turnover from the assignment (Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, & Erez, 2001). Third, frequent interactions within the host country indicate/signal considerable effort toward assignment success and should create more behavioral commitment to the assignment and fewer tendencies toward psychological withdrawal (Salancik, 1977).

test propositions. Finally, we must add that in empirical studies generally, researchers must control for or consider learning processes when testing propositions, which were made assuming, all else equal on learning processes or outcomes.

Discussion

In fact, learning has been suggested most often as the primary stress-reduction process that expatriates employ (Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Church, 1982; Earley, 2002; Storti, 1990; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). One main implication of our model for research and practice is that learning culturally appropriate behaviors is not enough to promote successful adjustment. Even an expatriate who learns appropriate expectations and behaviors may not be able to manage the resulting acculturative stress. In fact, learning how to perform a culturally appropriate behavior may relieve stress from social uncertainty, but at the same time, increase stress from an internal inconsistency and threat to the self-concept. In short, adjustment requires balancing the internal fit vs. environmental fit of behaviors in a cross-cultural setting. Another key lesson is that both learning and dissonance reduction processes work together in contributing to the management of acculturative stress. Future studies should focus on further integrating the processes of learning and dissonance reduction to comprehensively understand how stress is reduced and positive adjustment outcomes achieved. For example, using certain dissonance reduction methods may promote easier integration of newly learned information. Certain methods or contexts of learning may also facilitate functional methods of dissonance reduction. Future studies should attempt to more fully model such reciprocal/interactive effects between learning and dissonance reduction.

This model presents a new way to look at the cognitive processes of expatriate adjustment. We propose that all expatriates experience cross-cultural cognitive dissonance; it is how they reduce this dissonance that is important for outcomes. This model suggests several new directions for future research and practice. Directions for empirical testing We suggest that the current model be tested and expanded through three different empirical phases: in-depth study of the dissonance experience itself, quantitative measurement development, and study of patterns in multiple dissonance experiences over time. First, narrative or grounded theory-building analyses should be undertaken to focus on the individual dissonance experience in-depth, using daily interview data and diary data of host national interactions. This would expand the richness of description for model constructs, micro-processes, and the context in which the cultural cognitive dissonance experience occurs. This increased detail and nuance should provide excellent inputs to create more reliable and valid quantitative measures of our constructs. If some basic quantitative measurement challenges can be overcome, our propositions are imminently testable. Specifically, we must be able to reliably measure the nature and frequency of perceived situational demands for culturally appropriate behavior not in home repertoire, the nature and frequency of perceived inconsistencies arising in interactions with host nationals, the level of negative affective arousal and psychological discomfort caused, and the methods expatriates use for dissonance reduction (e.g., VABN modification, perceptual modification, affirmation, etc.). We expect that expatriates will be able to accurately report these constructs at some level if prompted sufficiently and some such measures already exist in a general form (e.g., Elliot & Devine, 1994). Moreover, there must be a way to reliably and accurately aggregate these responses over time and throughout the assignment in order to examine patterns. These measurement challenges are considerable, but once they are overcome, testing our model propositions should be straightforward. Expatriates could report extensive data through longitudinal event-sampling methodologies paired with administration on PDA-type devices. Data on cultural cognitive dissonance experiences and adjustment intermediate outcomes could be collected on scales whenever the expatriate is prompted to respond (e.g., right after an inconsistency in interaction, daily basis). These could be aggregated over time to examine patterns and test propositions. Experimental designs could also be used as in the predominant induced compliance design (Kunda, 1990). This could be combined with cross-cultural scenario research, which has successfully cued respondents to specific cultural values (e.g., Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). Using this type of design could create situations in which respondents are forced to adapt their behavior to become ‘‘culturally appropriate” for the setting. This treatment could be followed by measures of the type/level of inconsistency perceived, the level of negative arousal and discomfort, the dissonance reduction method(s) used, and the moderators in order to

