Multiculturalism From A Cognitive Perspective

Multiculturalism from a cognitive perspective: Patterns and implications
Author(s): Gundula Lücke, Tatiana Kostova and Kendall Roth

Source: Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 45, No. 2 (February/March 2014),
pp. 169-190
Published by: Palgrave Macmillan Journals
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43653804
Accessed: 22-01-2019 12:20 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Palgrave Macmillan Journals is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of International Business Studies
This content downloaded from 45.32.171.230 on Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:20:12 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of International Business Studies (2014) 45, 1 69- 1 90
© 201 4 Academy of International Business All rights reserved 0047-2506
www.jibs.net
Multiculturalism from a cognit

Patterns and implications
Abstract
Gundula Lücke1, Tatiana
Multiculturalism, the internal representation of multiple cultural meaning
Kostova2 and Kendall Roth2
systems, has critical implications for global managers and multinational corpo-
rations (MNCs). Understanding multiculturalism is becoming increasingly
1 Department of Business Studies , Uppsala
important, given that the locations within which MNC activity resides, and the
University, Uppsala , Sweden; 2Sonoco
composition
International Business Department, ; Moore
of the workforce even within a given location, are more diverse.
Building on the
School of Business, University of South Carolina, connectionism perspective, we offer a novel cognitive concep-
Columbia, USA tualization of multiculturalism that incorporates the individual's multicultural
cognitive content and structure. Based on that, we explain how specific socio-
Correspondence: cultural experiences interact with existing individual cognitions to form different
G Lücke, Department of Business patternsStudies,
of multiculturalism. Specifically, we propose five stylized patterns -
Uppsala University, Box 513, 75120 Uppsala, integration, inclusion, convergence, and generalization -
compartmentalization,
Sweden.
and explain how they are developed through specific sociocultural experiences.
Tel: +46 18 471 1358;
We discuss how different patterns of multiculturalism influence specific capabil-
email: gundula.lucke@fek.uu.se
ities of multicultural MNC managers and their effectiveness in a variety of critical
MNC tasks. We believe the cognitive connectionist perspective, which has not
been brought before into international business discussions of culture and
cultural capabilities, holds great promise for better understanding global
managers' capabilities and development.
Journal of International Business Studies (201 4) 45, 1 69- 1 90. doi: 1 0. 1 057/jibs.20 1 3.53
Keywords: culture; social cognition; impact of culture on MNC performance

management; multiculturalism; cultural cognitions
INTRODUCTION
Operating in multiple meaning systems across cultural borders is
increasingly common in everyday life. Understanding how to dea
with cultural multiplicity is particularly important for multinationa
corporations (MNCs), as it affects their ability to conduct critica
tasks such as global integration of dispersed operations, cross-border
transfer of management practices, and learning across different
environments (e.g., Brannen, 2004; Fiss & Zajac, 2004; Kostova &
Roth, 2002; Strang & Soule, 1998). Such tasks require significant
cultural interpretive work and meaning construction, which can be
handled only with an adequate understanding of multiple cultura
systems (e.g., Brannen, 2004). A number of approaches have been
Received: 12 January 201 1
suggested to deal effectively with these challenges, including the
Revised: 1 1 July 201 3
use of cross-cultural teams and cross-border structural units. In this
Accepted: 16 July 2013 paper, we focus on another mechanism that can play a critical rol
Online publication date: 21 November 2013
in such integration tasks - multicultural individuals. Multiculturai
^
170
are individuals who have an understanding of more Chiù, & No, 2010). The existing biculturalism lite-
than one societal culture, which allows them to rature is based on two key processes - identification
make informed cultural interpretations in multiple and socialization. The central proposition is that
contexts. Our objective in this paper is to developindividuals
a who have grown up under the influence
cognition-based explanation of multiculturalism, its of two cultures may develop a bicultural identity,
various patterns, and the related implications in thewhich allows them to hold two different cultures
context of MNCs, based on recent conceptualiza-that can be accessed based on the activation of
tions of culture. each cultural identity. Given that both cultures
We draw from contemporary cognitive work on are internalized through early socialization, these
