NG; DYNE; ANG (2009) From Experience to Experiential Learning Cultural Intelligence as a Learning

® Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2009, Vol. 8, No. 4, 51K526.

From Experience toExperiential Learning:Cultural Intelligence

as a Learning Capabilityfor Global Leader Development

KOK-YEE NGNanyang Technological University

LINN VAN DYNEMichigan State University

SOON ANGNanyang Technological University

Although international assignments are recognized as important mechanisms fordeveloping global leaders in organizations, existing research has focused primarily onleaders' performance during international assignments, rather than on the developmentaloutcomes gained from such assignments. We integrate research on experienfiai /earningand cultural intelligence to propose a process model that focuses on how leaderstranslate their international work assignment experiences into learning outcomes criticalfor global leadership development. Our model positions cuJfura] intelligence as amoderator that enhances the likelihood that individuals on international assignmentswill actively engage in the four stages of experiential learning (experience, reflect,conceptualize, experiment), which in turn leads to global leadership self-efficacy,ethnorelative attitudes toward other cultures, accurate mental models of leadershipacross cultures, and flexibility of leadership styles. Our model has major implications forthe selection and training of individuals, as well as organizational practices related tointernational job assignments from a developmental perspective.

Effective global leaders are a vital asset for orga-nizations today (Van Dyne & Ang, 2006). In thecurrent milieu of diversity, complexities, and inter-national competition, having leaders who are ca-pable of understanding, functioning, and manag-ing in the global environment is a valuable, rare,and inimitable resource that can offer firms a com-petitive advantage (Ang & Inkpen, 2008; Barney,1992). It is, therefore, of little surprise that trainingand development of global leader competencies isone of the top-five organizational practices thatsignificantly influences effectiveness of multina-tional companies (Stroh & Caligiuri, 1998).

Organizational interventions for enhancingglobal leadership effectiveness range from didac-

tic programs to intensive cultural experiences(Caligiuri, 2006). Didactic programs typically takethe form of cross-cultural training or diversitytraining that is provided in-house, or conductedoff-site by consulting firms or academic institu-tions. These courses aim to equip individuals withspecific knowledge, skills, abilities, and othercharacteristics (KSAOs) such as greater awarenessof cross-cultural differences; knowledge of appro-priate behaviors when working with people fromdifferent cultures; specific business knowledge,such as international finance and project manage-ment; and the ability to converse in a differentlanguage.

Intensive cultural experiences, on the other

511Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder'sexpress written permission. Users may print, download or email articles for individual use only.

512 Academy oí Management Learning & Education December

hand, aim to develop individuals more holisticallyby exposing them to the challenges of living andworking in a foreign environment (Leung, Maddux,Galinsky, & Chiu, 2008). Short- and long-term inter-national assignments are examples of such devel-opmental programs increasingly adopted by orga-nizations to nurture their global leaders, withmany firms now requiring that high-potential lead-ers have at least one overseas assignment in theircareers (Hall, Zhu, & Yan, 2001).

The growing emphasis on experiential ap-proaches to global leader development may beattributed to the importance accrued to interna-tional experience. For example, research demon-strates that firms led by CEOs with internationalexperience perform better financially (Carpenter,Sanders, Gregersen, 2001; Daily, Certo, & Dalton,2000; Sambharya, 1996). In addition, global leadersthemselves find international assignments benefi-cial for their personal and professional develop-ment. In a survey conducted by Gregersen, Morri-son, and Black (1998), 80% of respondents reportedthat living and working abroad was the most pow-erful experience in developing their global leader-ship capabilities.

Despite the crucial role that international as-signments play in global leadership development,most models and empirical research on interna-tional assignments have adopted a performanceperspective, focusing on performance and adjust-ment of expatriates (e.g., see review and meta-analysis by Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer,& Luk, 2005). While this stream of research offersimportant selection and training implications toensure that international operations are managedeffectively, it does not directly address the devel-opmental objectives and benefits of internationalassignments. Thus, we lack research and concep-tual models on how individuals learn to becomebetter global leaders based on their internationalwork experiences. We also lack conceptual frame-works that specify what types of individual aremost likely to learn and benefit the most from in-ternational assignments.

Responding to this gap, we address two ques-tions here: (1) How do global leaders learn fromtheir international assignments to become betterglobal leaders? (2) What attributes of global lead-ers enhance their learning while on internationalwork assignments? Thus, in contrast to prior re-search that emphasizes performance and adjust-ment outcomes, we adopt a developmental per-spective and focus on factors that affect globalleader learning outcomes.

Adopting a developmental perspective requiresseveral shifts in assumptions compared to the tra-

ditional performance perspective. A major and ob-vious difference is the emphasis on learning effec-tiveness, rather than on work effectiveness. Thisshift acknowledges that failures during interna-tional assignments can present excellent learningopportunities that help individuals hone theirglobal leadership skills (Hall et al., 2001), and con-trasts starkly with the traditional view that failuresare undesirable outcomes to be avoided. The focuson learning outcomes also moves beyond expatri-ate research that has commonly focused on waysto staff and manage those in international posi-tions, such as predeparture cross-cultural training(Morris & Robie, 2001), role clarity, and relationalskills (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). Finally,switching from an emphasis on performance to adevelopmental perspective requires a fundamen-tally different theoretical basis. Thus, we draw ontheories of adult learning to develop a model ofprocesses that affect learning outcomes of globalleaders.

We integrate two streams of research to informour research questions: First, we adopt Kolb's(1984) experiential learning theory (ELT) to expli-cate the processes that enable leaders to learnand develop their global leadership capabilitiesthrough their international work assignments. Sec-ond, we consider cultural intelligence (CQ; Ang &Van Dyne, 2008; Earley & Ang, 2003), defined as anindividual's capability to function effectively inculturally diverse contexts, as a key individualattribute that influences the extent to which indi-viduals actively engage in experiential learningduring their international work assignments.

In the remaining sections, we elaborate on ourtheoretical model (see Figure 1). We begin with abrief review of ELT (Kolb, 1984) and its applicationto global leadership development. We then de-scribe the 4-factor conceptualization of CQ anddiscuss its role in enhancing experiential learningprocesses and learning outcomes during interna-tional assignments. We conclude with a discus-sion of future research directions and organiza-tional implications aimed at enhancing learningoutcomes of global leaders in international workassignments.

THEORY DEVELOPMENT

Experiential Learning Theory (ELT)

ELT is an adult learning theory that highlights thecritical role experience plays in affecting learningand change. Kolb's (1984) formulation of ELT drawson the work of prominent educational and organi-zational scholars including John Dewey, Kurt

2009 Ng, Van Dyne, and Ang 513

Lewin, and Jean Piaget, who share the commonview that learning involves integrating experiencewith concepts and linking observations to actions(see especially Dewey, 1938).

We adopt the ELT framework as the basis of ourprocess model for developing global leadersthrough international assignments for several rea-sons. First, ELT emphasizes learning as a process(Kolb, 1984), unlike traditional learning theoriesthat focus on learning as behavioral or cognitiveoutcomes. This process-oriented approach is con-sistent with our research question to understandthe intervening mechanisms that translate inter-national work assignment experiences into learn-ing outcomes. Second, ELT views learning as aholistic process of adapting to the world that re-quires the integrated functioning of the total per-son, which includes thinking, feeling, perceiving,and behaving, as well as interactions between theperson and the environment (Kolb, 1984). The holis-tic nature of ELT fits well with the complexity ofinternational assignments, given that leaders areexposed to, and required to manage a multitude ofdemands and cues from their new environment.Third, ELT views learning as a continuous processwhere new knowledge, changing existing ideasand perspectives, relearning, and integrating oldand new ideas are important aspects of learning(Kolb, 1984). This emphasis on a continuous anddynamic cycle of learning is particularly crucialfor global leaders given the uncertainties and com-plexities of culturally diverse business settings.

Kolb's (1984) 4-stage learning cycle comprisestwo fundamental processes that enable learningfrom experience: (1) grasping the experience, and(2) transforming the experience. The four learningstages are based on two dialectically relatedmodes of grasping experience: concrete experi-ence versus abstract conceptualization, and twodialectically related modes of transforming expe-rience: reflective observation versus active exper-imentation. Concrete experience and abstract con-ceptualization are different ways of grasping theexperience. Concrete experience focuses on tangi-ble elements of the immediate experience, whileabstract conceptualization relies on conceptual in-terpretation and symbolic representation of the ex-perience. In a similar way, reflective observationand active experimentation are two different waysof acting upon the experience. Reflective observa-tion relies on internal processing, while active ex-perimentation emphasizes actual manipulation ofthe external world.

