Acculturation and overseas assignments: a review and research agenda

(1)

ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect

International

Journal

of

Intercultural

Relations

j o u r n a l ho me p ag e :w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / i j i n t r e l

Acculturation

and

overseas

assignments:

A

review

and

research

agenda

Miguel

Gonzalez-Loureiro

a,b

_,

_Timothy

_Kiessling

c

_,

_Marina

_Dabic

d,e,∗

a_University_of_Vigo,_Spain

b_Escola_Superior_de_Tecnologia_e_Gestão_de_Felgueiras,_Portugal c_Bilkent_University,_Turkey

d_University_of_Zagreb,_Croatia e_Nottingham_Trent_University,_UK

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory:

Availableonline16June2015

Keywords: Acculturation Overseasassignment Expatriate Literaturereview

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Thisreviewanalyzestwostreamsofliteraturethatareexploringasimilarphenomenon fromseparateperspectivesandonlyrecentlyhavetheybegantooverlap;thatofmigrant acculturation(fromthepsychology,sociologyandanthropologyresearch)andinternational assigneeadjustment(fromtheinternationalbusinessresearchstream).Weconducteda multiplecorrespondenceanalysisonasampleof389articlestoprovidetheintellectual structureoftheresearchintheseﬁelds.

Ourresearchindicatesthat:(1)thestandard2×2matrixofacculturationisinsufficient; (2)mostpastresearchfocusesonUSAtoothercountriesandviceversa,suggestingthere ismuchworklefttoexploreotherpairsofcultures(“thereandbackagain”isnotthesame globally);(3)asglobalorganizationsaredominatingthemarketplacewithmanyvarious staffingforms,variablessuchascorporatecultureandmanagementinteractionwillneed tobeincorporated;(4)researchneedstoincludedynamicsovertimeasmany individ-ualswhohaveworkedoutsideoftheirhomecountryoftenbecomemulti-culturalwitha globalmindsetandthetypicalacculturationframeworkisinsufficient;(5)past accultura-tionresearchfocusesontheworkorthesocioculturalcontextseparately,whilebothneed tobeincluded;(6)andtheextendedfamily(parents,relatives,closefriends,etc.)needto beconsidered.

1. Introduction

Ourresearchattemptstoreviewtheappropriatenessofextantacculturationframeworksinregardtothedifferingtypesof

overseasassignments,suggestwhereacculturationinthe21stcenturyshouldfocusandtoproposeafutureresearchagenda

toguidemorescholarlyworkinthisarea.Themotivationforourresearchisthattwostreamsofliteraturehavebeenexploring

thisphenomenonfromseparateperspectivesandonlyrecentlyhavetheybegantooverlap;thatofacculturation(from

thepsychology,sociologyandanthropology-PSAresearch)andinternationalassigneeadjustment(fromtheinternational

business-IBresearchstream)(Lu,Samaratunge,&Härtel,2012).AcculturationfromthePSAﬁeldsfocusesonimmigrants

toanewcountryandtheirdegreeofadaptation(Berry,1997)whiletheIBresearchfocusesontherelocationofemployees

∗ Correspondingauthorat:UniversityofZagreb,Croatia.

E-mailaddresses:mloureiro@uvigo.es(M.Gonzalez-Loureiro),kiessling@bilkent.edu.tr(T.Kiessling),mdabic@efzg.hr(M.Dabic).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.05.003

(2)

toanewcountryandtheirrelativesuccessintheworkassignment(Okpara&Kabongo,2011).Thesuccessofbothtypesof

individualshasthefocusuponthehostcountryandtheabilityoftheindividualtoadapttothenewculturallychallenging

circumstances.

TheunitofanalysisofthePSAacculturationresearchwastheunderstandingoftheintegrationandadaptationprocess

uponmigrationandthesubsequentnecessityforpolicymakersinthereceivingcountriestounderstandtheimmigrants’

issues(Berry,Phinney,Kwak,&Sam,2006).RecentPSAresearchcombinedculturalﬁtresearchandacculturationresearch

toassistinexplaininghowanindividual’spersonalitytraits,values,beliefsandbehavior,aswellastheiradaptationtothe

hostcountryareaffected(Schiefer,Möllering,&Daniel,2012).Theresearchsuggeststhatimmigrant’ssuccessinfollowing

thefouracculturationstrategies(Assimilation,Integration,MarginalizationandSeparation)(Berry,1997)willbemoderated

bythedegreeofﬁtbetweentheindividualandthesocietyintermsofculturalﬁt(Juang,Nguyen,&Lin,2006).

PSAacculturationsuggeststhatimmigrantshavetoconsidertwokeypoints:theimportanceofthepreservationoftheir

identityandcharacteristicspertainingtotheirhomecountry;andhowimportantisittoparticipateinthehostcountry

(Leong,2014).ThePSAcurrentliteratureacceptsthatofthefouracculturationstrategies,integration(commitmenttoboth

homecountryheritageandadaptiontothenewhostcountry)willbemoresuccessfulastherewillbelowerstress,higher

self-esteem,pro-socialbehaviors,fewernegativeanti-socialbehavioroftheadolescent,higherlifesatisfactionandamore

positiveworkplacewell-being(Berry&Sabatier,2010;Scottham&Dias,2010;Wang,Schwartz,&Zamboanga,2010).The

PSAacculturationresearchisbeginningtocross-overintoresearchthathasbeenthefocusoftheIBﬁeld;thatofexamining

workrelatedattitudesinregardtotheacculturationorientationsandwork-relatedwell-being(Peeters&Oerlemans,2009).

Althoughtheconceptofacculturationhasbeenstudiedscientiﬁcallysince1919(Rudmin,2003),thestandardframework

forPSAacculturationresearch(Assimilation,Integration,MarginalizationandSeparation)(Berry,1997)nowisbeing

chal-lengedtothinkbeyondthisapproach(Schwartz,Unger,Zamboanga,&Szapocznik,2010).RecentPSAresearchsuggeststhat

perhapsamoreselectiveapproachdependinguponthetypeofinterculturalcontactsuchasprivate,publicorwork

envi-ronmentmightbemoresuccessful(Navasetal.,2005).Forexample,TurkishimmigrantsintheNetherlandsuseddifferent

acculturationstrategiesdependingupontheirpublicversusprivatelife(Arends-Tóth&VandeVijver,2004).Althoughpast

PSAresearchsuggeststhatintegrationmaybethebestapproach,thisstrategymayonlybeviableinamulticulturalsociety

(Berry,2001).IntheNetherlands,Turkishimmigrants’self-reportedbehaviorssuggestingintegrationwasverydifferent

fromactualbehaviorsduetotheinabilitytoactuatebecauseofthedominantDutchculture(Arends-Tóth,VandeVijver,&

Poortinga,2006).

Thereisawidespectrumofcountries’cultures;fromthosecountriesthatareverymulticulturalwithmanydiffering

subcultureswithoutasingledominantculture(ex.Canada,USA,etc.)tothosecountrieswhereasingledominantcultureis

maintained(i.e.theNetherlands,Japan,etc.).Acountrythatismulticulturalillustratesthatculturalminoritiesareencouraged

andpositivelyaccommodated(Downie,Koestner,ElGeledi,&Cree,2004)andnow,duetoglobalization,manyindividuals

aremulticultural.Animmigrantwhoismulti-cultural(orbi-cultural)canidentifywiththedistinctcultures,internalize

theculturalschemataandareknowledgeableabouttheculturalvalues,normsandbeliefs(Brannen&Thomas,2010).Due

tothesefactorsitisarguedthatthepresentstandardPSAacculturationframeworkisunsuitableforglobalapplication

(Doucerain,Dere,&Ryder,2013)andamoremulti-dimensional(includingindividualcharacteristics,familysituation,

coun-trymulticulturalism,globalizationofnorms,etc.)versionofacculturationisrequiredtoaccommodateactuality(Downie

etal.,2004).TheIBresearchalsocontinuestoargueoftenmodelsaretoosimplistictoaccountforindividualdifferencesas

peoplemayhavemultipleculturalidentities(Arnett,2002;Leung,Bhagat,Buchan,Erez,&Gibson,2005)and“bi-culturals”

areagrowingdemographicgroupofexpatriates(Lakshman,2013).Ourresearchassistsinidentifyingthecommonalities

withineachﬁeldtodrawuponandtoassistinthedevelopmentofmorecomplicatedmodels.