culture (Oyserman & Sorensen, 2009; Strauss & value structures and beliefs are stable over time. We
Quinn, 1997), which provides a sophisticated emphasize instead multicultural cognition, which
explanation of how a culture can be cognitively does not necessarily imply identification or early
represented in an individual. This allows a more socialization, as cultural understandings can be lear-
explicit focus on the individual than is typical ned through experiences later in life. We wish to
for culture research in the management literature. understand key processes and patterns associated
From a cognitive perspective, culture is understood with multicultural exposure in adults. This is not to
as internalized mental representations fundamental say that multiculturalism cannot develop separa-
to everyday interpretation, understanding, com- tely through childhood socialization, but rather
munication, and overall functioning in society. that it can occur in adults, and that such a context
Individuals differ in how they internally organize allows us to theorize on systematic differences in
different cultural views, ideas, and perspectives multiculturalism due to varying cultural expo-
(Strauss, 2005). In particular, we take a connection- sures. Furthermore, multiculturalism as conceptua-
ism perspective, which conceptualizes cognition in lized here focuses on the cognitive level, and thereby
terms of interrelated, distributed cognitive elements, does not necessarily imply changes in individuals'
explaining how these emerge, how they are acce- value systems. It also allows a more conscious,
ssed, and how they shape understanding and sense- agency-like reaction to cultural situations, unlike
making in a dynamic and flexible way (Dawson, the automaticity generally implied in the switch-
2004; Garson, 2012; Houghton, 2005; Shanks, ing between cultural identities. Thus, the cognitive
2005; Smith, 1996; Strauss & Quinn, 1997). The multiculturalism perspective presented here can
connectionist approach helps us understand both be viewed as complementing the dominant view on
individuals' cultural cognitions - the content, or bicultural identity. Specifically, our approach add-
what they know - and the links between the differ- resses issues of the multicultural mind invol-
ent cognitive elements - the structure, or how they ving cognitive development, which complement
access or use cultures when making sense of the aspects of the multicultural self - that is, cultural
environment. It moves the imagery from one of identities (Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2010; Tadmor
a set of distinct, culture-specific cognitions to one et al., 2010). Existing research commonly fails to
of complex interpretations based on interlinked, differentiate these distinct aspects of knowing/
multicultural cognitions. This theoretical founda- understanding and identifying, whereby it is
tion allows us to specify several patterns of multi- argued that the former is a prerequisite of the latter
culturalism based on different combinations of cul- (Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2010; Tadmor et al.,
2010).
tural content and structure - compartmentalization,
integration, inclusion, convergence, and generali- Our approach is particularly useful for MNC man-
zation. It also provides a basis to suggest a link agers who may acquire their cultural cognitions
between these patterns and certain management through professional experiences. Specifically, we
capabilities critical for important MNC tasks, such explore individual variation in multicultural cogni-
as cross-border integration, cultural interpretation, tions, offering some ideas on how different social
sense-making, translation, and recontextualization. experiences lead to differences in both the content
The cognitive perspective we employ extends of individuals' cultural cognitions and the struc-
the work on biculturalism, which also examines ture in which they are organized - that is, in their
how individuals develop an understanding and pattern of multiculturalism. Thus, access to different
competency in more than one culture (Brannen & cultural meanings varies not only as a function of
Thomas, 2010; Fitzsimmons, Miska, & Stahl, 2011; the situation, as previously recognized, but also as
Nguyen & Benet-Martínez, 2010; Tadmor, Hong, a function of the particular cognitive architecture
Journal of International Business Studies
171
an individual holds. In other words, rather than the main elements of the connectionist cognitive
approach as applied to culture, including cultural
suggest that cultural differences in cognitions are
made salient at different times (e.g., Hong, Morris, interpretation and cognitions, cultural schémas, and
Chiù, & Benet-Martínez, 2000), we propose that
multicultural content and structure.
in the multicultural mind both conscious and Meaning systems have long been considered
unconscious cognitive processes may be the result
a critical aspect of culture, if not the essence of it.