In essence, Kolb's ELT model prescribes a pro-cess of learning where the learner should undergofour bases—experiencing, reflecting, thinking.

and acting—in order to transform an experienceeffectively into learning (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Having(grasping) an experience without doing anythingwith it (transforming) is not sufficient. Likewise,transformation cannot occur without an experiencethat can be acted upon. Hence, the model arguesthat tangible episodes or events (concrete experi-ences) are the basis for descriptive processing (re-flective observations), which are then assimilatedand distilled into conceptual interpretations (ab-stract conceptualization), which then become thebasis for action (active experimentation). Thisfourth step (testing ideas in the real world) gener-ates new experiences for the learner and triggersanother cycle of learning.

To date, ELT has received widespread attentionin the management development literature (Kayes,2002; Kayes, Kayes, & Yamazaki, 2005a, b; Kolb 8fKolb, 2005; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Much of thisresearch (e.g., Cassidy, 2004; Furnham, Jackson, &Miller, 1999; Mainemelis, Boyatzis, & Kolb, 2002;Yamazaki & Kayes, 2007) describes preferred learn-ing styles based on Kolb's (1999a, b) Learning StyleInventory. Acknowledging the importance of thisresearch and going beyond it, we adopt a prescrip-tive view of ELT and suggest that individuals needto experience all four stages of learning to gainmaximum developmental benefits from interna-tional assignments (cf. Mainemelis et al., 2002).Thus, we conceptualize ELT as a process of learn-ing involving conscious behaviors that effectivelearners display in order to translate experienceinto learning outcomes that, in turn, should en-hance their global leadership effectiveness (cf.Cassidy, 2004).

This approach should offer important insightsinto why individuals do not learn equally fromtheir international experiences (Leslie & Van Vel-sor, 1996; Spreitzer, McCall, & Mahoney, 1997; VanVelsor, Moxley, & Bunker, 2004). Although research-ers have considered an assortment of individualdifferences that affect ability to learn from interna-tional assignments, including cognitive abilities,self-esteem, personality traits, such as opennessand conscientiousness, and competencies, such asseeking and using feedback (Spreitzer et al., 1997;Van Velsor et al., 2004; Kayes et al., 2005b), there isno systematic framework to explain previous in-consistent results where some people seem tolearn more than others from international workassignment experiences. Responding to this gap,we propose that effective learning varies acrossindividuals because only some individuals en-gage in the entire experiential learning cyclewhen exposed to cultural experiences during theirinternational assignments. Thus, the process of ex-


periential learning, as explicated by ELT, providesa theoretical basis for examining individual at-tributes that affect the extent of learning and lead-ership development during international assign-ments. We therefore build on and extend recentresearch that has examined the competencies nec-essary for experiential learning (Kayes et al.,2005b; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004).

Specifically, we propose that CQ is an importantset of learning capabilities that enhances the ex-tent to which individuals translate their interna-tional work experiences into learning outcomesthrough the experiential learning processes of ex-periencing, reflecting, observing, and experiment-ing. This is consistent with Kayes et al.'s (2005a)thesis that individuals must have different abili-ties to manage each of the four stages in ELT. Insum, we aim to complement existing research ongeneric learning styles (e.g., Cassidy, 2004; Furn-ham et al., 1999; Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Mainemelis etal., 2002), and given the international context ofour research questions on global leadership de-velopment, we focus on CQ as a specific set oflearning capabilities. Below, we summarize Ear-ley and Ang's (2003) conceptualization of CQ. Wethen present propositions for relationships be-tween international work assignment experi-ences, CQ, experiential learning processes, andlearning outcomes.

Cultural Intelligence and Experiential Learning

Cultural intelligence (CQ), defined as an individ-ual's capabilities to function and manage effec-tively in culturally diverse settings (Earley & Ang,2003), is an important individual attribute giventoday's diversified workplace. The conceptualiza-tion of CQ is based on Sternberg and Detterman's(1986) framework of multiple intelligences, whichintegrates different perspectives of intelligence topropose four complementary ways of conceptual-izing individual-level intelligence: (a) meiacogni-iive intelligence refers to awareness and control ofcognitions used to acquire and understand infor-mation; (b) cognitive intelligence refers to knowl-edge and knowledge structures; (c) mofivafionaiintelligence acknowledges that most cognition ismotivated and thus focuses on the magnitudeand direction of energy as a locus of intelligence;and (d) behavioral intelligence focuses on indi-vidual capabilities at the action level (behavior).By expanding the scope of intelligence to includeabilities related to self-regulation and the dis-play of overt behaviors (Gardner, 1993), Stern-berg and Detterman (1986) offer a more compre-hensive theory of intelligence that goes beyond

cognitive abilities such as linguistic or logical-mathematical intelligence.

Based on Sternberg and Detterman's (1986)model, Earley and Ang (2003) conceptualized CQas a multidimensional construct with mental(metacognitive and cognitive), motivational, andbehavioral components. Hence, unlike previouslyfragmented research on intercultural competen-cies (Gelfand, Imai, & Fehr, 2008; Spitzberg, 1989),CQ offers a theoretical and parsimonious frame-work that comprises four capabilities. Metacogni-tive CQ is the capability for consciousness andawareness during intercultural interactions. It re-flects mental capabilities to acquire and under-stand culturally diverse situations and includesknowledge of and control over individual thoughtprocesses (Flavell, 1979) relating to culture. Rele-vant capabilities include planning, monitoring,and revising mental models. Those with highmetacognitive CQ are consciously mindful of cul-tural preferences and norms—before and duringinteractions. They question cultural assumptionsand adjust mental models during and after expe-riences (Nelson, 1996).

While metacognitive CQ focuses on higher ordercognitive processes, cognitive CQ focuses onknowledge of norms, practices, and conventions indifferent cultural settings acquired from educationand personal experiences. This includes knowl-edge of economic, legal, and social systems ofdifferent cultures (Triandis, 1994). Individuals withhigh cognitive CQ are able to anticipate and un-derstand similarities and differences across cul-tural situations. As a result, they are more likely tohave accurate expectations and less likely to makeinaccurate interpretations of cultural interactions(e.g., Triandis, 1995).

In addition to mental capabilities that foster un-derstanding of other cultures, CQ also includes themotivational capability to cope with ambiguousand unfamiliar settings. Mofivaíionaí CQ is thecapability to direct attention and energy towardlearning about and functioning in situations char-acterized by cultural differences. It is based on theexpectancy-value theory of motivation (Eccles &Wigfield, 2002) and includes intrinsic motivation(Deci & Ryan, 1985) and self-efficacy (Bandura,1997). Those with high motivational CQ have in-trinsic satisfaction and are confident about theirability to function in culturally diverse settings.

The fourth aspect of CQ recognizes that culturalunderstanding (mental) and interest (motivational)must be complemented with behavioral flexibilityto exhibit appropriate verbal and nonverbal ac-tions, based on cultural values of a specific setting(Hall, 1959). Thus, behavioral CQ is the capability


to exhibit situationally appropriate behaviors froma broad repertoire of verbal and nonverbal behav-iors, such as being able to exhibit culturally ap-propriate words, tones, gestures, and facial ex-pressions (Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, & Chua, 1988).

Although a relatively new construct, CQ re-search has extended the conceptualization andtheoretical grounding of CQ (Ang & Van Dyne,2008; Ng & Earley, 2006; Triandis, 2006) to examinerelationships with cultural adaptation and perfor-mance (Ang, Van Dyne, Koh, Ng, Templer, Tay, &Chandrasekar, 2007), expatriate effectiveness(Kim, Kirkman, & Chen, 2008; Shaffer & Miller, 2008;Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2006), personality(Ang, Van Dyne, & Koh, 2006; Oolders, Chernysh-enko, & Stark, 2008), intercultural training (Earley &Peterson, 2004; Harris & Lievens, 2005), and multi-cultural teams (e.g., Earley & Mosakowski, 2004;Janssens & Brett, 2006; Rockstuhl & Ng, 2008).