Learning is not enough to control acculturative stress

Functional methods of cultural cognitive dissonance reduction A major prescriptive implication of this model is that using VABN modification and perceptual modification for cultural cognitive dissonance reduction over time promotes positive adjustment outcomes and thereby less chance of early departure. This does not mean that well-adjusted expatriates never use other dissonance reduction methods. They just use these effective methods repeatedly and more often than poorly adjusted expatriates. Affirmation and rationalization are largely neutral in effect on adjustment outcomes and may be used occasionally by well-adjusted expatriates as well. With repeated use though, confession-redemption and rejection are associated with negative adjustment outcomes. Progression of adjustment/stage models Generally consistent with stage models, our model supports that adjustment levels should increase over time and level off when cultural cognitive dissonance experiences become very infrequent (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). In particular, VABN modification and perceptual modification will both lead to less frequent cultural cognitive dissonance experiences in the future. This suggests that those who use these methods relatively often should progress quickly to levels of lowered stress. Those using other methods regularly besides VABN or perceptual modification are likely to remain hampered by dissonance stress into later stages of the assignment. With the respect to the honeymoon period often proposed in early stage models (e.g., Black & Mendenhall, 1991), this may be explained by the fact that there has not been enough time for expatriates to feel any pressure to act inconsistently with any of their VABNs. It could be that when the cultural cognitive dissonance experiences begin, the honeymoon ends.

76

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

Dual-identification Over time, using VABN modification increases perceived similarity with the host culture, which can certainly reduce acculturative stress, but it also implies some weakened identification with the home culture leading to ‘‘assimilation,” which can potentially cause some problems with adjustment back to the home culture after repatriation (e.g., Berry, 1980). For this reason, researchers have frequently proposed that maintaining dual host and homeculture identifications (Sanchez et al., 2000) or ‘‘integration” (Berry, 1997) is the most healthy adjustment mode across cultures. In our model perceptual modification best promotes the state of: positive attitudes toward host nationals, limited identification with the host culture, diminishing cultural cognitive dissonance experiences, and frequent interactions with host nationals. By changing perceptions of the underlying host culture VABNs, the expatriate understands more what he/she has in common with the host culture. This involves seeking and incorporating new information regarding the host culture VABNs, allowing a broader view of similarities between cultures. In this way, his/her cultural identity ‘‘is nudged” closer to the host culture without negating or necessarily reducing any identification with the home culture (e.g., Earley, 2002; Sanchez et al., 2000). In any case, over time, this method leads to greater cognitive identity complexity, where accepted similarities with the host culture can exist comfortably beside identification with the home culture (Roccas & Brewer, 2002). Thus, assuming repatriation at some point, our model implies that one best achieves dual identification or integration by regularly using perceptual modification as the method of cognitive dissonance reduction.

(and to an extent, VABN modification) should be encouraged and the propositions give clues as to how to do this:

Applicability to other groups

Limitations and conclusion

Besides expatriates, the current model should also be relevant to family-member adjustment and other sojourner cross-cultural adjustment. Because family adjustment is very important for predicting early departure and has crossover effects to the expatriate (Black & Gregersen, 1991b; ; Shaffer & Harrison, 1998; Takeuchi et al., 2002), researchers should study whether family-member and expatriate methods of dissonance reduction are causally related or interact to influence adjustment outcomes. Moreover, it seems that this model should apply generally to interactions between constituents of any two collectives with distinctive VABNs, where one group’s representation functionally serves as the ‘‘host culture”. Thus, our model should inform behavioral science more broadly with respect to processes that minority individuals experience while interacting within the context of a perceived dominant group culture.