Understanding how people internalize meaning
of a more pervasive culture-cognitive development
permeating the manager's daily activitiessystems
(see alsothat help them interpret multiple cultural
Thomas, 2006, 2010). In fact, cultural understand-
environments is essential for explaining multi-
ings themselves may change when multiple culturalism.
cultures The predominant research on culture
meet and mix in an individual's mind. Based on emphasizes the sharedness of meaning systems
this conceptualization, we discuss how different among the members of a cultural group, owing to
the similarity of their social experiences (Strauss &
multicultural patterns are associated with important
multicultural skills that make individuals more or Quinn, 1997): thus the way members of a culture
less effective in critical management tasks within interpret a concept or activity tends to be similar
the MNC. Understanding how such multicultural within national contexts (Geppert, Williams, &
Matten, 2003; Gibson & Zellmer-Bruhn, 2001).
capabilities are formed, and how they impact indivi-
dual skills and task performance, provides useful While acknowledging the societal level, cognitive
insights for companies in their efforts to develop theories of culture also emphasize the importance of
effective international managers. the individual by looking at mental representations
The paper is organized as follows. We ñrst proof culture - cultural cognitions - and how they shape
vide a connectionism-based conceptualization of
interpretation and action. This results from mean-
multiculturalism. Second, we build on this to pro- ings that are evoked through the interaction
pose five distinct patterns of multiculturalism. between cognitions and social experiences.
Third, we offer propositions on the link between A person's mental representation of situations
multiculturalism patterns and effectiveness in
comprises base cognitive units that are distributed
critical managerial tasks in MNCs. We conclude and networked, and which function through parallel
with a discussion of the paper's contributions,processing
and mechanisms (Garson, 2012; Houghton,
of directions for future research on multicultural- 2005; Peterson & Wood, 2008; Smith, 1996). These
ism and MNCs. base units can be imagined as interconnected neu-
rons, which evoke meaningful interpretations only
THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS: when activated in a pattern distributed across many
CONNECTIONISM AND MULTICULTURALISM units. Cultural knowledge is thus inherent in and
Connectionism has been used across a number ofevoked holistically through interlinked cognitive
disciplines, including cognitive science (Bechtel &
pathways (Strauss & Quinn, 1997). Mental represen-
tations emerge when cognitive links strengthen,
Abrahamsen, 1991; Dawson, 2004), cognitive psycho-
logy (Houghton, 2005; Shanks, 2005), cultural based on repeated exposure to social environments.
anthropology (D'Andrade, 1995; Strauss & Quinn,
When they become relatively stable and shared, they
1997), social psychology (Smith, 1996), and man-
constitute cultural schémas (Bechtel & Abrahamsen,
agement (Hanges, Dorfman, Shteynberg, Sc Bates,
1991; Hanges et al., 2000; Strauss & Quinn, 1997).
2006; Hanges, Lord, & Dickson, 2000; Peterson &
Schemas increase perceptual readiness, memory
Wood, 2008). Like other cognitive theories ofretrieval,
cul- and perception of social contexts, and are
ture, a connectionist perspective aims at explaining
used for evaluation, judgment, problem solving, and
how culture shapes the way people think,other how tasks (Förster & Liberman, 2007). Strongly
they make sense of their environment and whointerconnected
they schémas are activated together thro-
are, and how this is represented in their minds.
ugh parallel processing. Similar or related concepts
Unlike other theories, however, here the emphasis
overlap, and are therefore more likely to be accessed
is on mental representations organized in an together.