TheIBﬁeldhasbeenresearchingtheimportanceofculturaladjustmentasmoreemployeesarebeingsentoverseason

foreignassignmentsthaneverbefore(Okpara&Kabongo,2011)andthatitisestimatedthatasmanyas40%return

pre-maturelyduetotheinabilitytoadapttothehostcountries’culture(Kim&Slocum,2008;Tung,1988).Thetermusedin

theIBresearchiscross-culturaladjustmentaswellasacculturation,withtheIBdeﬁnitionof;theprocessofadaptationto

livingandworkinginaforeignenvironmentwiththeperceiveddegreeofpsychologicalcomfortandfamiliaritywiththe

newculture(Black,Mendenhall,&Oddou,1991).Thekeydifferenceinthetwoliteraturestreams(PSAversusIB)isthefocus

ontheworkenvironmentintheIBstream,butthatisnowchanging(e.g.Luetal.,2012).

Anotherkeydifferenceinthetwoliteraturestreamsisthatmigrationcouldbeconsideredapermanentmovebyan

immigrant,yetintheIBliteraturethemovebyanemployeecouldbetemporary,lastingbetween2and5years.However,

duetothisshortlengthoftime,onecouldarguethattheculturaladjustmentprocessismoreimportantduetotheinherent

natureoftheshortnessoftimeforsuccess.Forexample,theemployeesthataresenttooverseasassignmentsarecalled

expatriatesandplantoreturntotheirhomecountryatsomepoint(McGinley,2008).Empiricalevidencesuggeststhat

culturaladjustmentisanimportantaspectforsuccessinexpatriatejobperformance(Forster,1997;Harvey,1996)asthelack

ofassigneeadjustmentcausesinadequateperformance,psychologicalstress,negativeeffectsontheexpatriates’families,

aswellasthelong-termcareerrepercussionsuponrepatriationofafailedexpatriateassignments(Selmer,2001).

A recent trend in the IB expatriate research examines whether an expatriate’s capability to effectively adjust to

aninternationalassignmentis infact partly afunction oftheculturaldistancebetween theexpatriate’shome

coun-tryandthehostcountry(Colakoglu&Caligiuri,2008).ThisresearchmirrorsthePSAresearchinregardtoculturalﬁt.

Forexample,immigrants’ personalitytraitsand adaptationtothehostcountryis partlymoderatedbythedegreethe

(3)

OtherrecentPSAresearchisexploringculturalﬁtandtheuseofthestandardacculturationframework(Schieferetal., 2012).

TheIBresearchsuggeststhereare3facetsofexpatriateadjustmentofwhichtwoarenon-workrelated:interactionwith

membersofthelocalcommunityandadjustmenttothelifeconditionsofthehostcountry(Black,1988)withthework

adjustmentthethirdkeyfactorforsuccess.IthasbeensuggestedthatthereisalackinthePSAacculturationresearch

com-biningboththenon-workrelatedissuesassociatedwithimmigrationandsubsequentoverallproductivityinemployment.

ThissamePSAresearchfocusesonimmigrationstrategiesandjob-relatedoutcomessuchasemployeeperformance,job

satisfaction,commitment,interpersonalcommunicationandlevelconﬂict(Lu,Samaratunge,&Härtel,2011).

Perourreviewoftheseparateanddistinctresearchstreams,ourresultsidentiﬁedmanycommonthemesandconstructs

that current research suggests cross-roads the two research streams. Both research streams suggest that

accultura-tion/adjustmentwillbenecessaryfor theoverseasassigneeandtheimmigrant,yetvarious methodsand frameworks

havebeendevelopedseparately.Forexample,thestandardPSAframeworkofAssimilation,Integration,Marginalization

andSeparationisnotusedintheIBresearch.TheIBresearchfocusesonculturaladjustmentforworksuccessona

tem-porarybasis,whilethePSAresearchfocusesonhowimmigrantscanandshouldadapttoanewcountryonapermanent

basis.Theexpatriateisoftensentasanextensionofcorporateheadquartersandtoretainthecorporateculture,hencethe

acculturation/adaptationprocessmaynotthesameforbothresearchstreams.

Anothercommonthemeofbothstreamsofresearchistheenvironmentalinteractionwiththeindividual’straits;

illus-tratingtheimportanceforsuccessofculturalﬁtandthedifferencesbetweenthehome/hostcultures.Ourresearchexplores

thesetwostreamsofresearchforcommonalities,illustrateunder-researchedareasandthenwesuggestfutureresearch.

Henceweprovideamapoftheintellectualstructureofresearchinthisintersectiontodatebyanalyzingthecontentof389

differentarticlespublishedinscholarlyrelevantjournals.

Theresultsofourresearchindicatethat:(1)thestandard2×2matrixofacculturationisinsufﬁcient;(2)mostpast

researchfocusesonUSAtoothercountriesandviceversa,suggestingthereismuchworklefttoexploreotheracculturation

dimensions(“thereandbackagain”isnotthesameglobally);(3)asglobalorganizationsaredominatingthemarketplacewith

manyvariousstafﬁngforms,variablessuchascorporatecultureandmanagementinteractionwillneedtobeincorporated;

(4)researchneedstoincludedynamicsovertimeasmanyindividualswhohaveworkedoutsideoftheirhomecountryoften

becomemulti-culturalwithaglobalmindsetandthetypicalacculturationframeworkisinsufﬁcient;(5)pastacculturation

researchfocusesontheworkorthesocioculturalcontextseparately,whilebothneedtobeincluded;(6)andtheextended

family(parents,relatives,closefriends,etc.)needtobeconsidered.

2. Methodsanddatacollection

FollowingtheproceduresuggestedbyTranﬁeld,Denyer,andSmart(2003),westructuredtheprocessinthreesteps:

(1)journalsanddatabaseselectiondependinguponthetopic,(2)searchcriteriaanddictionaryofdescriptorsand(3)the

methodforanalyzingandmappingtheintellectualstructureoftheresearch.Overthenextsectionswedescribeeachstep.

Reproducibilityofresultsisacriticalissueinthistypeofresearchasitdependsonthedecisionstheresearchermakes.

SinceourgoalwastoobtainapictureofhowscholarshavedealtwiththeacculturationissuethroughouttheIBliterature,

weutilizedacorrespondenceanalysis,aquantitativemethodthatwilleasethereproducibilityofourresultsinthefuture.As

furtherexplainedbyBeh(2004),Greenacre(1984)andAkturk,Gun,andKumuk(2007),thehomogeneityanalysis,sometimes

referredtoascorrespondenceanalysis,issuitableforrepresentinggraphicallythepatternsunderlyingbehindaspaceof

observationsandcategoricalvariables.Inourcase,thisisformedbyarticles(observations)anddescriptors(variables).

Accordingly,weselectedthehomogeneityanalysisofvariancebymeanofalternatingleastsquares(HOMALS),following

othersimilarreviewsintheﬁeldofbusinessmanagement,suchasFurrer,Thomas,andGoussevskaia(2008)inthestrategic

managementﬁeldorDabic,González-Loureiro,andFurrer(2014)forMNEs’strategies.

2.1. Databaseselectionforsamplingarticles

WeselecteddatabaseswithinthewideareaofSocialSciences.Thesearchstrategydependedontheintersectionof

acculturationandthedifferentformsofoverseasassignments,regardlessofthejournals’speciﬁcﬁeld.Overseasassignment

isatopicthatcanbepositionedindifferentsubﬁeldssuchasinternationalhumanresourcemanagementormoregenerallyin

theIBﬁeld,whileacculturationcanbefoundinjournalspublishinginﬁeldssuchaspsychologyandsociology.Therefore,not

focusingonaparticularjournalenabledthepossibilitytoincludeanypossibleareaprovidedthatthetopicwasacculturation

onoverseasassignment.

Wecontrolledforthejournalqualityofthearticlesselectedbyselectingtwoofthemostreputeddatabasesindexingand

abstractingtop-qualityarticlesinSocialSciences,insearchofwhatRamos-RodríguezandRuíz-Navarro(2004)denominated

asknowledgecertiﬁedbytop-reputedscholarsinaﬁeld.Accordingly,weselectedtheSocialSciencesCitationIndex-SSCI

fromtheISI-WebofSciencesandScopus.Severalacademicjournalsmayhavebeenexcluded,whichmaybeconsidereda

(4)

2.2. Searchcriteriaanddictionaryofdescriptors

Wedesignedsearchsyntaxtoﬁndthelexemesofthekeywordsinourintersectionofacculturationandthedifferent

termsscholarsmayhaveusedtorefertointernationalassignments.Pastresearchonthelattersuggestedthatalackofclear

deﬁnitionforsomeofthesetermsexists.However,aﬁrstsearchyieldedalistofbothcommonandemergingforms.Baruch,

Dickmann,Altman,andBournois(2013)distinguish20differenttermsofinternationalworkexperiencesaccordingtoseven

dimensions,namelytime spent,intensityofinternationalcontracts,breadthofinteraction,legalcontext,international

workinstigator,extentofculturalgapandspeciﬁcposition.SometerminologiesirrelevanttoIBresearchwereexcluded

becauseourresearchwasfocusedoninternationalbusinesssoimmigration-relatedforms,non-businesspositions and

voluntaryorself-initiatedformswerenotincluded.Wethensummarizedthesetypesinthefollowing6categorieswhich

includethedifferentstagesoftheinternationalbusinesscycle:expatriate,inpatriate,ﬂexpatriate,propatriate,glopatriate

andrepatriate.