There are clearly some limitations to the proposed model. There are many other determinants of early departure than this cognitive dissonance process (Garonzik, Brockner, & Siegel, 2000; Guzzo et al., 1994; Lee & Mitchell, 1994; Schaffer & Harrison, 1998), and there are other causes of adjustment outcomes besides dissonance reduction methods (e.g., Black et al., 1991; Shaffer et al., 1999). There may be further constructs that could influence the causal relationships we describe. We also did not include important non-withdrawal outcomes of adjustment (e.g., Black & Mendenhall, 1990; McEvoy and Parker, 1995), which will also be related to the intermediate adjustment outcomes in our model. Finally, we had to limit our consideration of ultimate outcomes to withdrawal/early departure for reasons of parsimony in the model and space limitations. We expect that there are additional effects of using different dissonance reduction methods on expatriate job performance and psychological health as well. However, our purpose here was to model one cross-cultural adjustment process in depth, showing how it influences the key outcome of early departure. Despite this limited focus, we take the necessary step of introducing a new perspective on the cross-cultural adjustment process and outlining directions for future research and practice in the area. Previously, without a model of this process, there was ‘‘a blind spot” in our understanding that has likely caused development of underspecified and inaccurate theoretical and empirical models. With the cultural cognitive dissonance perspective, researchers can expand their inquiry in novel directions and practitioners may create new ways to effectively manage expatriates’ adjustment before and during assignments.

Management Implications Götz-Marchand, Götz, and Irle (1974) found that people employed a mode of dissonance reduction only to the extent that it was made obvious to them. This suggests that pre-departure or post-arrival training could be effective in explicitly teaching the more functional methods of dissonance reduction. For example, many real examples of internal conflicts faced during adjustment could be compiled through qualitative case studies. Then, expatriates could discuss and learn techniques for seeking similarities and subtly changing perceptions of the host/home-culture’s VABNs, as in perceptual modification. This could be usefully complimented by attributional training that helps expatriates better understand the underlying reasons for and VABNs behind host national behaviors (Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). There may even be teachable metacognitive strategies for approaching dissonance experiences that encourage functional methods (Earley & Peterson, 2004). If supported empirically, the biggest practical implication of the model is that reducing dissonance through perceptual modification

 Select expatriates higher on self-monitoring to minimize extreme dissonance arousal, especially for first-time expatriates assigned in distant and tight host cultures.  Select expatriates higher on self-esteem and on openness to experience.  Make more exemplars of the host culture available to the expatriate by introducing him/her to a large number and variety of host nationals with broad VABNs.  Formally encourage ‘‘family incentives” for the expatriate to stay, encourage intrinsic interests in local organizations/activities, and encourage social connections with host nationals to further increase the effectiveness of organizational incentives in facilitating assignment completion.  Although seemingly counter-intuitive, giving small but substantial incentives rather than large incentives for assignment completion may facilitate functional adjustment best, particularly when the expatriate has no other intrinsic incentives to stay or leave.  Place special emphasis on influencing early dissonance reduction experiences that can help produce a functional pattern with diminishing frequency over time. This implies creating early experiences where expatriates can be exposed to host nationals of many different profiles and encouraged to seek similarities with them in a ‘‘safe” location with family or other expatriates for support.

References Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1962). Performance expectancy as a determinant of actual performance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 178–182.