inter- In contrast, unrelated concepts, for exam-
connected architecture of cultural cognitions. This
ple political and religious leaders, are not linked,
and hence tend to be used/evoked separately
is fundamental to understanding how culture works
in the brain, shaping thought and action (Hanges
(Hanges et al., 2000). From a connectionist perspec-
et al., 2000, 2006; Smith, 1996; Strauss & Quinn,
tive, therefore, culture is viewed as "interpretations
1997). In the next few paragraphs we introduce
with such and such degree of schematicity" inherent
^
172
in the connectivity and strength of cognitive path- Collins, 2009; Strauss & Quinn, 1997; Wenger,
ways, rather than as a collection of fixed and 1998). fullyAlthough cognitive content and structure are
shared units of cultural meanings (D'Andrade, relatively1992; stable, they can change as a result of
Norman, 1982: 290). Cultural interpretation iscultural the learning, whereby people acquire schémas
outcome of the propagation of activations through pertaining to different cultures (i.e., multicultural
the strongest connections. In a given situation, content), and develop cognitive structures that link
thoughts and actions depend on the parallel proces- and merge them. Specifically, social processes such
sing of connected concepts, selves, motivations, as and
modeling, direct and indirect experience, rewards
other internalized aspects. Interpretations based for on
culturally appropriate behaviors, and instruction
strongly schematized cognitions may become are morecritical for cultural learning (Gherardi, Nicolini,
automatic and subconscious. & Odella, 1998; Markus & Hamedani, 2007; Peterson
Applying the connectionist framework to multi- & Wood, 2008; Wood & Bandura, 1989).
culturalism, we distinguish between multicultural Managers vary considerably with respect to their
cognitive content and structure, which are both cultural experiences - for example, length of stay
critical for understanding cultural interpretations in a foreign culture, number of cultures to which
(Hanges et al., 2006). Simply put, content is what they have been exposed, and intensity or nature of
a person knows, and structure is how this is accessed. the experience - which affects changes in cognitions
Multicultural content consists of a person's different (Kitayama, Duffy, Kawamura, & Larsen, 2003). This
cultural schémas - that is, what he/she knows about results in distinct content and structure of multi-
various cultures - and represents the availability of
cultural cognitions, so that individuals differ in how
multicultural knowledge. Multicultural structure well they understand other cultures, how many
represents the interconnectedness and the relative cultures they comprehend, and how they internally
tie strength between different cultural schémas in organize
an cultural cognitions, which leads to differ-
individual's cognition. It explains how different ences in thinking, sense-making, evaluations, and
cultures can be activated together once they responses. have To capture this variation, in the next
become interconnected; to the extent that certain section we propose stylized patterns of multicultur-
concepts are cognitively linked, the activation of one alism, each understood as a distinct, relatively stable
is likely to result in the parallel processing of the cognitive architecture shaped by different cultural
others. Accordingly, we define multiculturais as experiences.
individuals who have internalized multiple cultural
meanings held in mental representations of inter-
DEVELOPMENT OF PATTERNS OF
connected cultural schémas facilitating interpreta-
MULTICULTURALISM
tions within multiple cultures.
Understanding multiculturalism also requires an "Whenever I board a plane to go home, I become a different
explanation of how these cultural cognitions deve- person, and on the flight back it is the other way around."
lop. We follow a sociocultural perspective that
emphasizes the mutual constitution of mind and Why is it that some multiculturais feel this way,
social experiences (Markus & Hamedani, 2007; while others have a different experience ... being
Markus & Kitayama, 2010; Meyer & Höllerer, 2010; always aware of their other cultures, constantly
Nisbett, 2003; Peterson & Sondergaard, 2011), and pondering different meanings of the same word
suggest that cultural cognitions are formed as a or event, considering multiple alternatives, and inte-
reflection of social phenomena, and are situated grating tidbits of various cultural views into their
in or intertwined with the social context (Cerulo,
work? To explain such variation, we introduce five
2002; DiMaggio, 1997; Peterson & Wood, 2008; patterns of multiculturalism - compartmentali-
Sewell, 1992; Smith & Collins, 2009; Vaughan, zation, integration, inclusion, convergence, and
2002; Wilson & Clark, 2009). Therefore both con- generalization (see Figure 1).