Going beyond existing research on CQ thathas theorized and demonstrated the importanceof CQ for performance in cross-cultural contexts,we focus here on CQ as a set of learning capa-bilities that are important for global leaders.Specifically, we consider how the four CQ di-mensions enhance the likelihood that individu-als will be actively engaged in the four stages ofexperiential learning—concrete experience, re-flective observation, abstract conceptualization,and active experimentation—during interna-tional work assignments.

Concrete Experience

Individuals differ in how active they are or in howmuch they enjoy learning from concrete experi-ences. Kolb (1984) argues that individuals with anorientation toward concrete experience are open tonew experiences, emphasize feeling rather thanthinking, and function well in unstructured situa-tions. In the context of intemational assignments, wepropose that two CQ dimensions—motivational CQand behavioral CQ—will affect the amount andquality of concrete experiences leaders seek duringintemational assignments.

Self-efficacy research (Bandura, 1997) suggeststhat individuals who are more confident of theirability to complete a particular task are morelikely to initiate effort, persist in their efforts, andperform better. Since intercultural interactions aretypically stressful because of unfamiliar culturalnorms and cues (Mendenhall & Qddou, 1985;Qberg, 1960; Shaffer, Harrison, Gregersen, Black, &Ferzandi, 2006), we suggest those with high moti-vational CQ, characterized by greater interest andself-efficacy, will actively seek cross-cultural ex-

periences during their international assignments.This is consistent with Yamazaki and Kayes' (2004)point that valuing people of different cultures is animportant learning skill for engaging in concreteexperiences. Conversely, those with little interestor confidence will minimize their degree of culturalinvolvement, thus restricting the amount and qual-ity of concrete cross-cultural experiences theycould learn from. Thus, our first proposition pre-dicts that the relationship between internationalexperience and concrete experiences will be stron-ger for those with higher motivational CQ.Proposition 1: Motivational CQ enhances the

likelihood that individuals willseek concrete cross-cultural expe-riences during their internationaljob assignments.

Next, we propose that those with high behav-ioral CQ—the capability to exhibit appropriateverbal and nonverbal actions in culturally diversesituations—will also seek and engage in morecross-cultural experiences during international as-signments. Gaining concrete experiences requirespeople to engage with the environment and typi-cally involves interpersonal interactions. Sincecultures differ in their norms for appropriate be-haviors (Hall, 1959; Triandis, 1994), the capability ofdisplaying a flexible range of behaviors is critical tocreating positive impressions and developing mean-ingful intercultural relationships (Bhaskar-Shrinivaset al., 2005; Gudykunst & Kim, 1984). Building rela-tionships with locals, in turn, creates more opportu-nities for cross-cultural contact (Kayes et al., 2005b;Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Accordingly, we predictthat the relationship between intemational experi-ence and concrete experiences will be stronger forthose with higher behavioral CQ.Proposition 2: Behavioral CQ enhances the like-

lihood that individuals will seekconcrete cross-cultural experi-ences during their internationaljob assignments.

We surmise that cognitive CQ and metacogni-tive CQ are unlikely to be related to concrete ex-periences, given that these two mental CQ capa-bilities emphasize knowledge and analyticalprocesses involved in reasoning, rather than ac-tions. Cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ, how-ever, are critically important for the next twostages of the experiential learning cycle, as de-scribed below.

Reflective Observation

Reflective observation occurs when people thinkabout experiences and reflect critically on their


assumptions and beliefs. This is an important pro-cess because it helps people to describe the situ-ation objectively and develop an understanding ofwhy things happen (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). It also al-lows them to consider different perspectives orviews of the situation.

We propose that cognitive CO and metacogni-tive CQ enhance reflective observation during in-ternational assignments. Individuals with highcognitive CO possess elaborate cultural schémas.Schemas are mental representations of patterns ofsocial interaction that are characteristic of partic-ular cultural groups (Triandis, Marin, Lisansky, &Betancourt, 1984), and are important because theyenhance information processing (Taylor & Crocker,1981) and enable more accurate identification andunderstanding of cultural issues. Research hasshown that area studies training aimed at in-creasing cultural knowledge enhanced accuracyof interpreting social behaviors across culturesbecause trained participants were less likely toapply their own cultural assumptions to othercultures (Bird, Heinbuch, Dunbar, & McNulty,1993). Similarly, Ang and colleagues (2007) dem-onstrated that cognitive CO enhanced accuracyof judgment and decision making about cross-cultural interactions.

We argue that because individuals with highcognitive CO have greater understanding of differ-ences and similarities across cultural systems,they are more aware of what cues they should lookfor. They are also less likely to make negativeevaluations of cultural norms and behaviors,which allows them to be more objective and accu-rate in their observations of cross-cultural experi-ences (Osland & Bird, 2000). Therefore, we proposethat the relationship between international expe-rience and reflective observation will be strongerfor those with higher cognitive CO-Proposition 3: Cognitive CQ enhances the likeli-

hood that individuals will reflect ontheir cross-cultural experiences dur-ing their international assignments.

We also propose that metacognitive CO—think-ing about thought processes related to cross-cultural experiences—will facilitate reflective ob-servation during international assignments. Thosewith high metacognitive CO monitor and thinkabout their own assumptions, beliefs, and emo-tions as well as the way they process environmen-tal and behavioral cues provided by others. Theyactively process their cognitive observations, cre-ate new categories in their memory storage, andconsider multiple perspectives in making sense oftheir experiences (Flavell, 1979). Thus, we predictthe following:

Proposition 4: Metacognitive CQ enhances thelikelihood that individuals will re-flect on their cross-cultural experi-ences during their internationalassignments.

Since reflective observation emphasizes per-ceptual and cognitive capabilities, we do notexpect motivational CO or behavioral CO. whichdeal with the "heart" and the "body" of thelearner, respectively (Earley, Ang, & Tan, 2006), tobe of direct relevance to this stage of experien-tial learning.

Absírací ConcepfuaJizafion

Abstract conceptualization, the third stage of expe-riential learning, emphasizes the importance ofbuilding general theories using scientific, as op-posed to intuitive, approaches. This stage requireslearners to distill their reflections into more gen-eral concepts that can guide their future actions,and emphasizes thinking, rather than feeling(Kolb, 1984).

Similar to reflective observation, we proposethat cognitive CO and metacognitive CO willfacilitate abstract conceptualization during inter-national assignments. Research in cognitive psy-chology has shown that experts conceptualizeproblems more efficiently and effectively becausethey have more organized knowledge structureswith stronger linkages among domain-related con-cepts. In contrast, novices are less efficient be-cause their knowledge representations tend to bebased on salient surface elements (Chase & Si-mon, 1973; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982). In addition,novices are often less effective in their knowledgeacquisition because their lack of pre-organizedschémas hinders efficient classification of knowl-edge (Kalyuga, Ayres, Chandler, & Sweller, 2003).

Therefore, we propose that individuals withhigher cognitive CO will be more accurate andeffective in developing general ideas and concep-tual interpretations of culture based on their inter-national assignments. This is because they havemore organized and elaborated knowledge struc-tures that facilitate their information processing aswell as identification of relevant principles. Con-versely, those with low cognitive CO are less ableto integrate their insights and reflections into co-herent knowledge structures about culture, thusimpeding the formation of higher order conceptsand theories. Accordingly, we propose that the re-lationship between international experience andabstract conceptualization will be stronger forthose with higher cognitive CQ.Proposifion 5; Cognitive CQ enhances the likeli-


hood that individuals will detectpatterns and develop conceptualgeneralizations of cross-cultuial ex-periences during their internationalassignments.

Metacognitive CQ should also enhance abstractconceptualization during international assign-ments because many cross-cultural situations donot fit typical norms or tendencies, even when ex-pectations are based on rigorous research. Cul-tural paradoxes—situations or interactions thatinvolve contradictory norms or behaviors—arecommon encounters for expatriates in all cultures(Osland & Bird, 2000). In fact, Osland and Osland(2006) reported that expatriates who are more in-volved in the host culture are more likely to beaware of paradoxes.

Thus, having the metacognitive CQ capability ofthinking about thinking facilitates abstract con-ceptualization, particularly when faced with cul-tural paradoxes. Considering personal assump-tions and being open to disconfirming experiencesis a form of higher order reasoning that allowsindividuals to analyze new cross-cultural experi-ences without being biased or constrained by pastexperiences or expectations (Earley & Ang, 2003).Those with high metacognitive CQ have analogi-cal reasoning capabilities that enable them totranslate their insights from a particular experi-ence into more general concepts and interpreta-tions that can be applied to other cultural contexts.Thus, we propose that the relationship betweeninternational experience and abstract conceptual-ization will be stronger for those with higher meta-cognitive CQ.Proposition 6: Metacognitive CQ enhances the like-

lihood that individuals v/ill detectpatterns and develop conceptual gen-eralizations of cioss-cultural experi-ences during their international as-signments.