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78 Ashforth, B., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20–39. Aycan, Z. (1997). Acculturation of expatriate managers, a process model of adjustment and performance. In Z. Aycan (Ed.). New approaches to employee management: Expatriate management, theory and research (Vol. 4, pp. 1–40). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Bazerman, M. H., Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Wade-Benzoni, K. (1998). Negotiating with yourself and losing: Making decisions with competing internal preferences. Academy of Management Review, 23, 225–241. Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1996). Image theory: The unifying perspective. In L. R. Beach (Ed.), Decision-making in the workplace: A unified perspective (pp. 1–19). Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bell, M. P., & Harrison, D. A. (1996). Using intra-national diversity for international assignments: A model of bicultural competence and expatriate adjustment. Human Resource Management Review, 6, 47–74. Berry, J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. M. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation, theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9–25). Boulder, CO: Westview. Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5–68. Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & Luk, D. M. (2005). Input-based and time-based models of international adjustment: Meta-analytic evidence and theoretical extensions. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 257–280. Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in Japan. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 277–294. Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1991a). Antecedents to cross-cultural adjustment for expatriates in Pacific Rim assignments. Human Relations, 44(5), 497–515. Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1991b). The other half of the picture: antecedents of spouse cross-cultural adjustment. Journal of International Business Studies, 461–477. Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). The right way to manage expats. Harvard Business Review, 52–62. Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1990). Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review and theoretical framework for future research. Academy of Management Review, 15, 113–136. Black, J. S., & Mendenhall, M. (1991). The U-curve adjustment hypothesis revisited: A review and theoretical framework. Journal of International Business Studies, 22, 225–247. Black, S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16, 291–317. Black, S., & Stephens, G. K. (1989). The influence of the spouse on American expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments. Journal of Management, 15(4), 529–544. Brein, M., & David, K. H. (1971). Intercultural communication and adjustment of the sojourner. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 215–230. Brislin, R. W. (1981). Cross-cultural encounters. New York: Pergamon. Chan, D. K. S., Gelfand, M. J., Triandis, H. C., & Tzeng, O. (1996). Tightness-looseness revisited: Some preliminary analyses in Japan and the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 31, 1–12. Church, A. T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 540–572. Clair, J. A., Beatty, J. E., & MacLean, T. L. (2005). Out of sight but not out of mind: Managing invisible social identities in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 30, 7896. Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 16, pp. 229–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor (NEO-FFI) Inventory professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. Earley, P. C. (2002). Redefining interactions across cultures and organizations: Moving forward with cultural intelligence. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 271–299. Earley, P. C., & Peterson, R. S. (2004). The elusive cultural chameleon, cultural intelligence as a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 100–115. Elliot, A. J., & Devine, P. G. (1994). On the motivational nature of cognitive dissonance: Dissonance as psychological discomfort. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 382–394. Festinger, L. A. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Festinger, L. A., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 203–210. Garonzik, R., Brockner, J., & Siegel, P. A. (2000). Identifying international assignees at risk for premature departure: The interactive effect of outcome favorability and procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 13–20. Götz-Marchand, B., Götz, J., & Irle, M. (1974). Preference of dissonance reduction modes as a function of their order, familiarity, and reversibility. European Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 201–228. Gregersen, H. B., & Black, J. S. (1992). Antecedents to commitment to a parent company and a foreign operation. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 65–90. Grandey, A. A. (2003). When ‘‘the show must go on”: Surface acting and deep acting as determinants of emotional exhaustion and peer-rated service delivery. Academy of Management Review, 46, 86–96. Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A., & Elron, E. (1994). Expatriate managers and the psychological contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 617–626.