tent and structure emerge from sociocultural expe- We derive the patterns from a connectionist
riences, and through cultural learning embedded perspective, based on a series of conditions related
to multicultural content and structure of cogni-
in relationships and activities (e.g., Bourdieu, [1977]
2006; Brown & Duguid, 1991; DeFillippi & Ornstein, tions. We specifically consider what happens when
2003; Elkjaer, 2003; Levinthal & March, 1993; individuals are exposed to multiple cultures. Cogni-
Orr, 1990; Peterson & Wood, 2008; Powell, Koput, tions can be either based on the original contents
& Smith-Doerr, 1996; Shanks, 2005; Smith & of the various cultures or represent some type of
173
Compartmentalization
Separate cultural cognitions
Integration
Interconnected cultural
cognitions
Inclusion
Enhanced home cultural
cognitions (A) with
added foreign culture
elements
Convergence
Merged cultural
cognitions consisting
of overlapping
schémas
Generalization
New cultural
cognitions of meta-
cultural schémas
Figure 1 Patterns of multiculturalism.
differ in the way original cultures are connected -

hybrid content that emerges. If original contents
compartmentalization
are retained, they can be used either separately or and integration; two that
in an interlinked manner; if a hybrid emerges, represent recombined original sets (expanded and
reduced) - inclusion and convergence; and one
at the theoretical extreme it will be an essentially
new set of cognitions substantially different from
reflecting the emergence of new cultural cognitions
- generalization. Below, we elaborate further on
the originals. In the general case, a hybrid repre-
sents some kind of recombination of the original
each pattern and explain how their distinct content
cognitions, and can be formed though expanding and structure emerge as a result of different social
the base culture with elements from other cultures,
experiences.
or through reducing the cultural content to a
common core. Based on all of these conditions, Compartmentalization
We define compartmentalization as a cognitive
we propose five patterns of multiculturalism: two
that retain the original cultural knowledge butpattern in which an individual has internalized
journal of International Business Studies
'
174
meanings from multiple cultures, whereby thewhen

cul- learning occurs in different contexts and/or at
tures are held separately, and are not linked in
different times of one's life, whereby individuals
may
an integrated cognitive structure. The mental repre-compartmentalize interpretations associated
sentation of compartmentalized multiculturais withcon-different social spheres and discourses (Roskos
sists of multiple sets of cultural schémas, reflecting& Christie, 2011; Strauss & Quinn, 1997). The like-
deep knowledge of each culture, which are then lihood of this pattern depends on the nature of
used for interpretation, communication, andthe beha-
experience - for example, its uniqueness, length,
viors in different cultural contexts. By depth and of intensity of interaction. It will develop when
cultural knowledge we mean knowledge that the is notindividual is deeply immersed in a foreign
superficial, in that the individual not only knows culture without concurrent interactions with other
the typical patterns of behavior in a given culture, cultural groupings, or when the new cultural context
but also understands their underlying logics is and
significantly distinct from what is known, and
motivations. The cultural schémas allow efficient is therefore hard to link in any meaningful way
interpretation, because it is based on processing (Strauss, 2005). It is also possible that in highly
of culture-congruent cognitive pathways thatdiverse have environments with clashing cultures (e.g.,
gained stability over time, and thus may have become world cosmopolitan cities), individuals might delib-
unconscious and automatic (Ericsson & Towne, erately choose to focus on one culture at a time,
2010). Here, the different sets of cultural schémas as opposed to seeking linkages between them. An
are held separately, and interpretation at any given example of this type is a manager who works abroad
time is guided by just one culture, activated byin thea host-country-focused job, and who maintains
specific cultural cues (O'Reilly, 2005). As a result of
predominantly host-country social interactions. The
the disconnected structure, compartmentalization interactions with the home contacts are limited,
multiculturais can alternate back and forth between rare, and not intense, and do not occur at the same
sometimes logically contradictory meaning systems, time as the ones in the host country. Compartmen-
as they are not concerned with and aware of con- talizing the different cultural cognitions (i.e., keep-
flicts between these meanings (Strauss, 2005). This ing them separate, yet available) is a very natural
is consistent with Berger and Luckmann's (1966: mechanism through which people handle multi-
156-157) idea that individuals can switch worlds - plicity and deal with contradictions. However, com-
that is, change their social reality, including their partmentalization multiculturais are not the same
social and cultural self. By analogy, one could think as monoculturals. They have at their disposal multi-
about switching between languages in different con- ple cultural cognitions, which they can activate
texts. Different cultural cognitions have been found under particular circumstances. They can even co-
in attribution styles (Hong, Chiù, & Kung, 1997; activate unconnected schémas and blend interpre-
Hong et al., 2000), reasoning and decision-making tations into a reasonable synthesis (D'Andrade,
styles (Briley, Morris, & Simonson, 2000), and self- 1995), although they will not do so routinely. To
evaluations, attitudes, and value endorsement summarize, we propose:
(Ross, Xun, & Wilson, 2002; Verkuyten & Pouliasi,
Proposition 1: Compartmentalization multicul-
2006), where there is a sense of belonging in the
turalism results from separate learning of distinct
active culture (LaFromboise, Coleman, & Gerton,
cultural meaning systems without building cogni-
1993). Therefore, a compartmentalization manager, tive links between them. Individuals switch bet-
who travels from one country to another, switches ween the cultures based on activation in distinct
to a different set of schémas reflecting different ways
cultural settings. They may access schémas from
of thinking and understanding.