Thedeﬁnitionofexpatriateisstillcontroversialinbreadth,perhapsinﬂuencedbythepaceofthedynamicsinthebusiness

practicesaswehavemovedtowardglobalcompetition(Harvey,Speier,&Novicevic,2001).Wefoundthatsomescholarshave

usedthistermwithoutproperdeﬁnitionwithintheirarticle.Traditionallythedeﬁnitionusedfor“expatriate”isindividuals

thatarehighlycommittedtoaninternationalposition,whousuallyconductfewassignmentsforlessthanﬁveyearsand

frequentlyinasingleﬁrm(Harvey,Fisher,McPhail,&Moeller,2013).

Flexpatriatesareexpatriatesbuthavealowintheirlowercommitmenttoaglobalcareer.Theyaremorewillingto

occupyseveralshort-terminternationalpositions(McPhail,Fisher,Harvey,&Moeller,2012).Thischaracteristicmakes

themexperienceacculturationinadifferentwayastraditionalexpatriatesandtheymaynotexperienceanyacculturation

duetotheshortnessofthetimeimmersedinthatculture.Baruchetal.(2013)considertheﬂexpatriates’culturalgapasless

relevant,becausedeepculturaladaptationisnotexpected.

Thepropatriateisanewterminologyinregardtoexpatriates.Apropatriatecanbedeﬁnedasaprofessionalofoverseas

assignments,remainingabroadformorethanseventotenyears(Harveyetal.,2013).Theybecomeaculturalnomad(McPhail

etal.,2012)asthenumberofinternationalassignmentsandlengthincrease.Therefore,thisformofinternationalassignment

focusesonamulticulturalindividualwhodevelopsaglobalmindsetastheybecomemoreacculturatedinmanydifferent

cultures.Propatriatesholda“global”cultureperspective.

Glopatriateisanotheremergingtermforinternationalassignments.Baruchetal.(2013)refertothisformasglobetrotting.

Individualsimmersedinthistypeofoverseasassignmentsnormallyseekhighlevelsofautonomyandresponsibilityand

wouldfrequentlyremainonoverseasassignmentsindeﬁnitely.Theynormallyholdmorethan10yearsofglobalexperience

andseveralassignmentsindifferentculturalcontextswithvariousemployers(McPhailetal.,2012).Theyhavehigher

probabilityofde-identiﬁcationwiththehome-countrycultureandtheorganizationitself(Harveyetal.,2013).

Inpatriatesarethosehostcountryand/orthird-countrynationalswhoaretransferredintotheheadquartersofa

multi-nationaleitheronapermanentorasemi-permanentbasis(Harvey,1997).Theseindividualsarenotreverseexpatriates,

butbroughttocorporateheadquarterstoglobalizetopmanagementandtodevelopaglobalmindsetfortheﬁrm.Theywill

experiencecultureshockalongwiththeirfamilyandwillhavecorporatecultureissuesaswell(Moeller,Harvey,&Williams,

2010).

Finally,ourresearchincludestheresearchstreaminregardtorepatriation.Therepatriateclosesthecycleofthedifferent

formsofinternationalassignmentsastheyreturntothehomecountryafteroneormultipleassignments.Anindividual

whohaslivedoverseasandisreturningtotheiroriginalhomecountryisofparticularinterestforthestudyofacculturation

sinceitmayimplyareversedformofacculturationorre-acculturation(Linehan&Scullion,2002),whileSzkudlarek(2010)

emphasizingtheneedformoreresearchonthere-entryissue.HarveyandNovicevic(2006)deﬁnetherepatriateasthereturn

ofglobalexpatriatemanagersafterasequenceofmultipleoverseasrelocations,forextendedtimeperiods(e.g.upto20years)

and/ormultipleassignmentsinaglobalnetworkorganization.Therepatriateisoftenignoredinotherliterature(Baruch

etal.,2013),butisimportantastheindividualhasbeenacculturatedoverseasandmustdosoagainwhenreturningtotheir

homecountry.Researchsuggeststhatcultureshockofreturninghomeoftencausestheseindividualstoseekassignments

backoverseas.

Wecombinedthe6categoriesofIBassignmentwiththatofacculturation,followingBerry’soriginalwork(Berry,2005;

Berry,Kim,Minde,&Mok,1987;Berry,Kim,Power,Young,&Bujaki,1989)alongwiththeWardandKus’(2012)

concep-tualizationandclassiﬁcationscheme.Weincludedthelexeme“accultur*”inordertoﬁndallthederivatives.Sooursearch

strategycomprisedanyoftheformsofoverseasassignmentsandanyoftheexpressionsrelatedwithacculturation.

Datawereextractedandthesearchstrategyyieldedasampleof389articles.Themainkeywordswereextractedwithin

thetitleandauthors’keywordsﬁeldsbymeansofWordstat6.1software.Thisﬁrststepprovidedahugelistof990keywords

(nouns,adjectivesandverbs).Theaimofthisstepwastoobtainaworkablelistofdescriptorstobedepictedinthemap.

Afterdeletingsomemeaninglesswordsforourtopic,weadoptedaprocess-basedviewandsummarizedthosekeywords

inﬁveblocksofinformationand34descriptors:antecedents,moderatorormediatingvariables;toolsandorientationsfor

managingacculturation;outcomesoftheprocess;formsofoverseasassignments;andgeographicalareas.Table1

illustratesthespeciﬁckeywordswithineachblockanddescriptor.Theextractionofthespeciﬁcgeographicareaswill

enabledetectingpossiblegapsregardingcontextualparticularities.Weshouldmentionthatthelistofthisintersection’s

descriptorsemergednaturallyfromthesampleinsteadofbiasedinclusionsforcedbyscholarswhenconductingaprioristic

(5)

Table1

Dictionaryofdescriptorsandkeywords.Descriptorsarisenfromthereviewof389articleson“acculturation”andformsofoverseasassignments(e.g. expatriates,glopatriates,ﬂexpatriates,...).

Antecedents,moderatorormediatingvariables Descriptor(shortname) Keywords(content)

1.Context Contextualfactors;socio-cultural;economic;historical;political;hostcountry;homecountry;nationalculture; culturaldistance;culturaltolerance;globaliz(s)ation;economicdevelopment;similarityofsocialinstitutions; similarityoflanguage;culturaltaboos.

2.Organization Strategy;ﬁrmculture;organizationalculture;parentorganization;headquarter(s);hostorganization;host enterprise;subsidiary/ies;MNCstructure;strategicplanning;organiz(s)ationalsupport;organiz(s)ationalassistance; successionplanning;organiz(s)ational(dynamic)competencies;stafﬁng;recruitment;repatriationprogram. 3.Individual Personalitytraits;extroversion;agreeableness;conscientio(us)sness;neuroticism;opennesstoexperience;technical

competence;behavior(u)r;skill;ability/ies;feeling(s);individualcompetencies;talent;entrepreneurialorientation; livedexperience;motivation;individualtolerance;managerialresourcefulness;managerialcompetence;technical competence;cross-culturalexperience;relationalskills;individuallifecycle;interculturalexperience;maritalstatus; relocationexperience;personalitytype;culturaltoughness;culturallytough;self-oriented;others-oriented; perception;mentalhealth;mood;emotion;sensitivity;culturaladaptability.

4.Globalmindset Globalmind(-)set;culturalintelligence;cognitiveintelligence;motivationalintelligence;metacognitiveintelligence; globalbusinessorientation;open-minded;psychologicalcapital;cosmopolitanism;thinkingglobally;opennessto culturaldiversity;globalstateofmind;propensitytoengage;abilitytoadapt;curiosity;seekingopportunities;glocal. 5.Position Hierarchicallevel;jobcharacteristics;roleconﬂict;positioninorganiz(s)ation;characteroftheposition;focusof

position;manager.

6.Commitment Commitmenttotheorganization;commitmenttoassignment.

7.Time Timeofstay;lengthofstay;temporary;semi-permanentbasis;permanentbasis;shortterm;longterm;overseas experience;pastexperience;previousexperience;internationalexperience;extendedtimeperiod;endurance. 8.Diversity Diversityworkforce;multiculturalism;multiculturalworkforce;culturalautonomy;thirdculture;hyper-diversity;

super-diversity;intercultural;cosmopolitan.