As with reflective observation, we do not ex-pect motivational CQ and behavioral CQ to re-late to abstract conceptualization because ab-stract conceptualization primarily involvesmental capabilities. The capabilities to channelenergy (motivational CQ) or display appropriatebehaviors (behavioral CQ) are less relevant tothe mental processes of developing conceptualinterpretations.

Aciive Experimentation

Active experimentation involves a pragmatic focuson influencing the environment and getting thingsdone and is concerned with whether one's en-

hanced understanding fits reality (Kolb, 1984). Weargue that all four CQ capabilities will facilitateactive experimentation during international as-signments. First, cognitive CQ and metacognitiveCQ are important because they enable learners toorganize and map out action plans. Action, withoutclear goals and plans, is unlikely to produce de-sired outcomes. Thus, those with enhanced under-standing of culture (cognitive CQ) and those whohave clear plans and strategies for action (meta-cognitive CQ) are more likely to follow throughand test their ideas and understanding during in-ternational assignments. Accordingly, we predictthe relationship between international experienceand active experimentation will be stronger forthose with higher cognitive and metacognitive CQ.Proposition 7: Cognitive CQ enhances the likeli-

hood that individuals will imple-ment and test their conceptualgeneralizations in cross-culturalinteractions during their interna-tional assignments.

Proposition 8: Metacognitive CQ enhances thelikelihood that individuals will im-plement and test theii conceptualgeneralizations in cross-cultural in-teractions during theii internationalassignments.

We argue that motivational CQ should also en-hance active experimentation. Individuals withthe desire and self-efficacy to deal with cross-cultural interactions tend to seek and persist whencross-cultural situations are challenging (Bandura,1997). Moreover, given that self-efficacy is a "gen-erative capability in which cognitive, social, emo-tional and behavioral subskills must be organizedand effectively orchestrated to serve innumerablepurposes" (Bandura, 1997: 37), having high motiva-tional CQ enables learners to carry out sequencesof action steps to achieve specific goals (Earley etal., 2006). Accordingly, we predict that the relation-ship between international experience and activeexperimentation will be stronger for those withhigher motivational CQ.Proposition 9; Motivational CQ enhances the

likelihood that individuals will im-plement and test their conceptualgeneializations in cross-cultuialinteractions during their interna-tional assignments.

Finally, behavioral CQ should also facilitate ac-tive experimentation during international assign-ments. One reason is language. Those who are notflexible in their language skills have fewer oppor-tunities for meaningful contact with locals. Thislimits the quantity as well as quality of their cross-


cultural experiences and makes it difficult for themto engage in active experimentation. In addition,having the capability to adapt verbal and nonver-bal behaviors to specific cultural contexts providespeople with greater latitude for experimentation.Conversely, those with low behavioral CQ aremore constrained and have fewer opportunities toimplement and test their ideas (Kayes et al., 2005b).Therefore, we propose that the relationship be-tween international experience and active experi-mentation will be stronger for those with higherbehavioral CQ.Proposiiion 10: Behavioral CQ enhances the like-

lihood that individuals will im-plement and test their conceptualgeneralizations in cross-culturalinteractions during their interna-tional assignments.

In the next section, we consider the four learningstages of ELT and important learning outcomesthat are especially relevant for global leadershipdevelopment.

Learning Outcomes for Global LeadershipDevelopment

Learning, defined as the process of creating knowl-edge based on the transformation of experience(Kolb, 1984), is a multifaceted construct (e.g.,Gagne, 1984; Kraiger, Ford, & Salas, 1993; Krath-wohl. Bloom, & Masia, 1964) with implications formultiple learning outcomes. Kraiger and col-leagues (1993), for instance, proposed three majorcategories of learning outcomes: affective, knowl-edge, and skills-based outcomes. In thinking aboutimplications of the four stages of the ELT cycle, weidentified four learning outcomes that should haveparticular significance to global leaders.

According to Kraiger et al. (1993), affective Jearn-ing ouícomes refer to changes in the learner's mo-tivation and attitudes as a result of the learningexperience. Two constructs that represent changesin motivation and attitudes with direct relevanceto global leaders are sense of self-efficacy as aglobal leader and ethnorelative attitudes aboutother cultures. Knowledge outcomes refer to thequantity and type of knowledge gained as a resultof a learning experience (Kraiger et al., 1993). Forglobal leaders to be effective, it is essential thatthey understand that effective leadership stylesvary across culture. Thus, we focus on knowledgeof implicit leadership mental models across cul-tural contexts for our third learning outcome. Thefinal category in Kraiger and colleagues' frame-work is behavior, or skill-based learning. This fo-cuses on whether individuals are able to apply

newly learned behaviors to work or other settings(generalization; Kraiger et al., 1993). In the contextof global leaders, an important skill-based learn-ing outcome is the flexibility of leadership stylesthat the global leader can enact to suit specificcultural contexts. In the next sections, we developour logic for predicting relationships betweenspecific ELT processes and these four learningoutcomes.

Affective Oufcomes

Affective outcomes of learning reflect changes inmotivation and attitudes. Self-efficacy is a per-son's sense of being able to perform a specific setof actions (Bandura, 1997). Applied to global lead-ers, an important and immediate learning outcomeof international work assignments is enhancedglobal leadership self-efficacy. By applying exist-ing research on leadership self-efficacy (Kane,Zaccaro, Tremble, & Masuda, 2002; Ng, Ang, &Chan, 2008), we define global leadership self-efficacy as perceived capabilities to perform spe-cific leadership roles effectively in culturally di-verse settings.

According to Kraiger et al. (1993), enhanced task-specific self-efficacy (such as global leadershipself-efficacy) is an immediate and powerful indi-cator that learning has taken place. Consistentwith this, a recent meta-analysis of training out-comes showed that posttraining self-efficacy wasthe best predictor of the amount of proceduralknowledge gained from training interventions(Sitzmann, Brown, Casper, Ely, & Zimmerman,2008).

Returning to the conceptual relationship be-tween specific ELT processes and learning out-comes, we propose that individuals who activelyengage in intercultural experiences during theirinternational assignments will develop greaterglobal leadership self-efficacy. This is because in-tercultural experiences provide concrete problem-solving opportunities that enable individuals toenhance their understanding of the challengesand strategies of global leadership. Moreover,cross-cultural interactions provide concrete expe-riences where individuals receive real-time feed-back on their behaviors and effectiveness basedon reactions from other parties during cross-cultural interactions. As suggested by Gist andMitchell (1992), the information and feedbackgained through these concrete experiences en-hances self-efficacy. Applied to global leadership,we propose the following:Proposiiion 11: Individuals who seek concrete

cross-cultural experiences during

2009 Ng, l̂ an Dyne, and Ang 519

iheir infernaiionaJ assignments aremore likely to develop greaterglobal leadership seli-eiiicacy.

Another important affective outcome of experi-ential learning in international assignments isethnorelative attitudes that recognize and acceptthat beliefs, traditions, and behaviors vary acrosscultures. This means that ethnocentric attitudesthat other cultural beliefs, traditions, and behav-iors are wrong or inferior to their own (Black, 1990)are minimized. Effective global leaders need topossess ethnorelative attitudes toward other cul-tures, so that they are sensitive and respectful ofcultural differences and better able to understandbehavior from the perspectives of other cultures(e.g., making isomorphic attributions and under-standing why a behavior occurs from the otherculture's perspective; Triandis, 2006).

Research demonstrates that ethnorelative atti-tudes can be fostered based on positive contactwith other cultures and training programs de-signed to help participants make isomorphic attri-butions about behavior of those from other cultures(e.g., Bennett, 1986; Klak & Martin, 2003). In terms ofrelationships between ELT processes and learningoutcomes, we propose that individuals who reflecton their cross-cultural experiences are more likelyto develop ethnorelative attitudes. Given that un-familiar cues in cross-cultural interactions are of-ten misunderstood, those who actively and objec-tively reflect on their experiences, ask questionsabout why incidents occurred, and try to put them-selves in the shoes of the other party, are morelikely to develop ethnorelative, as opposed to eth-nocentric attitudes (Bennett, 1986; Triandis, 2006).In contrast, individuals who do not engage in re-flective observation are less likely to recognizeand appreciate cultural differences. Thus, we pro-pose the following:Proposifion 12: Individuals who reilect on their

cross-cultural experiences duringtheir international assignmentsare more likely to develop eth-norelative attitudes toward othercultures.