77

Gudykunst, W. B. (1995). Anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) theory, current status. In R. L Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (Vol. 19, pp. 8– 58). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & BhaskarShrinivas, P. (2004). Going places: Roads more and less traveled in research on expatriate experiences. In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.). Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 22). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. pp. 203–252. Harmon-Jones, E., Brehm, J. W., Greenberg, J., Simon, L., & Nelson, D. E. (1996). Evidence that the production of aversive consequences is not necessary to create cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 5–16. Hoshino-Browne, E., Zanna, A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Kitayama, S., & Lackenbauer, S. (2005). On the cultural guises of cognitive dissonance: The case of easterners and westerners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 294–310. Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Sulley de Luque, M., & House, R. J. (2006). In the eye of the beholder: Cross-cultural lessons in leadership from project GLOBE. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67–90. Kahle, L. R. (1984). Attitudes and social adaptation: A person-situation interaction approach. Oxford: Pergamon. Kim, Y. Y. (1995). Cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory. In R. L. Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (Vol. 19, pp. 170–193). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–433. Kraimer, M. L., Wayne, S. J., & Jaworski, R. A. (2001). Sources of support and expatriate performance: The mediating role of expatriate adjustment. Personnel Psychology, 54, 71–99. Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58, 281–342. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498. Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1994). An alternative approach: The unfolding model of voluntary employee turnover. Academy of Management Review, 19, 51–89. Lord, C. G., & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Attitude representation theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology, (Vol. 31, pp. 265–343). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Lord, C. G., Paulson, R. M., Sia, T. L., Thomas, J. C., & Lepper, M. R. (2004). Houses built on sand: Effects of exemplar stability on susceptibility to attitude change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 733–749. Maertz, C. P., & Griffeth, R. W. (2004). Eight motivational forces and voluntary turnover: A theoretical synthesis with implications for research. Journal of Management, 30, 667–683. McKimmie, B. M., Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., Manstead, A., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2003). I’m a hypocrite, but so is everyone else: Group support and the reduction of cognitive dissonance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7(3), 214–224. Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A review. Academy of Management Review, 10, 39–47. Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1102–1121. Molinsky, A. (2007). Cross-cultural code switching: The psychological challenges of adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Academy of Management Review, 32, 622–640. Nicholson, N. (1984). A theory of work role transitions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 172–191. Norton, M. I., Monin, B., Cooper, J., & Hogg, M. A. (2003). Vicarious dissonance: Attitude change from the inconsistency of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 47–62. Palthe, J. (2004). The relative importance of antecedents to cross-cultural adjustment: Implications for managing a global workforce. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28, 37–59. Parker, G., & McEvoy, B. (1995). Expatriate adjustment: Causes and consequences. In J. Selmer (Ed.), Expatriate management (pp. 97–114). Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social identity complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 88–106. Salancik, G. (1977). Commitment and the control of organizational behavior and belief. In B. Staw & G. Salancik (Eds.), New directions in organizational behavior (pp. 1–54). Chicago: St. Clair. Salancik, G., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253. Sanchez, J. I., Spector, P. E., & Cooper, C. L. (2000). Adapting to a boundaryless world: A developmental expatriate model. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 96–106. Scher, S. J., & Cooper, J. (1989). Motivational basis of dissonance: The singular role of behavioral consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 899–906. Selmer, J. (2002). Practice makes perfect? International experience and expatriate adjustment. Management International Review, 42(1), 71–87. Shaffer, M. A., & Harrison, D. A. (1998). Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from international assignments: Work, nonwork, and family influences. Personnel Psychology, 51, 87–118. Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., & Gilley, K. M. (1999). Dimensions, determinants, and differences in the expatriate adjustment process. Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 557–582.

78

C.P. Maertz Jr. et al. / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 108 (2009) 66–78

Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., Gregeren, H., Black, J. S., & Ferzandi, L. A. (2006). You can take it with you: Individual differences and expatriate effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 109–125. Sinangil, H. K., & Ones, D. S. (2001). Expatriate management. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.). Handbook of industrial, work, & organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 424–443). London: Sage. Snyder, M. (1987). Public appearances private realities: The psychology of selfmonitoring. New York: W.H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co. Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 261–302). San Diego: Academic Press. Stone, J., & Cooper, J. (2001). A self-standards model of cognitive dissonance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 228–243. Storti, C. (1990). The art of crossing cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Takeuchi, R., Yun, S., & Tesluk, P. E. (2002). An examination of crossover and spillover effects of spousal and expatriate cross-cultural adjustment on expatriate outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 655–666. Thibodeau, R., & Aronson, E. (1992). Taking a closer look: Reasserting the role of the self-concept in dissonance theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 591–602.

Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506–520. Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Monterrey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S. S., & Ou, A. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33, 426–478. Tung, R. (1982). Selection and training procedures of US, European, and Japanese multinationals. California Management Review, 25(1), 57–71. Tung, R. (1987). Expatriate assignments, enhancing success and minimizing failure. Academy of Management Executive, 1(2), 117–126. Van Vianen, A. E. M., De Pater, I. E., Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Johnson, E. C. (2004). Fitting in: Surface- and deep-level cultural differences and expatriates’ adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 697–710. Wicklund, R. A., & Brehm, J. W. (1976). Perspectives on cognitive dissonance. Hillsdale, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. (2004). An experiential approach to cross-cultural learning: A review of competencies for successful expatriate adaptation. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3, 362–379. Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. New York: McGraw-Hill.