9.Family Familyacculturation;familyadjustment;adolescent;teen;teenager;children;espouse;husband;Familycontext; dualcareerissues.

10.Ethnicrelations Ethnicstereotypes;ethnicattitudes;ethnicprejudice;multiculturalideology;security;discrimination. Outcomes

Descriptor(shortname) Keywords(content)

11.Acculturation Acculturation;acculturationprocess;acculturative;mutualaccommodation;psychologicaladjustment(s); psychologicaladaptation(s);socioculturaladjustment(s);socioculturaladaptation(s);contactparticipation;cultural adaptation;culturalmaintenance;behavior(u)ralshift(s);culturalidentity;re-acculturation;cultural

maintenance-contact;culturalmaintenance-adoption;exposuretoculturalnorms.

12.Adjustment Cross-culturaladjustment;workadjustment;adjustmenttowork;cross-culturalmanagement;adjustmentto interacting;adjustmenttothegeneralenvironment;tolerance.

13.Positiveoutcomes Harmony;effectiveness;success;lifesatisfaction;socialsuccess;distressing;satisfaction.

14.Negativeoutcomes Stress;acculturativestress;failure;prematuretermination;lifedissatisfaction;socialdysfunction;conﬂict;tension; rejection;maladjustment;misﬁt;strain(s);dailyhassles;ill;illness;unhealthy;trauma;traumatiz(s)ed;neurosis; anxiety;depressed;depression.

Toolsandorientationsformanagingacculturation Descriptor(shortname) Keywords(content) 15.Assimilation Assimilation;meltingpot. 16.Separation Separation,segregation. 17.Integration Integration;biculturalism.

18.Marginalization Marginalization;deculturation;culturelessness;exclusion.

19.Socialization Socialization;socialsupport;socialactivity;shopping;socialnetworking.

20.Copingstrategies Acculturativelearning;mentoring;pre(-)departureselection;pre(-)departuretraining;emotion-focusedcoping strategies;problem-focusedcopingstrategies;withdrawal;palliativecoping;becomingsociallyintegrated; avoidance;cognitiveavoidance;problemreappraisal;situationcontrol;ethnocentrism;positivecomparison; resignation;negativecomparison;seekingtaskhelp;expectationchange;relationshipbuilding;empathizing;culture learning;planfulproblemsolving;refusingresponsibility;confrontation;self-control;givingtaskhelp;reinforcement substitution;micro(-)politics;focusation;seekingemotionalsupport;givingemotionalsupport;culturalchange; developmentprogram;pre(-)departuretraining;organizationalsupport;cross-culturaltraining.

21.Appraisal Appraisal;assessment;performance;monitoringprocess;remedialactionprogram;feedback. 22.Compensation Compensation;reward;economicallyfair;globalstockoptions;salary;internationalcompensation. Formsofoverseasassignments

23.Expatriate Expatriate.

24.Glopatriate Glopatriate;culturalnomad;globalcareer. 25.Flexpatriate Flexpatriate.

26.Inpatriate Inpatriate;impatriate;patriate;inpatriation;impatriation;patriation. 27.Repatriate Repatriate;repatriation.

(6)

Table1(Continued) Geographicalareas

28.Europe EU/Europe/European;North-European;Czech;Finland;Germany/German;Dutch;Greece;Poland; Russia/Russian/Soviet;Spain;UK/England/British.

29.NorthAmerica Canada/Canadian;TheUSA/United-States/UnitedStates/USA/California. 30.LatinAmericaandtheCaribbean Brazil;Mexico/Mexican.

31.Asia-Paciﬁc Australia/Australian;Japan/Japanese;Korea;NewZealand.

32.South-EastAsia Asia/Asian;China/Chinese;Hong-Kong;India;Malaysia;Singapore/Singaporean;Taiwan/Taiwanese;Viet Nam/VietNamese.

33.MiddleEast(WestAsia) Arab/ArabiaSaudi;Israel;Jordan;Kazakhstan;Kuwait.

34.Africa Africa/African;Afghan/Afghanistan;Algeria/Algerian;Egypt;Nigeria;South-Africa;Sudan;Syria/Syrian. Source:owndraftfromcontentanalysisofthesampleof389articles.

2.3. Methodforanalyzingandmappingtheintellectualstructureofresearch

Literaturereviewresearchwithintheﬁeldofinternationalhumanresourcemanagement isconductedbymanually reviewingcertainarticlesdependingonthescholar’sinsightsandexpertise,todemonstratethevalidityoftheresearcher’s position,suchasBonache,Brewster,andSuutari(2001),Schuler,Budhwar,andFlorkowski(2002)orDeCieri,Cox,and Fenwick(2007).Thisisappropriatefordevelopingatheoreticalorconceptualpaper.However,whentheintentionisto

providetheintellectualstructureofresearchofaﬁeld,theuseofunbiasedquantitativemethods,atleastinpartofthe

process,areadvisable.Usingaquantitativetechniqueisbeneﬁcialtominimizethepossibleimpactoftheresearcher’sbias

whenconductingthereview.Inaddition,theresultbasedonquantitativetechniquesenablesanalyzingalargersampleof

articlesthanwhenconductedmanually.

TheHOMALSprocessisamodernizedversionoftheGuttman’siterativealgorithm(1941)and,followingtheexplanation

ofHildebrandandMüller-Funk(2012),itaimsatminimizingalossfunction.

Themainoutcomeofthisprocedureisshowninaproximitymapwherethekeywordsaredepictedintwoaxes.The

positionsrepresentanactualdistancebetweenthepairsofkeywordsintermsofassociation.Thosepairsofkeywords

appearingjointlyinlargeportionofarticleswillappearcloserinthemap(Hoffman&Franke,1986;Michailidis&DeLeeuw,

1998).Similarly,iftheywerecoveredbyseparatearticlesinalargeextent,theywillappeardistant.Thismapenablesthe

detectionofpossiblegapsofresearch:thosedescriptorsappearingmoredistantinthemap.

Intermsofgoodness-of-ﬁtindexesitcanbeanalyzedessentiallytheeigenvaluessincethisalgorithmisﬁnallyreduced

toaproblemofeigenvalues(Michailidis&DeLeeuw,1998).Accordingtothelatterauthors,someinterestingpropertiesof

theHOMALSsolutionrelatewiththeeigenvaluesandthedimensionsobtained:(a)thedimensionsarenested,i.e.theﬁrst

pi-dimensionsareidenticalwhenonecomputesi+nadditionaldimensions;(b)thesolutionsforsubsequentdimensionsare

ordered,i.e.theﬁrstdimensionhastheabsolutemaximumeigenvalue,theseconddimensionhasthemaximumabsolute

eigenvaluesubjecttotheconstraintthatX(·,2)isuncorrelatedtoX(1,·)andsoforth;(c)thesolutionisinvariantunder

rotationsoftheobjectscoresinthep-dimensionalspaceandofthecategoryquantiﬁcations.

Therefore,thisisaniterativeprocessthathelpscontroltheresearcherbiaswhenmappingaresearchﬁeld.However,this

characteristicmustbeusedcarefullyintermsoflogicalmeaninginsubsequentmaps.Westronglyrecommendanumber

ofpointsbetween25and40dependingupontheﬁeldstudied.Thisisbecauselessfrequentdescriptorstendtolocatein

theedgesoftheaxeswhilethoseappearingmorefrequentlytendtolocateinthecenteroftheaxes.Therefore,wesuggest

includingthosedescriptorsthatarelessfrequentintheperiodanalyzedbutthatareemergingtopicsintherecentperiods.

Alimitationofourmethodisthatthosetopicsabsolutelyeludedbyscholarswillremainunveiledinthemap.Suggesting

additionaltopicsisuptotheresearcherifandonlyiftheirrelevanceisstronglyarguedintermsofscholarlyrelevanceand

utilityforpractitionersintheﬁeld.

2.4. Descriptorsandtrends

Oursearchstrategyyielded389articlesdealingwithacculturationintheIBresearch.ThisisconsistentwiththeDabic,

González-Loureiro,andHarvey’s(2015)reviewoftheexpatriatetopic,whofound438papers,whichimpliesthat

accultur-ationisapervadingissuewithinthetopicofinternationalhumanresourcemanagementandyetwelackacomprehensive

listofpossibleframeworkstobeappliedinthisresearch.Wesplitthetimeframeofouranalysisintwoinordertocontrol

fortheinﬂuenceoftheBerry’stwo-by-two‘acculturationstrategies’matrix(2005).Asaresult,Tables2and3showsthe

breakdownofthefrequencyof34descriptorsrelativetothetotalnumberofarticlesineachtimeframe,namely113articles

during1976–2004and276papersduring2005–2014.