Knowledge Outcomes

Learning occurs when experiences change peo-ple's knowledge domain, such as gaining newknowledge or developing a more sophisticatedmental model of a specific subject (Kraiger et al.,1993). For global leaders, a critical cognitive learn-ing outcome is enhanced awareness and knowl-edge of ways that culture influences what is con-sidered effective leadership. This is because

effective leadership styles vary based on culture—what is effective in one culture may be ineffectivein other cultures due to culturally based implicittheories of leadership held by followers (e.g., seeGLQBE study by House, Hanges, Javindan, Dorf-man, & Gupta, 2004).

In thinking about relationships between ELT pro-cesses and learning outcomes, we propose thatabstract conceptualization is particularly impor-tant for gaining accurate knowledge of implicitmental models of appropriate leadership acrosscultures (Lord, Brown, Harvey, & Hall, 2001). Whenindividuals distill their observations and reflec-tions into more general concepts and principles,they are more likely to add elements to theirknowledge structures and build connections be-tween knowledge elements (Glaser & Chi, 1989).For example, when global leaders engage in ab-stract conceptualization to develop guidelinesabout why participative leadership is effective inone setting but not in others (Dorfman et al., 1997),they begin to connect their knowledge of culturalvalues (e.g., power distance) with specific leader-ship behaviors (e.g., directive or participativestyles), thus broadening their mental model of ef-fective leadership by accurately taking into ac-count cultural influences on implicit leadershiptheories. Accordingly, we present the following:Proposition 13: Individuals who develop concep-

tual generalizations based oncross-cultural experiences duringtheir international assignments aremore likely to develop accuratemental models oi eiiective leader-ship across cultures.

Skills-Based Outcomes

The final type of learning outcome identified byKraiger et al. (1993) is skill-based, or behaviorallearning outcomes. For global leaders, learning toexhibit a broad and flexible range of leadershipbehaviors is an important skill because culturesdiffer in what is viewed as appropriate leadershipin particular situations (House et al., 2004). This isconsistent with leadership research on behavioralflexibility (Zaccaro, Gilbert, Thor, & Mumford, 1991)and leadership complexity (Denison, Hooijberg, &Quinn, 1995), which argues that leaders must havea flexible repertoire of behavioral responses sothat they can respond effectively and differentlybased on specific situational demands, whilemaintaining their own integrity and credibility.

In terms of the conceptual relationship betweenspecific ELT processes and learning outcomes, we

520 Academy of Management Learning & Education December

propose that individuals who actively experimentwith how to influence their peers and subordinatesare more likely to develop a broader and flexiblerange of leadership styles. This is consistentwith cognitive-behavioral approaches to train-ing, which emphasize intentions and ability tochange behaviors (Brewin, 1996). For example, dur-ing active experimentation, learners consciouslyplan for opportunities to verify their insights (e.g.,whether an authoritarian leadership style is moreeffective with individuals from a particular cul-ture) and then carry out their plan (e.g., givespecific directions to members from that culture).Furthermore, active experimentation allows in-dividuals to gain experience based on real inter-actions with others. Thus, active experimenta-tion facilitates development of a wide range offlexible leadership behaviors that will be avail-able to them in future interactions.Proposiiion 14: Individuals who actively imple-

ment and test their ideas in cross-cultural situations during their in-ternational assignments are morelikely to develop flexibility of lead-ership styles.

For our last proposition, we emphasize the im-portance of feedback loops and the ongoing natureof these processes. Thus, each of the four learningoutcomes has implications for CQ. This is consis-tent with the general premise of the ELT learningcycle and is also consistent with the conceptual-ization of CQ as a malleable set of individualcapabilities that can be enhanced by experiences(Van Dyne, Ang, & Koh, 2008). Thus, when experi-ential learning enhances global leader learningoutcomes, this leads to future enhancements in CQcapabilities. This feedback loop suggests a virtu-ous circle, such that culturally intelligent indi-viduals are more actively engaged in experien-tial learning processes during their internationalassignments, achieve high learning outcomes asa result of this involvement, and in turn gainincreased CQ capabilities. Conversely, thosewith low CQ are less actively engaged in expe-riential learning, have poorer learning out-comes, and are less likely to gain enhanced CQ.Qur last proposition predicts a feedback loopsuch that higher learning outcomes lead tohigher subsequent CQ.Proposiiion 15: Individuals who gain positive

learning outcomes from their inter-national assignments are morelikely to experience subsequent en-hanced CQ capabilities.

DISCUSSION

We have adopted a developmental perspectiveand positioned CQ and experiential learning astwo key factors that influence global leader learn-ing outcomes. Qverall, we aimed to address twoquestions: (1) How do global leaders translate theirinternational experiences into positive learningoutcomes that enhance their global leadership ef-fectiveness? (2) What individual attributes en-hance learning outcomes of global leaders duringtheir international experiences?

To address these questions, we integrated the-ory on experiential learning and cultural intelli-gence and developed a model where CQ capabil-ities facilitate active involvement in experientiallearning. Thus, those with higher CQ are betterable to balance and integrate the dual dialectics ofthe ELT process: grasping experience and trans-forming experience. They are also better able toparticipate actively in the four processes of ELT:concrete experience, reflective observation, ab-stract conceptualization, and active experimenta-tion. Moreover, we have proposed that those whoare more actively engaged in experiential learningwill benefit from more positive learning outcomeswith special relevance to global leaders: globalleadership self-efficacy, ethnorelative attitudes to-ward other cultures, accurate mental models ofeffective leadership across cultures, and flexibilityof leadership styles.

In sum, we suggest that level of CQ influencesexperiential learning during international assign-ments and is one key reason why some globalleaders succeed in their roles and others fail (Shaf-fer et al., 2006). It also may explain why somerepatriates fail to experience career benefits andinstead are disappointed and frustrated at the endof their assignments (cf. Bolino, 2007). For example,leaders who are low in CQ will be less likely totake the initiative to get involved with locals (VanDyne & Ang, 2006). They also may have a ten-dency to short-circuit the experiential learningcycle, thus limiting their learning in becomingeffective global leaders. For instance, leaderswith high motivational CQ and high behavioralCQ may involve themselves in many concreteexperiences during their international assign-ments. However, without high cognitive CQ andmetacognitive CQ, they will not learn fully fromtheir experiences because they lack the observa-tional skills and conceptual understanding totransform their experiences into knowledge thatcan guide them in the future. In a similar way,those who possess high cognitive and metacog-nitive CQ, but who lack motivational CQ may

2009 JVg, Van Dyne, and Ang 521

strive for cultural knowledge through books andobservations but refrain from seeking real inter-actions that will provide more holistic experi-ences and engender deeper learning.

Thus, our conceptual model sheds light on pastinconsistent research findings that show positiveeffects of international work assignments in someinstances and no effects in other instances. Themodel also provides a conceptual explanation forwhy international assignments are not necessar-ily effective leadership development tools for allglobal leaders. Finally, the model has importantorganizational implications. Specifically, themodel espouses that global leaders need to en-gage in all four stages of experiential learning,and this suggests two sets of organizational impli-cations for helping to maximize the developmentalbenefits of international assignments for globalleaders.

Organizational Implications Based on ELT

Selecting Individuals With CQ Capabilities toLearn

Selection is the basic mechanism organizationsuse to get the right people into the right positions(McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002). When organizationsview experiential learning and development asimportant components of international assign-

ments, CQ can serve as an important selectiontool. As we have explicated in our propositions,there are solid theoretical reasons for expectingthat those with higher CQ (metacognitive CQ, cog-nitive CQ, motivational CQ, and behavioral CQ)are more likely to undergo all four stages of theexperiential learning process. This, in turn, makesthem more likely to develop self-efficacy as globalleaders, adopt ethnorelative attitudes toward othercultures, develop accurate mental models of lead-ership across cultures, and show flexibility of lead-ership styles (see Figure 1). Thus, in addition tohaving performance implications as demonstratedby prior research, our model proposes that CQ alsohas implications for learning outcomes and can beused to select people who are more likely to benefitfrom overseas assignments.