two or more cultures simultaneously, although this
We propose that this pattern of multiculturalism
requires an additional cognitive effort, and does not
develops when individuals have multiple foreign
happen automatically.
country experiences, each of which is confined
within one particular setting and is relatively inde-
pendent from the others. Each experience adds new Integration
cultural content, but does not require or involveIntegration multiculturalism is a pattern in which
a simultaneous dealing with multiple cultures. Asan individual has internalized multiple meaning
a result, individuals do not form structural links
systems that are interlinked within one coherent
between the newly acquired cultural schémas andset of cultural schémas. Similar to compartmen-
the existing cognition. This pattern can be expected talization, it allows a deep understanding of cultural
175
cultures. Discussions or explanations of cultural

contexts, as it retains the different culture-specific
cognitions. In contrast, though, here the multi- meanings and differences can also facilitate reflec-
cultural cognitions are interlinked, and as such are tive thinking processes, leading to more conscious
frequently and even routinely activated together structural integration. Not all intercultural cognitive
(Förster & Liberman, 2007; Higgins, 1990; Strausslinks & will be the same, however; depending on the
Quinn, 1997). The stronger the intercultural cogni- experiences, some will be stronger than others.
Highly integrated schémas can lead to automatic,
tive linking, the more likely will the interpretations,
ways of thinking, and actions be simultaneously unconscious thought and actions. In summary, we
shaped by the different cultures. Therefore, integra-propose:
ted multiculturais do not necessarily switch between
Proposition 2: Integrated multiculturalism deve-
largely distinct worlds, but combine aspects of each
lops from interconnected learning of distinct cul-
in their thoughts and actions. Even if a compartmen-
tural meaning systems whereby strong cognitive
talized and an integrated multicultural had similar
links are established between them. Such integra-
culture-cognitive content (i.e., both have internalized
tion is enhanced through parallel, repeated, deep,
multiple meaning systems, and both can understand
and intense multicultural experiences. Multiple
situations in their local context, their nuances, and
cultural cognitions are activated concurrently for
matters of appropriateness and evaluations), they
interpretation.
would be very different multiculturais, because inter-
pretations are evoked within different cognitive
architectures, involving only one or multiple cul- Inclusion
Inclusion multiculturalism is where an expanded
tures, respectively. In addition to the strength of the
integration, the cognitive capacity in a given situa- and modified cultural content emerges that incor-
porates elements of multiple cultural cognitions
tion also affects activation. For example, in restricted
situations, when under time pressure, individuals into a dominant, pre-existing culture. In this case,
may not use multicultural interpretations (Decoster individuals do not internalize the complete cultural
& Claypool, 2004; Forster & Liberman, 2007). Simi- meaning system from the foreign cultures, nor link
larly, other factors such as salient motivation, mood,
them in their entirety with their dominant cultural
and identity also affect which schémas are activated
cognition. Instead, they bring only select cultural
(Forster & Liberman, 2007). elements into their primary cultural cognition. This
We suggest that integration multiculturalism
occurs through matching new cultural information
results from the combination of the following learn-based on its resonance with salient and accessi-
ing experiences. First, as for compartmentalization ble cognitions (O'Reilly, 2005; Smith, 1996). Such
multiculturais, extensive exposure to in-depth learn-
matching depends on the level of similarity between
ing opportunities in multiple host cultures is funda-
the new and the existing content. Similar interpreta-
mental. The individual learns through strong social tions are matched onto existing categories, because
embeddedness with host culturais and diverse expe- cognitive pathways of related constructs overlap,
riences such as participating in different activities
thus not changing the dominant cognitive structure.