Intermsoffrequency,thetopkeywordsaddressedinthetwoliteraturestreamsare;organization,context,negative

outcomes,adjustmentandindividual(seeTable2).Thesetermsareoftenusedtogetherastheyarerelated,forexample

individualandadjustment(orlackthere-of)couldhavenegativeoutcomes.Thecontextoftheassignmentfortheindividual

alsowouldbecombinedforresearch.Theorganizationkeywordhasgonefrom50mentionsinthe28yearsofresearch

(7)

Table2

Largestpastresearchfocus(*).

Descriptors P1:1976–2004 P2:2005–2014 Total %tototal

# %tototal # %tototal Organization 50 7.01% 151 8.42% 201 8.02% Context 42 5.89% 144 8.03% 186 7.42% Negativeoutcomes 56 7.85% 144 8.03% 200 7.98% Adjustment 31 4.35% 142 7.92% 173 6.90% Individual 52 7.29% 128 7.13% 180 7.18% Inpatriate 67 9.40% 127 7.08% 194 7.74% Position 40 5.61% 110 6.13% 150 5.98% Expatriate 57 7.99% 108 6.02% 165 6.58% Acculturation 64 8.98% 99 5.52% 163 6.50%

SouthEastAsia 18 2.52% 82 4.57% 100 3.99%

Appraisal 29 4.07% 78 4.35% 107 4.27% Positiveoutcomes 41 5.75% 73 4.07% 114 4.55% AsiaPaciﬁc 18 2.52% 44 2.45% 62 2.47% Glopatriate 15 2.10% 43 2.40% 58 2.31% NorthAmerica 20 2.81% 39 2.17% 59 2.35% Copingstrategies 11 1.54% 37 2.06% 48 1.91% Diversity 11 1.54% 36 2.01% 47 1.87% Integration 9 1.26% 23 1.28% 32 1.28% Repatriate 11 1.54% 19 1.06% 30 1.20%

MiddleEast(WestAsia) 6 0.84% 18 1.00% 24 0.96%

Family 10 1.40% 17 0.95% 27 1.08%

Socialization 11 1.54% 17 0.95% 28 1.12%

Ethnicrelations 12 1.68% 17 0.95% 29 1.16%

Globalmindset 2 0.28% 16 0.89% 18 0.72%

Time 6 0.84% 16 0.89% 22 0.88%

LatinAmericaandtheCaribbean 4 0.56% 12 0.67% 16 0.64%

Europe 1 0.14% 11 0.61% 12 0.48% Africa 3 0.42% 11 0.61% 14 0.56% Commitment 4 0.56% 9 0.50% 13 0.52% Flexpatriate 6 0.84% 8 0.45% 14 0.56% Compensation 3 0.42% 7 0.39% 10 0.40% Assimilation 2 0.28% 5 0.28% 7 0.28% Marginalization 0 0.00% 2 0.11% 2 0.08% Separation 1 0.14% 1 0.06% 2 0.08% Totalfreq. 713 100.00% 1794 100.00% 2507 100.00%

(*)Sortedbythemostrecentperiod(2005–2014).

continuetodominatethebusinesslandscape,thefocuswillbecomemoreuponMNCs,theircorporatecultureandthe managementofglobalemployees.

Intermsoftrendsoccurringintheresearch(seeTable3),keywordssuchasadjustment,SoutheastAsia,contextand

organizationcontinuetoberesearched.HowevernascentresearchthatappearstobeofnewinterestisEurope,global

mindset,Africa,theMiddleEast,LatinAmericaandtheCaribbeanandcopingstrategies.Pastresearchfocusedonwestern

countries(inparticular,USA)adaptingtoforeignmarketsormigrantsadaptingtotheUSA.Nowresearchintheglobal

marketplaceisexploringregionsthathavebeenlargelyignored,butarebecomingmoreprominentintheglobaleconomy.

2.5. ThemapoftheintellectualstructureofresearchonacculturationinIBresearch

TheHOMALSprocedureconductedonthematrixof389articlesby34descriptorsdeliveredthemapoftheintellectual

structureofresearchonacculturationininternationalassignments(seeFig.1).Themapshouldbeinterpretedalongwith

thefrequenciesshowedinTable1.

FollowingthesuggestionofHoffmanandFranke(1986),HoffmanandDeLeeuw(1992)andMichailidisandDeLeeuw,

oncethemapisobtained,onemustlabelthepolesaccordingtothedescriptorslocatedproximaltoeachpole.TheHOMALS

procedureyieldsthequantiﬁcations,i.e.thecoordinatesofeachdescriptorinthetwodimensions.

Ontherightside,descriptorsaregovernedbyglopatriate,timeandrepatriateinfrequencyterms.Ifweincludedlower

frequenttermswithhighvaluesandproximaldescriptors,thenﬂexpatriate,Europe,compensationandfamilyareincluded.

Thispoleseemstosummarizetheroleoftimeontheacculturationprocess,inparticularinthreerelevantformsof

interna-tionalassignments:glopatriates,repatriatesandﬂexpatriates.Thisiswhywesuggestlabelingthispoleas“dynamicsover

time”.

Ontheleftside,descriptorsrelatemainlywithmarginalization,integrationandassimilationholdthehighestvaluesin

absolutetermsinthispole.Globalmindset,adjustmentanddiversitylocatenear.Thispoleappearstorecompilethetraditional

(8)

Table3

Trendsinresearch(*).

Descriptors %tototalinP1(1976–2004) %tototalinP2(2005–2014) ChangefromP1toP2

Europe 0.14% 0.61% 90.91%

Globalmindset 0.28% 0.89% 87.50%

Adjustment 4.35% 7.92% 78.17%

SouthEastAsia 2.52% 4.57% 78.05%

Africa 0.42% 0.61% 72.73%

Context 5.89% 8.03% 70.83%

Copingstrategies 1.54% 2.06% 70.27%

Diversity 1.54% 2.01% 69.44%

Organization 7.01% 8.42% 66.89%

MiddleEast(WestAsia) 0.84% 1.00% 66.67%

LatinAmericaandtheCaribbean 0.56% 0.67% 66.67%

Glopatriate 2.10% 2.40% 65.12% Position 5.61% 6.13% 63.64% Appraisal 4.07% 4.35% 62.82% Time 0.84% 0.89% 62.50% Negativeoutcomes 7.85% 8.03% 61.11% Integration 1.26% 1.28% 60.87% Assimilation 0.28% 0.28% 60.00% Individual 7.29% 7.13% 59.38% AsiaPaciﬁc 2.52% 2.45% 59.09% Compensation 0.42% 0.39% 57.14% Commitment 0.56% 0.50% 55.56% NorthAmerica 2.81% 2.17% 48.72% Inpatriate 9.40% 7.08% 47.24% Expatriate 7.99% 6.02% 47.22% Positiveoutcomes 5.75% 4.07% 43.84% Repatriate 1.54% 1.06% 42.11% Family 1.40% 0.95% 41.18% Acculturation 8.98% 5.52% 35.35% Socialization 1.54% 0.95% 35.29% Ethnicrelations 1.68% 0.95% 29.41% Flexpatriate 0.84% 0.45% 25.00% Marginalization 0.00% 0.11% 100.00% Separation 0.14% 0.06% 0.00% Total 100.00% 100.00%

(*)Sortedby“PerCentChange”ignoring“Marginalization”.

moreproximaltothispole,thenitbecomesapparentthatthepolecombinesnewchallengesandthetraditionalacculturation strategies.Wethenimplylabelingthispoleas“newapplicationsofacculturationstrategies”.

Intheuppersideofthemap,descriptorsareﬂexpatriate,adjustment,globalmindset,organization,integrationanddiversity. SouthEastAsiaandAfricareachedthemostextremevaluesforgeographicalareasinthatpole.Thecontentseemstobe relatedwiththeactionsandprocessofadaptationatwork,atanorganizationallevel.Accordingly,weproposelabelingthis as“adjustmentatwork”.

Onthebottomside,keydescriptorsareglopatriate,compensation,family,separation,repatriate,assimilation,inpatriate, expatriateandmarginalization.Europeisthemaingeographicalarea. Ajointconsiderationofthedescriptorsseemsto suggestissuesdealingwithfamilyissuesinaccordancewiththeBerry’sacculturationstrategies.Wethensuggestthat “familyacculturation”appropriatelyrepresentsthecontentofthispole.