Many international assignments, however, arenot designed for developmental purposes and in-stead emphasize other selection criteria, such asdomain-specific business knowledge (Spreitzer etal., 1997). In such situations, candidates may pos-sess KSAOs that are important for the role andorganization. However, our model suggests that ifthey lack CO capabilities to complement their ex-isting skills-set, they may not benefit developmen-tally from international assignments. Thus, an-other implication arising from our work here is theimportance of organizational policies and inter-

IntemationalWork Assignment

Experiences

Experiential Learning Processes

Concrete Experiences^

ActiveExperimentation

ReflectiveObservation

AbstractConceptualization

CulturalIntelligence

t

Leaming Outcomes

AffectiveGlobal Leadership Self-EfficacyEthnorelative Attitudes

KnowledgeAccurate Mental Models of Effective

Leadership Across Cultures

BehavioralFlexibility of Leadership Styles

FIGURE 1Cultural Intelligence and Experiential Learning for Global Leadership Development in

International Assignments


ventions that encourage employees to learn fromtheir cross-cultural experiences. This is particu-larly important for individuals who lack CQ capa-bilities and who may not naturally get activelyinvolved in experiential learning in the absence oforganizational incentives.

Policies and Practices to Encourage ExperientialLearning

Expatriate assignments often include generouspay packages with expensive cars and exclusivehomes. These perquisites, however, can isolateglobal leaders from the host-country culture.Oddou, Mendenhall, and Ritchie (2000) observedthat even in short-term overseas trips, organiza-tional travel policies that focus on efficient andeffective travel can shelter global leaders in a"bubble" that separates them from direct andmeaningful contact with the local culture. Hence,providing the physical, mental, and psychological"space" to allow people to experience, reflect,think, and experiment is critical for learning andchange to take place (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). We sug-gest this idea of "space" has special relevance toglobal leaders who otherwise may not participateactively in experiential learning.

The first stage of experiential learning is con-ciete experiences. Organizations should encour-age their leaders to get involved in the host cultureto gain concrete experience in several ways. First,they can emphasize the value of concrete experi-ences by explaining that involvement and leader-ship development are important objectives of theassignment. This framing should help global lead-ers view the experience as more than just anothertask assignment or jiist another business trip(Oddou et al., 2000). Second, organizations canstructure international assignments to facilitateinterdependence with locals. This will provideleaders with more concrete and meaningful inter-actions with locals that should increase their in-volvement with the local culture (Osland & Os-land, 2006). Third, organizations can rewardleaders for learning foreign languages and in-creasing their knowledge of the local culture dur-ing their assignments. Each of these should facil-itate and encourage cultural involvement (Oddouet al., 2000).

The second stage of experiential learning is re-flective observation. Global leaders have heavyresponsibilities and workloads that allow themvery little time for reflection. Recognizing this re-ality, Mintzberg and Gosling (2002) recommendedthat international management programs shouldincorporate modules for personal reflection. Apply-

ing this to global leaders, organizations can en-courage them to document their cross-cultural ex-periences, insights, and learning points in ajournal (Oddou et al., 2000). By writing down theirexperiences and thoughts, global leaders can com-pare their experiences with their expectations.They can also compare their experiences acrosstime and situations, thus promoting reflection andlearning.

The third stage of the experiential learning pro-cess, abstract conceptualization, also has specificimplications for organizations and their leadershipdevelopment programs. The majority of existingcross-cultural training programs focus on provid-ing country-specific knowledge (Earley & Peterson,2004). Although such training is important for an-ticipating cross-cultural differences, it does not ad-equately equip global leaders with the capabilityto engage in abstract conceptualization that canhelp them make sense of novel and paradoxicalsituations. We recommend that cross-culturaltraining programs should focus on inductive logicand reasoning skills to help global leaders makesense of, as well as translate, their concrete expe-riences and reflections into more abstract under-standing of the culture (Earley & Peterson, 2004).Training programs should also emphasize thebenefits of developing a general appreciation ofdifferent cultures based on specific personal ex-periences, rather than based on stereotypicaltendencies.

The final stage in the ELT process is active ex-perimentation. Organizations can encourage lead-ers to apply their newly acquired insights by pro-viding incentives and resources that encouragethem to set specific and measurable developmen-tal goals for exploration and experimentation.They also can make sure that reward systems donot contradict the importance of development. Forexample, if goals only emphasize short-term busi-ness results, global leaders will be less likelyto maximize experiential learning opportunities.Coaching and mentoring resources will also behelpful to encourage and guide leaders in theirexperimentation processes. Alternatively, theycould facilitate virtual team interactions amongglobal leaders in various locations and encouragethem to share their experiences and sense-makingwith each other. All of these should promote activelearning (e.g., McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002; Oddou etal., 2000).

Research Directions

Spreitzer and colleagues (1997: 26) observed that"perhaps the most important direction for future


research is the creation of a theoretical frameworkfor understanding the processes [italics added] bywhich end-state competencies and the ability tolearn from experience contribute to the develop-ment of executive potential." Our model representsa step in this direction and points to several ave-nues for future research.

First, research can examine empirical relation-ships between the four aspects of CQ, experientiallearning, and the learning outcomes proposed inour model. Future studies could assess CQ capa-bilities with Ang et al.'s (2007) 20-item CQS andadapt existing experiential learning measures(e.g.. Learning Style Inventory by Kolb, 1999a, b) toassess actual observable learning behaviors. Thiswould complement existing research on learningstyles and preferred modes of learning. Learningoutcomes such as global leadership self-efficacycan be assessed by adapting existing measures ofleadership self-efficacy (e.g., Ng et al., 2008); eth-nocentric attitudes (reverse of ethnorelative atti-tudes) toward other cultures could be assessedwith Shaffer et al.'s (2006) 6-item ethnocentrismscale; accuracy of mental models of effective lead-ership across cultures can be assessed with mea-sures of cognitive learning outcomes such asmultiple-choice, true-false or free-recall tests(Kirkpatrick, 1987; Kraiger et al., 1993); and finally,the GLOBE leadership scales (House et al., 2004)could be adapted to assess flexibility of leadershipstyles. To assure rigorous research and avoid com-mon source bias, we recommend multiple sourcedesigns where constructs are assessed by those indifferent roles (e.g., self, peers, supervisors).

Another stream of research could examine howinternational assignments can be designed tomaximize their impact on leadership developmentoutcomes. Research by McCauley, Ruderman,Qhlott, and Morrow (1994) on developmental com-ponents of jobs suggest that challenging job situ-ations often provide valuable opportunities for de-velopment. Examples of challenging tasks that canstretch and develop a leader include tasks that in-volve a high level of responsibility, tasks that re-quire the leader to create change, and tasks thatrequire the leader to manage non-authority rela-tionships. Applied to our context, future researchcould assess the developmental components of in-ternational assignments and examine their impacton leader's learning outcomes. Consistent withMcCauley et al.'s (1994) arguments, we proposethat international assignments with more develop-mental components will provide more significantexperiences that will trigger reflection, thinking,and experimentation. Consistent with our model,research should also take into account interindi-

vidual differences in CQ and their effects on expe-riential learning and learning outcomes.

SUMMARY

Even though international assignments are recog-nized as an important means to develop globalleaders, very little research has considered howleaders actually transform their experiences dur-ing their assignments into learning that will en-hance their global leadership effectiveness. Byintegrating research on CQ and experiential learn-ing theory, we aim to develop a better understand-ing of how and why global leaders learn from theirinternational assignments to become better globalleaders. In essence, our model suggests that CQ isan important set of learning capabilities that al-lows global leaders to benefit developmentallyfrom their experiences by facilitating active in-volvement in all four sages of the ELT cycle duringinternational assignments. Thus, CQ facilitatesthe transformation of experience into experientiallearning as summarized by the phrase in our title:from experience io experiential learning. We rec-ommend that researchers adopt a developmentalperspective when studying expatriates and short-term travelers, so that the developmental benefitsof international assignments can be maximized forboth organizations and individuals.

REFERENCES

Ang, S., & Inkpen, A. C. 2008. Cultural intelligence and offshoreoutsourcing success: A framework of firm-level intercul-tural capability. Decision Sciences, 39: 337-358.