3. Discussionofresults

Pastresearchhasbeengovernedbyadjustment-acculturationasshowedinthepolesoftheseconddimension.Two complementaryviewpointsthatsuggesttheexistenceoftwolevelsofanalysis:theroleofworkandthewiderscopeofthe placewherehe/sheandhis/herfamilylive.Also,extantresearchonacculturationstrategieshasfrequentlyneglectedthe issueofdynamicsalongtime,astheﬁrstdimensionshowed.

Theadjustment-acculturationhasbeenresearchedasmutuallyexclusionaryrealmsandscholarshavedevotedlittleeffort tojointheanalyses.InspiteoftheBlackandcolleagues’attempts(e.g.Blacketal.,1991)topushforwardanintegrative

viewpointofdomesticandinternationaladjustmentorthoseemphasizingtheroleofspouses(e.g.Black&Stephens,1989),

thereisstillroomforwiderparadigmsbycombiningtensionsemergingatmultipleconcentriclevelsaroundtheassignee.

Moreover,Black(1988,1990)andcolleagues(Blacketal.,1991)groupedissuesaroundadjustmentatthreelevels:adjustment

towork,adjustmenttointeractingwithhostnationalsandadjustmenttothegeneralenvironment.However,littleisknown

(9)

Fig.1.MapoftheintellectualstructureofresearchonacculturationinInternationalBusinessResearch(quantiﬁcationsoftheHomalsprocedureforthe fullperiod1976–2014)

Source:owndraftfromthe389articles.

Theinteractionindividual-organizationatbothoriginandhostlocationsistheﬁrstlevelofanalysis.Awiderfocuswill

enlargethescopeofanalysistowardasecondtypeoforganization,i.e.his/herfamilygroup,alongwithallthefamily’s

individuallivingabroadandthoseremainingatthehomecountry.

Articlesdealingwithacculturationininternationalassigneesquiteoftenconsiderworkandsocioculturalcontext

sepa-rately.Itisnotsolelyaquestionofindividualadaptationatworkorfamilyadaptationinthehostcountry.Itisaquestion

ofbothlevels.Thisimpliesthatmorethantwocultures(dominantanddominated)maybeinteractingbecauseofthe

pos-sibilityofsmallculturaldifferencesinthefamilygroup.Asglobalizationcontinuesto“ﬂatten”theworldandinternational

assignmentsbecomeacommonpractice,itisverylikelythatwemayﬁndanincreasingnumberofmulticulturalfamilies.

Thistypeoffamilyoffersaninterestingopportunitytoresearchfurtheraswellastoassisttobuildmorecompleteparadigms

duetothecomplexityofthisissue.

Thepossibilityofinteractiveeffectsbetweenbothlevelsofanalysis,workandhomeatoriginandhostcultures,should

befurtherincorporatedtofutureframeworks.Thisviewmayopennewextensionsforfutureresearchifweincludethe

notionofextendedfamily,i.e.therelationshipswithparents,relativesandclosefriendswhoremainedattheorigincountry.

Theymustgothroughtheirownacculturationprocesswhenmaintainingtheirrelationshipswithfamilylocatedoverseas.

Acculturationspreadstherequiredadaptationfromworktopersonallife,whilescholarsrefertoadjustmentastheimpact

ofadaptationatwork.Asthemapshows,thereisroomformoreintegrativestudiesofadjustmentandacculturationinstead

ofascribingtheresearchtooneoranother.

ThehorizontaldimensionisabouttheapplicationsofacculturativestrategiesbeyondtheculturaldifferencesofWestern

andEasterperspectives.LocationssuchasLatin-AmericaandtheCaribbeanorthebig“unknown”Africadeservefurther

attentionfromscholarsifauniversaltheoryofmanagingacculturationistobedeveloped.Furthermore,globalbusiness

continuestoevolveandtopicssuchasinternationalventuressuchastheINVs,born-globalorthereversedviewpointof

emergingmarketsmultinationalsdeservefurtherattention(seeforinstanceThite,Wilkinson,&Shah,2012orFan,Zhang,

&Zhu,2013).Thosetopics/organizationalstructuresandissuesrequireamorecompleteframeworkbeyondthesimplistic

viewoftwo-by-twomatrix.

Inthehorizontaldimension,wefoundthemostunderinvestigatedissuewithinthisﬁeld,theconceptoftimewith

themaindescriptors.Moreempiricalresearchisneededtoreachalongitudinalperspectiveofacculturation,aviewpoint

along timethatmayyieldatheoryofstages andalifecyclealongthelifetimeofinternationalassigneesand

interna-tionalorganizations.Todate,timehasbeenconsideredaspartofthedeﬁnitionofﬂexpatriates.Apervasiveissueisthe

time of assignment.Research onacculturation hasyieldedan impressive listof coping strategies,as those Stahland

Caligiuri’s(2005)documentedintheirstudyofcopingstrategiesadoptedbyexpatriates.Copingisdeﬁnedastheefforts

(10)

(Lazarus&Launier,1978,p.311).StahlandCaligiuri(2005)appliedthelatterdeﬁnitiontoexpatriates,sotheydeﬁnecoping

strategiesastheactionsandproceduresexpatriatesusetomanage,reduceorovercometheenvironmental(e.g.cultural

differences)andinternaldemands(e.g.roleconﬂict)theyencounter.Theseauthorsshowedthatproblem-focusedrather

thanemotion-focusedstrategiesmaybemoreeffectiveregardingtheintentiontoremainontheinternationalassignment.

However,thelatterismoderatedbycontextualfactorssuchashierarchicallevel,timeontheassignmentandcultural

dis-tance.Accordingly,timeshouldbeincludedasacriticalmoderatorinrevisitingsomestudiesonacculturation,whilecoping

strategiesopenamultidimensionalpathforfutureresearchonacculturation.

However,majordifﬁcultiesarisewhenonetriestoconductaquantitative,longitudinalstudybecauseoftheproblemsto

obtainlargeandconsistentsamplesrequiredbydurationmodels,suchasCoxregressions.Perhapsscholarsshouldconduct

theireffortstodesigningcollaborativeresearchprojectsforthesake ofscienceandpractitioners. Westilllackstudies

analyzingthelong-termeffectofacculturation,perhapsinﬂuencedbytherelativeadolescenceofthistopic.Overthenext

decadesandaftermorethan40yearsofresearchonissuessuchasexpatriates(seeDabicetal.,2015),therehasbeen

amassedarelevantbodyofknowledgeininternationalhumanresourcemanagement,inordertobuildanintegrativetheory

ofinternationalassignments.

4. Conclusionsandimplications

Ourresearchattemptstoreviewtheappropriatenessofextantacculturationframeworksinregardtothedifferingtypes

ofoverseasassignments,suggestwhereacculturationinthe21stcenturyshouldfocusandtoproposeafutureresearch

agendatoguidemorescholarlyworkinthisarea.Themotivationforourresearchistherearetwostreamsofoverlapping

literature;thatofacculturationandinternationalassigneeadjustment.Therearesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweenthe

twoliteraturestreamsandrecentresearchsuggeststhattheynowseemtobecoalescingwithafocusonboththecultural

nuancesofmovingoverseas,adaptationandsubsequentjobsuccess.Inthepast,theinterculturalresearchﬁeldfocusedon

migrantacculturationandtheirstrategiesforadaptation(Assimilation,Integration,MarginalizationandSeparation)and

howvariationsinacculturationaffecthowwellindividualsadapttotheirsociety.IBresearchprimarilyusedtheterm

cross-culturaladjustmentandisdeﬁnedastheprocessofadaptationtolivingandworkinginaforeignenvironmentwiththe

perceiveddegreeofpsychologicalcomfortandfamiliaritywiththenewculture.Thekeydifferenceinthetwoliterature

streamsisthefocusontheworkenvironmentmoresointheIBstreamthaninthecross-culturalliterature,butthatappears

tobechanging.

RecentacculturationresearchisnowexaminingresearchthathasbeenthefocusoftheIBﬁeld,thatofexaminingwork

relatedattitudesinregardtoacculturationorientationsandwork-relatedwell-being(buttheIBﬁelddoesnotusethe

adap-tationframework,butwilloftenresorttoHofstede’sframeworkofnationalcultureamongstothers).Intheintercultural

ﬁeldresearchersarguethatthereisalackintheacculturationresearchcombiningboththenon-workrelatedissues

associ-atedwithimmigrationandsubsequentoverallproductivityinemployment.Assuch,newresearchisintroducingaresearch

focusonimmigrationstrategiesandjob-relatedoutcomessuchasemployeeperformance,jobsatisfaction,commitment,

interpersonalcommunicationandlevelconﬂict.

Arecenttrendinexpatriateresearchexamineswhetheranexpatriate’scapabilitytoeffectivelyadjusttoaninternational

assignmentisinfactpartlyafunctionoftheculturaldistancebetweentheexpatriate’shomecountryandthehostcountry.

Thisresearchmirrorstheinterculturalresearchinregardtoculturalﬁt.Forexample,immigrants’personalitytraitsand

adaptationtothehostcountryispartlymoderatedbythedegreethepersonalitytraitsmatchthenorms,valuesandpractices

ofthehostcountrypopulation.

Ourresearchattemptstoidentifysomeoftheoverlaps, underresearchedareasandsuggestionsforfutureresearch.

Bothglobalmindsetandtimearekeyconceptsinrelationtoacculturationeitherseparatelyorasjointvariables.Although

successfulcorporationshaveidentiﬁedthefamilyimportanceinthesuccessofoverseasassignmentsduetotheirintense

trainingofboththeexpatriateandtheirfamily,ourresearchsuggeststhatthereisstillworktodointhisareasincescholars

inthistopichavegenerallyfocusedonwillingnesstotakeanassignmentandadjustment.Otherimportanttopics,suchasthe

careersof‘trailingpartners’andthedifﬁcultiesoffulﬁllingextendedfamilyobligations(e.g.,eldercare)whilegeographically

dispersedhavebeenlesswellresearched.Relativetoexpatriatefamilies,littleisknownaboutthefamilyexperiencesof

otherpracticesofglobalemployeessuchasfrequentinternationalbusinesstravelers(IBTs)orshort-termassigneesglobal

domestics.Finally,althoughthereissigniﬁcantcomparisonsofEastversusWest(ChinaandUSAforexample),thereisa

dearthofresearchinbothEuropeandAfrica.BothareasareofinterestinregardtoacculturationasAfricaisadifﬁcult

researchareawithonebillionpeoplethatarevastlydifferentoverahugediversesetofcultures,whileEuropeisamature

stablemarketplacewithdominantculturesthatareunitedmostlyunderonecurrency.

Ourresearchhassomeimplicationsforpractitioners.Currently,thereisnouniversaltheoryforguidanceandresults

willdependonthecontextofthesituation.Inthecaseofacculturationthiscontextismultifacetedsoitisevenmore

complicated.Therefore,whatisabestpracticeintheUSAmaynotbevalidinanothercountry.Practitionersshouldtakeinto

accountthecontext(s)wheretheir“bestpractices”workedandthencompareit/themwiththenewcontextinordertomake

theadaptationsrequired.Thesuccessoftheprocessofadjustmentatworkdoesnotdependsolelyonwhatoccursinthe

workplace,butmustincludeawiderperspective:thatofthefamilyacculturationprocess.Thetypeofoverseasassignment

(11)

“bestpractices”.Thisentailsthatthecompensationisnotonlyfortheexpatriatebutmustincludetheotherfamilymembers’

needsaspartofthecompensation.

References

Akturk,D.,Gun,S.,&Kumuk,T.(2007).Multiplecorrespondenceanalysistechniqueusedinanalyzingthecategoricaldatainsocialsciences.Journalof AppliedSciences,7(4),585–588.

Arends-Tóth,J.,&VandeVijver,F.J.(2004).Domainsanddimensionsinacculturation:ImplicittheoriesofTurkish–Dutch.InternationalJournalofIntercultural Relations,28(1),19–35.

Arends-Tóth,J.,VandeVijver,F.J.,&Poortinga,Y.H.(2006).Theinﬂuenceofmethodfactorsontherelationbetweenattitudesandself-reportedbehaviors intheassessmentofacculturation.EuropeanJournalofPsychologicalAssessment,22(1),4–12.

Arnett,J.J.(2002).Thepsychologyofglobalization.AmericanPsychologist,57(10),774.

Baruch,Y.,Dickmann,M.,Altman,Y.,&Bournois,F.(2013).Exploringinternationalwork:Typesanddimensionsofglobalcareers.TheInternationalJournal ofHumanResourceManagement,24(12),2369–2393.

Beh,E.J.(2004).Simplecorrespondenceanalysis:Abibliographicreview.InternationalStatisticalReview,72(2),257–284.

Berry,J.W.(1997).Immigration,acculturation,andadaptation.AppliedPsychology,46(1),5–34.

Berry,J.W.(2001).Apsychologyofimmigration.JournalofSocialIssues,57(3),615–631.

Berry,J.W.(2005).Acculturation:Livingsuccessfullyintwocultures.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations,29(6),697–712.

Berry,J.W.,Kim,U.,Minde,T.,&Mok,D.(1987).Comparativestudiesofacculturativestress.InternationalMigrationReview,21(3),491–511.

Berry,J.W.,Kim,U.,Power,S.,Young,M.,&Bujaki,M.(1989).Acculturationattitudesinpluralsocieties.AppliedPsychology,38(2),185–206.

Berry,J.W.,Phinney,J.S.,Kwak,K.,&Sam,D.L.(2006).Introduction:Goalsandresearchframeworkforstudyingimmigrantyouth.

Berry,J.W.,&Sabatier,C.(2010).Acculturation,discrimination,andadaptationamongsecondgenerationimmigrantyouthinMontrealandParis. Interna-tionalJournalofInterculturalRelations,34(3),191–207.

Black,J.S.(1988).Workroletransitions:AstudyofAmericanexpatriatemanagersinJapan.JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,19(2),277–294.

Black,J.S.(1990).TherelationshipofpersonalcharacteristicswiththeadjustmentofJapaneseexpatriatemanagers.ManagementInternationalReview, 30(2),119–134.

Black,J.S.,Mendenhall,M.,&Oddou,G.(1991).Towardacomprehensivemodelofinternationaladjustment:Anintegrationofmultipletheoretical perspectives.AcademyofManagementReview,16(2),291–317.

Black,J.S.,&Stephens,G.K.(1989).TheinﬂuenceofthespouseonAmericanexpatriateadjustmentandintenttostayinPaciﬁcRimoverseasassignments. JournalofManagement,15(4),529–544.

Bonache,J.,Brewster,C.,&Suutari,V.(2001).Expatriation:Adevelopingresearchagenda.ThunderbirdInternationalBusinessReview,43(1),3–20.

Brannen,M.Y.,&Thomas,D.C.(2010).Biculturalindividualsinorganizationsimplicationsandopportunity.InternationalJournalofCrossCultural Manage-ment,10(1),5–16.

Colakoglu,S.,&Caligiuri,P.(2008).Culturaldistance,expatriatestafﬁngandsubsidiaryperformance:ThecaseofUSsubsidiariesofmultinational corpo-rations.TheInternationalJournalofHumanResourceManagement,19(2),223–239.

Dabic,M.,González-Loureiro,M.,&Furrer,O.(2014).Researchonthestrategyofmultinationalenterprises:Keyapproachesandnewavenues.BQRBusiness QuarterlyResearch,17(2),129–148.

Dabic,M.,González-Loureiro,M.,&Harvey,M.(2015).Evolvingresearchonexpatriates:Whatis‘known’afterfourdecades(1970–2012).TheInternational JournalofHumanResourceManagement,26(3),316–337.

DeCieri,H.,Cox,J.W.,&Fenwick,M.(2007).Areviewofinternationalhumanresourcemanagement:Integration,interrogation,imitation.International JournalofManagementReviews,9(4),281–302.

Doucerain,M.,Dere,J.,&Ryder,A.G.(2013).Travelsinhyper-diversity:Multiculturalismandthecontextualassessmentofacculturation.International JournalofInterculturalRelations,37(6),686–699.

Downie,M.,Koestner,R.,ElGeledi,S.,&Cree,K.(2004).Theimpactofculturalinternalizationandintegrationonwell-beingamongtriculturalindividuals. PersonalityandSocialPsychologyBulletin,30(3),305–314.

Fan,D.,Zhang,M.M.,&Zhu,C.J.(2013).InternationalhumanresourcemanagementstrategiesofChinesemultinationalsoperatingabroad.AsiaPaciﬁc BusinessReview,19(4),526–541.

Forster,N.(1997).Thepersistentmythofhighexpatriatefailurerates:Areappraisal.InternationalJournalofHumanResourceManagement,8(4),414–433.

Furrer,O.,Thomas,H.,&Goussevskaia,A.(2008).Thestructureandevolutionofthestrategicmanagementﬁeld:Acontentanalysisof26yearsofstrategic managementresearch.InternationalJournalofManagementReviews,10(1),1–23.

Greenacre,M.J.(1984).Theoryandapplicationofcorrespondenceanalysis.London:AcademicPress.

Guttman,L.(1941).Thequantiﬁcationofaclassofattributes:Atheoryandmethodofscaleconstruction.InP.Horst(Ed.),Thepredictionofpersonal adjustment(pp.319–348).NewYork:SocialScienceResearchCouncil.