Ang, S., & Van Dyne, L., 2008. Conceptualization of culturalintelligence: Definition, distinctiveness, and nomologicalnetwork. In Ang, S., & Van Dyne, L. (Eds.), Handbook oncultural intelligence: Theory, measurement and applica-tions: 3-15. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, S. K. 2006. Personality correlates ofthe four-factor model of cultural intelligence. Group andOrganizaron Management, 31: 100-123.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C. K. S., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay,C, & Chandrasekar, N. A. 2007. The measurement of cul-tural intelligence: Effects on cultural judgment and deci-sion making, cultural adaptation, and task performance.Management and Organization Review, 3: 335-371.

Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control NewYork: Freeman.

Barney, J. 1992. Integrating organizational behavior and strat-egy formulation research: A resource-based analysis. In P.Shrivastava, A. Huff, & J. Dutton (Eds.), Advances in strate-gic management, 8: 39-61. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Bennett, J. J. 1986. A developmental approach to training inter-cultural sensitivity, /nternationai Joumal of InterculturalRelations, 10: 179-196.

Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & Luk, D. M.


2005. Input-based and time-based models of internationaladjustment: Meta-analytic evidence and theoretical exten-sions. Academy oí Management Journal, 482: 25-281.

Bird, A., Heinbuch, S., Dunbar, R., & McNulty, M. 1993. A concep-tual model of the effects of area studies training programsand a preliminary investigation of the model's hypothe-sized relationships, /nfernational Joumal oí ¡nterculturalRelations. 17: 415-435.

Black, J. S. 1990. The relationship of personal characteristicswith the adjustment of Japanese expatriate managers.Management international Review, 30: 119-134.

Bolino, M. C. 2007. Expatriate assignments and intra-organiza-tional career success: Implications for individuals and or-ganizations. Journal oí International Business Studies, 38:819-835.

Brewin, C. R. 1996. Theoretical foundations of cognitive-behav-ior therapy for anxiety and depression. Annual Review oíPsychology. 47: 33-57.

Caligiuri, P. 2008. Developing global leaders. Human ResourceManagement Review, 18: 219-228.

Carpenter, M. A., Sanders, W. G., & Gregersen, H. B. 2001. Bun-dling human capital with organizational context: The im-pact of international assignment experience on multina-tional firm performance and CEO pay. Academy oíManagement Journal. 44: 493-511.

Cassidy, S. 2004. Leaming styles: An overview of theories, mod-els, and measures. Educational Psychology. 24: 419-444.

Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. 1973. The mind's eye in chess. InW. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual iníormation processing: 215-281.New York: Academic Press.

Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. 1982. Expertise in problemsolving. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology oíhuman intelligence, 1: 7-75. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erl-baum Associates.

Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Dalton, D. R. 2000. Internationalexperience in the executive suite: The path to prosperity?Strategic Management Journal. 21: 515-523.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. 1995. Paradox andperformance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity inmanagerial leadership. Organization Science. 8: 524-540.

Dewey, J. 1938. Experience and education. New York: Simon &Schuster.

Dorfman, P. W., Howell, J. P., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Täte, U., &Bautista, A. 1997. Leadership in Western and Asian coun-tries: Commonalities and differences in effective leader-ship processes across cultures. Leadership Quarterly. 8:233-274.

Earley, P. C, & Ang, S. 2003. Cultural intelligence: Individualinteractions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univer-sity Press.

Earley, P. C Ang, S., & Tan, J. 2008. CQ: Developing culturalintelligence at work. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford UniversityPress.

Earley, P. C & Mosakowski, E. 2004. Cultural intelligence. Har-vard Business Review. 82(10): 139-148.

Earley, P. C, & Peterson, R. S. 2004. The elusive cultural chame-leon: Cultural intelligence as a new approach to intercul-

tural training for the global manager. Academy oí Manage-ment Learning and Education. 3: 100-115.

Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. 2002. Motivational beliefs, values,and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53: 109-132.

Flavell, J. H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: Anew area of cognitive inquiry. American Psychologist. 34:908-911.

Furnham, A., Jackson, C. J., & Miller, T. 1999. Personality, learn-ing style and work performance. Personality and IndividualDifferences, 27: 1113-1122.

Gagne, R. M. 1984. Learning outcomes and their effects: Usefulcategories of human performance. American Psychologist.39: 377-385.

Gardner, H. 1993. Multiple intelligence: The theory in practice.New York: Basic Books.

Gelfand, M. J., Imai, L., & Fehr, R. 2008. Thinking intelligentlyabout cultural intelligence: The road ahead. In S. Ang, & L.Van Dyne, (Eds.), Handbook on cultural intelligence: The-ory, measurement and applications: 375-387. New York:M. E. Sharpe.

Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. 1992. Self-efficacy: A theoreticalanalysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy ofManagement Review, 17: 183-211.

Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. 1989. Overview. In M. T. Chi, R. Glaser,& M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise: xv-xxviii. Hills-dale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gregersen, H. B., Morrison, A. J., & Black, J. S. 1998. Developingleaders for the global frontier. Sloan Management Review,40: 21-32.

Gudykunst, W. B., & Kim, Y. Y. 1984. Communicating withstrangers. An approach to intercultural communication.New York: Random House.

Gudykunst, W. B., Ting-Toomey, S., & Chua, E. 1988. Culture andinterpersonal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hall, D. T., Zhu, G., & Yan, A. 2001. Developing global leaders: Tohold on to them, let them go! Advances in Global Leader-ship. 2: 327-349.

Hall, E. T. 1959. The silent language. New York: Doubleday.

Harris, M., & Lievens, P. 2005. Selecting employees for globalassignments: Can assessment centers measure cultural in-telligence? In R. T. Golembiewski & M. A. Rahim, (Eds.),Current topics in management, 10: 221-240. Brunswick, NJ:Transaction Publishers.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta,V. 2004. Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBEstudy of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Janssens, M., & Brett, J. M. 2006. Cultural intelligence in globalteams: A fusion model of collaboration. Group and Organi-zation Management, 31: 124-153.

Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. 2003. Theexpertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38: 23-31.

Kane, T. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Tremble, T. T., Jr., & Masuda, A. D. 2002.An examination of the leader's regulation of groups. SmallGroup Research, 33: 85-120.

Kayes, D. C. 2002. Experiential leaming and its critics: Preserv-ing the role of experience in management learning andeducation. Academy oí Management Leaming and Educa-tion, 1: 137-149.


Kayes, D, C, Kayes, A, B,, & Yamazaki, Y, 2005a, Essentialcompetencies for cross-cultural knowledge absorption,Joumal of Managerial Psychology, 20: 578-589

Kayes, D, C, Kayes, A, B,, & Yamazaki, Y, 2005b. Transferringknowledge across cultures: A leaming competency ap-proach. Performance /mprovemenf Quarterly, 18(4): 87-100,

Kim, K,, Kirkman, B, L,, & Chen, G, 2008. Cultural intelligenceand international assignment effectiveness: A conceptualmodel and preliminary findings. In Ang, S,, & Van Dyne, L,(Eds,) Handbook on cultural intelligence: Theory, measure-ment and applications: 71-90, New York: M, E, Sharpe,

Kirkpatrick, D, L, 1987, Evaluation of training. In R, L, Craig (Ed,),Training and development handbook: A guide to humanresource development (3rd ed.): 301-319, New York:McGraw-Hill,

Klak, T,, & Martin, P, 2003, Do university-sponsored interna-tional cultural events help students to appreciate "differ-ence"? /nfernationaJ Joumal of Intercultural Relations, 27:445-465,

Kolb, D, A, 1984, Experiential learning: Experience as the sourceof ¡earning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pren-tice-Hall,

Kolb, D, A, 1999a, Learning Style Inventory. MA: TRG Hay/McBer,Training Resources Group,

Kolb, D, A, 1999b, ¿earning Style Inventory - Version 3: Technicalspecifications. MA: TRG Hay/McBer, Training ResourcesGroup,

Kolb, A, Y,, & Kolb, D, A, 2005, Learning styles and learningspaces: Enhancing experiential leaming in higher educa-tion. Academy of Management Leaming and Education, 4:193-212,

Kraiger, K,, Ford, J, K,, & Salas, E, 1993, Application of cognitive,skill-based, and affective theories of learning outcomes tonew methods of training evaluation, Joumal of AppliedPsychology, 78: 311-328,

Krathwohl, D, R,, Bloom, B, S,, & Masia, B, B, 1984, Taxonomy ofeducational objectives: The classification of educationalgoals. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Leslie, J, B,, & Van Velsor, E, 1998, A look at derailment today:North American and Europe. Greensboro, NC: Center forCreative Leadership,