Harvey,M.(1996).Theselectionofmanagersforforeignassignments:Aplanningperspective.TheColumbiaJournalofWorldBusiness,31(4),102–118.

Harvey,M.(1997).Inpatriationtraining:Thenextchallengeforinternationalhumanresourcemanagement.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations, 21(3),393–428.

Harvey,M.,Fisher,R.,McPhail,R.,&Moeller,M.(2013).Aligningglobalorganizations’humancapitalneedsandglobalsupply-chainstrategies.Asia-Paciﬁc JournalofHumanResources,51(1),4–21.

Harvey,M.,&Novicevic,M.N.(2006).Developmentofanefﬁcientarchitecturefortheinpatriationofmanagers.InM.J.Morley,N.Heraty,&D.G.Collings (Eds.),Internationalhumanresourcemanagementandinternationalassignments.Basingstoke:Palgrave.

Harvey,M.,Speier,C.,&Novicevic,M.(2001).Atheory-basedframeworkforstrategicglobalhumanresourcestafﬁngpoliciesandpractices.International JournalofHumanResourceManagement,12(6),898–915.

Hildebrand,K.F.,&Müller-Funk,U.(2012).Homalsfordimensionreductionininformationretrieval.InW.A.Gaul,A.Geyer-Schulz,L.Schmidt-Thieme,& J.Kunze(Eds.),Challengesattheinterfaceofdataanalysis,computerscience,andoptimization(pp.353–361).Berlin:SpringerHeidelberg.

Hoffman,D.L.,&DeLeeuw,J.(1992).Interpretingmultiplecorrespondenceanalysisasamultidimensionalscalingmethod.MarketingLetters,3(3),259–272.

Hoffman,D.L.,&Franke,G.R.(1986).Correspondenceanalysis:Graphicalrepresentationofcategoricaldatainmarketingresearch.JournalofMarketing Research,23(3),213–227.

Juang,L.P.,Nguyen,H.H.,&Lin,Y.(2006).Theethnicidentity,other-groupattitudes,andpsychosocialfunctioningofAsianAmericanemergingadultsfrom twocontexts.JournalofAdolescentResearch,21(5),542–568.

Kim,K.,&Slocum,J.W.,Jr.(2008).Individualdifferencesandexpatriateassignmenteffectiveness:ThecaseofUS-basedKoreanexpatriates.JournalofWorld Business,43(1),109–126.

Lakshman,C.(2013).Biculturalismandattributionalcomplexity:Cross-culturalleadershipeffectiveness.JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,44(9), 922–940.

Lazarus,R.S.,&Launier,R.(1978).Stress-relatedtransactionsbetweenpersonandenvironment.InL.A.Pervin,&M.Lewis(Eds.),Perspectivesininteractional psychology(pp.287–327).NewYork:PlenumPress.

Leong,C.H.(2014).Socialmarkersofacculturation:Anewresearchframeworkoninterculturaladaptation.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations, 38,120–132.

(12)

Leung,K.,Bhagat,R.S.,Buchan,N.R.,Erez,M.,&Gibson,C.B.(2005).Cultureandinternationalbusiness:Recentadvancesandtheirimplicationsforfuture research.JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies,36(4),357–378.

Linehan,M.,&Scullion,H.(2002).Therepatriationoffemaleinternationalmanagers:Anempiricalstudy.InternationalJournalofManpower,23(7),649–658.

Lu,Y.,Samaratunge,R.,&Härtel,C.E.(2011).AcculturationstrategiesamongprofessionalChineseimmigrantsintheAustralianworkplace.AsiaPaciﬁc JournalofHumanResources,49(1),71–87.

Lu,Y.,Samaratunge,R.,&Härtel,C.E.(2012).TherelationshipbetweenacculturationstrategyandjobsatisfactionforprofessionalChineseimmigrantsin theAustralianworkplace.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations,36(5),669–681.

McGinley,J.(2008).Expatriateadjustmentwithinasocialcontext:ExaminationofasampleinRussia.JournalofSocial,Evolutionary,andCulturalPsychology, 2(2),56–68.

McPhail,R.,Fisher,R.,Harvey,M.,&Moeller,M.(2012).Stafﬁngtheglobalorganization:“Culturalnomads”.HumanResourceDevelopmentQuarterly,23(2), 259–276.

Michailidis,G.,&DeLeeuw,J.(1998).TheGiﬁsystemofdescriptivemultivariateanalysis.StatisticalScience,13(4),307–336.

Moeller,M.,Harvey,M.,&Williams,W.(2010).Socializationofinpatriatemanagerstotheheadquartersofglobalorganizations:Asociallearningperspective. HumanResourceDevelopmentReview,9(2),169–193.

Navas,M.,García,M.C.,Sánchez,J.,Rojas,A.J.,Pumares,P.,&Fernández,J.S.(2005).Relativeacculturationextendedmodel(RAEM):Newcontributions withregardtothestudyofacculturation.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations,29(1),21–37.

Okpara,J.O.,&Kabongo,J.D.(2011).Cross-culturaltrainingandexpatriateadjustment:AstudyofwesternexpatriatesinNigeria.JournalofWorldBusiness, 46(1),22–30.

Peeters,M.C.,&Oerlemans,W.G.(2009).Therelationshipbetweenacculturationorientationsandwork-relatedwell-being:Differencesbetweenethnic minorityandmajorityemployees.InternationalJournalofStressManagement,16(1),1–24.

Ramos-Rodríguez,A.,&Ruíz-Navarro,J.(2004).Changesintheintellectualstructureofstrategicmanagementresearch:AbibliometricstudyoftheStrategic ManagementJournal,1980–2000.StrategicManagementJournal,25(10),981–1004.

Rudmin,F.(2003).Criticalhistoryoftheacculturationpsychologyofassimilation,separation,integrationandmarginalization.ReviewofGeneralPsychology, 7(1),3–37.

Schiefer,D.,Möllering,A.,&Daniel,E.(2012).Culturalvalueﬁtofimmigrantandminorityadolescents:Theroleofacculturationorientations.International JournalofInterculturalRelations,36(4),486–497.

Schuler,R.S.,Budhwar,P.S.,&Florkowski,G.W.(2002).Internationalhumanresourcemanagement:Reviewandcritique.InternationalJournalof Manage-mentReviews,4(1),41–70.

Schwartz,S.J.,Unger,J.B.,Zamboanga,B.L.,&Szapocznik,J.(2010).Rethinkingtheconceptofacculturation:Implicationsfortheoryandresearch.American Psychologist,65(4),237.

Scottham,K.M.,&Dias,R.H.(2010).AcculturativestrategiesandthepsychologicaladaptationofBrazilianmigrantstoJapan.Identity:AnInternational JournalofTheoryandResearch,10(4),284–303.

Selmer,J.(2001).Psychologicalbarrierstoadjustmentandhowtheyaffectcopingstrategies:WesternbusinessexpatriatesinChina.InternationalJournal ofHumanResourceManagement,12(2),151–165.

Stahl,G.K.,&Caligiuri,P.(2005).Theeffectivenessofexpatriatecopingstrategies:Themoderatingroleofculturaldistance,positionlevel,andtimeonthe internationalassignment.JournalofAppliedPsychology,90(4),603–615.

Szkudlarek,B.(2010).Reentry–Areviewoftheliterature.InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations,34(1),1–21.

Thite,M.,Wilkinson,A.,&Shah,D.(2012).InternationalizationandHRMstrategiesacrosssubsidiariesinmultinationalcorporationsfromemerging economies–Aconceptualframework.JournalofWorldBusiness,47(2),251–258.

Tranﬁeld,D.,Denyer,D.,&Smart,P.(2003).Towardsamethodologyfordevelopingevidence-informedmanagementknowledgebymeansofsystematic review.BritishJournalofManagement,14(3),207–222.

Tung,R.L.(1988).Thenewexpatriates:Managinghumanresourcesabroad.BallingerPublishingCo./Harper&RowPublishers.

Wang,S.C.,Schwartz,S.J.,&Zamboanga,B.L.(2010).AcculturativestressamongCubanAmericancollegestudents:Exploringthemediatingpathways betweenacculturationandpsychosocialfunctioning.JournalofAppliedSocialPsychology,40(11),2862–2887.

Ward,C.,&Kus,L.(2012).BacktoandbeyondBerry’sbasics:Theconceptualization,operationalizationandclassiﬁcationofacculturation.International JournalofInterculturalRelations,36(4),472–485.

Ward,C.,Leong,C.H.,&Low,M.(2004).PersonalityandsojourneradjustmentAnexplorationofthebigﬁveandtheculturalﬁtproposition.Journalof Cross-CulturalPsychology,35(2),137–151.