Leung, A, K,, Maddux, W, W,, Galinsky, A, D,, & Chiu, C-y, 2008,Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The whenand how, American Psychologist, 63: 169-181,

Lord, R, G,, Brown, D, J,, Harvey, J, L,, & Hall, R, J. 2001, Contex-tual constraints on prototype generation and their multi-level consequences for leadership perceptions. LeadershipQuarterly, 12: 311-338,

Mainemelis, C, Boyatzis, R,, & Kolb, D, A. 2002, Leaming stylesand adaptive flexibility: Testing experiential learning the-ory. Management Leaming, 33: 5-33,

McCall, M, W,, & Hollenbeck, G, P, 2002, The lessons of intema-tional experience: Developing global executives. MA: Har-vard Business School,

McCauley, C, D,, Ruderman, M, N,, Ohlott, P, J,, & Morrow, J, E,1994, Assessing the developmental components of manage-rial jobs, Joumal of Applied Psychology, 79: 544-560,

Mendenhall, M,, & Oddou, G, 1985, The dimensions of expatriateacculturation: A review. Academy of Management Review,10: 39-47,

Mintzberg, H,, & Gosling, J, 2002, Educating managers beyondborders. Academy of Management Leaming and Education,1: 64-76.

Morris, M, A,, & Robie, C, 2001, A meta-analysis of the effects ofcross-cultural training on expatriate performance and ad-justment, /nternafionai Joumal of Training and Develop-ment. 5: 112-125,

Nelson, T, O, 1996, Consciousness and metacognition, AmericanPsychologist, 51: 102-116,

Ng, K, Y,, Ang, S,, & Chan, K, Y, 2008, Personality and leadereffectiveness: A moderated mediation of leadership self-efficacy, job demands and job autonomy, Joumal of AppliedPsychology, 93: 733-743,

Ng, K, Y,, & Earley, C, P, 2006, Culture and intelligence: Oldconstructs, new frontiers. Group and Organization Manage-ment, 31: 4-19,

Oberg, K, 1960, Culture shock: Adjustment to new cultural envi-ronments. Practical Anthropology, 7: 177-182,

Oddou, G,, Mendenhall, M,, & Ritchie, J, B, 2000, Leveragingtravel as a tool for global leadership development. HumanResource Management, 2-3: 159-172,

Oolders, T,, Chemyshenko, O, S,, & Stark, S, 2008, Culturalintelligence as a mediator in relationships between open-ness to experience and adaptive performance. In S, Ang, &L, Van Dyne, (Eds,), Handbook on cultural intelligence; The-ory, measurement and applications: 145-173, New York:M, E, Sharpe,

Osland, J, S,, & Bird, A, 2000, Beyond sophisticated stereotyping:Cultural sensemaking in context. Academy of ManagementExecutive, 14: 65-87,

Osland, J, S,, & Osland, A, 2006, Expatriate paradoxes and cul-tural involvement. International Studies of Managementand Organization, 35(4): 91-114,

Rockstuhl, T„ & Ng, K, Y, 2008, The effects of cultural intelligenceon interpersonal trust in multicultural teams. In S, Ang, & L,Van Dyne, (Eds,), Handbook on cultural intelligence: The-ory, measurement and applications: 206-220, New York:M, E, Sharpe,

Sambharya, R, B, 1996, Foreign experience of top managementteams and international diversification strategies of U,S,multinational corporations. Strategic Management Joumal,17: 739-746,

Shaffer, M. A,, Harrison, D, A,, Gregersen, H,, Black, J, S,, &Ferzandi, L, A, 2006, You can take it with you: Individualdifferences and expatriate effectiveness, Joumal of AppliedPsychology, 91: 109-125,

Shaffer, M,, & Miller, G, 2008, Cultural intelligence: A key suc-cess factor for expatriates. In S, Ang, & L, Van Dyne, (Eds,),Handbook on cultural intelligence; Theory, measurementand applications: 107-125, New York: M, E, Sharpe,

Sitzmann, T,, Brown, K, G,, Casper, W, J,, Ely, K,, & Zimmerman,R, D, 2008, A review and meta-analysis of the nomologicalnetwork of trainee reactions, Joumal of Applied Psychology,93: 280-295,

Spitzberg, B, H, 1989, Issues in the development of a theory ofinterpersonal competence in the intercultural context, In-temational Joumal of ¡ntercultural Relations, 13: 241-268,

Spreitzer, G, M,, McCall, M, W,, Jr,, & Mahoney, J, D, 1997, Earlyidentification of intemational executive potential, Joumalof Applied Psychology, 82: 6-29,


Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (Eds.). 1986. What is iníeJlí-gence?; Con/emporary viewpoints on ifs nature and defini-tion. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Stroh, L. K., & Caligiuri, P. M. 1998. Increasing global competi-tion through effective people management. Journal oíWorld Business, 33: 1-16.

Taylor, S. E., & Crocker, J. 1981. Schematic bases of social infor-mation processing. In E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, & M. P.Zanna (Eds.), Social cogniiion: The Ontario symposium: 89-134. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Templer, K. J., Tay, C, & Chandrasekar, N. A. 2006. Motivationalcultural intelligence, realistic job previews, and realisticliving conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment.Group and Organiza/ion Management, 31: 154-173.

Triandis, H. C. 1994. Cuiture and sociai beiiavior. New York:McGraw Hill.

Triandis, H. C. 1995. Culture specific assimilators. In S. M.Fowler (Ed.), /ntercuiíurai sourcebooi: Cross-cultural train-ing methods: 179-186. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Triandis, H. C. 2006. Cultural intelligence in organizations.Group and Organization Management, 31: 20-26.

Triandis, J. C, Marin, G., Lisansky, J., & Betancourt, H. 1984.Simpática as a cultural script of Hispanics. Journal oí Per-sonality and Social Psychology, 47: 1363-1375.

Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. 2006. Getting more than you expect:Global leader initiative to span structural holes and repu-tational effectiveness. In W. H. Mobley & E. W. Weldon(Eds.), Advances in global leadership. 4: 101-122. New York:JAI Press.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Koh, C. 2008. Development and valida-tion of the CQS: The cultural intelligence scale. In S. Ang, &L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook on cuiturai inteiiigence; Tiie-ory, measurement and applications: 16-38. New York: M. E.Sharpe.

Van Velsor, E., Moxley, R. S., & Bunker, K. A. 2004. The leaderdevelopment process. In C. D. McCauley & E. Van Velsor(Eds.), Handbook oí leadership development f2nd ed.̂ : 204-233. CA: Wiley.

Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. 2004. An experiential approach tocross-cultural leaming: A review and integration of compe-tencies for successful expatriate adaptation. Academy oíManagement Learning and Education, 3: 362-379.

Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. 2007. Expatriate learning: Explor-ing how Japanese managers adapt in the United States,international Journal oí Human Resource Management, 18:1373-1395.

Zaccaro, S. J., Gilbert, J. A., Thor, K. K., & Mumford, M. D. 1991.Leadership and social intelligence: Linking social perspec-tiveness and behavioral flexibility to leader effectiveness.Leadersiiip Quarterly, 2: 317-342.

Kok-Yee Ng ([email protected]) is associate professor in management at the Nanyang Tech-nological University in Singapore, and director of research at the Center for Leadership andCultural Intelligence. Ng received her PhD in organizational behavior from Michigan StateUniversity. Her research interests include cultural intelligence, leadership, and teams.

Linn Van Dyne ([email protected]) professor, Michigan State University (PhD, University ofMinnesota) is associate editor of Organizaiionai Behavior and Human Decision Processes, afellow in Society of Organizational Behavior, and on seven additional editorial boards. Herresearch programs include proactive employee behaviors and cultural intelligence.

Soon Ang ([email protected]; PhD, Minnesota) is Goh Tjoei Kok Chair and professor inmanagement at the Nanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University in Singa-pore. Ang pioneered the concept of cultural intelligence and has published widely. Herresearch interests include cultural intelligence, outsourcing, and global leadership.

Copyright of Academy of Management Learning & Education is the property of Academy of Management and

its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's

express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

NG; DYNE; ANG (2009) From Experience to Experiential Learning Cultural Intelligence as a Learning

Documents

Transcript of NG; DYNE; ANG (2009) From Experience to Experiential Learning Cultural Intelligence as a Learning