and events (Lücke & Roth, 2008). Second, in contrastNew interpretations are likely to be added to, and
to compartmentalization, often the different cultu- therefore expand, the dominant cognition. That is
res are experienced together. These are situations in
why inclusion individuals develop modified cul-
which influences of multiple cultures are coincidingtural views of situations, leading to alternative inter-
in one setting or following in rapid succession: for pretations (Smith, 1996). The changed cognitive
example, an individual has multicultural meetings, content provides more differentiated and complex
or regularly socializes with friends from different understandings of specific settings. Finally, drasti-
cultures. This creates a social space with cultural cues
cally different meanings or strongly conflicting
activating multicultural cognitions and strengthen-views that do not resonate with existing cognition
ing the structural links between them. Such linking
may not be learned or integrated at all.
requires certain meaning-making processes that Inclusion multiculturalism develops as a result of
connect separate and even contradictory views and
less intense exposure to multiple foreign cultures,
ideas. In order to result in stable structure, the multi-
which nevertheless constitutes a cultural experience,
cultural exposure has to be frequent and repetitive,especially when it occurs frequently and repeatedly.
and it has to be based not only on observation but
This may involve, for example, contact with a
also on active participation and enactment of the
foreigner within the home setting, or short travel or
*
176
stay abroad with few cultural interactions. Such heavily weighted, and others only marginally
experiences allow only limited access to modelingrepresented.
behaviors in the foreign culture. A typical exampleConvergence
is occurs when individuals are exposed
the learning that takes place in a closed expatriate
to a larger number of cultures, and their exposure
community, where interactions are based largely is moderate or low in terms of time spent, intensity,
on the home culture, and in relative isolation from
and breadth. Under such conditions, individuals
the host. In such conditions, internalization of look for simplification in order to deal with the
multiple contexts, and at the same time are not
the complete host cultural meaning system - or even
extensive parts of it - is unlikely. However, the engaged in in-depth cultural learning, which would
multicultural exposure may still be extensive, for imply a more complete internalization of a given
example in regularly held cross-cultural meetings, culture, rather than a selection of a subset of cogni-
or interactions with colleagues from diverse back- tive elements that are compatible with the ones
grounds. Such learning is supported through narra-already held. Actual participation in host cultural
tives and stories, communication, reports, speeches,settings, though, allows learning of meanings in
or books. Cross-cultural training also facilitates social contexts, recognition of the situated nature
of cultural meanings, and their activation based on
this learning, as it increases the ability to imitate
others in actual situations, and to recognize modelcues. This makes convergence different from inclu-
behavior in host culturais (Black & Mendenhall, sion, where the linking of interpretations to their
1990). To summarize: contextual origins is tenuous. Convergence multi-
culturais do learn local host culture, albeit a reduced
Proposition 3: Inclusion multiculturalism deve-
version of it. Through matching cognitive path-
lops from limited cultural exposure to new cul-
ways of similar concepts, common meanings can be
tures, whereby discrete cognitive elements from
other cultures are added into the dominant cul-
found (Garson, 2012; Houghton, 2005; Shanks,
2005). We suggest that such cognitive processes
tural cognition held by the individual. This results
are highly efficient ways to achieve some degree
in a singular - albeit modified - cognitive struc-
of understanding and adjustment without further
ture. Interpretations continue to be strongly influ-
immersion in the culture, avoiding the dissonance
enced by the dominant cognitions, but can also
associated with contrasting meanings. Individuals
accommodate alternative understandings, owing
do not start out in this pattern, but arrive at it as
to the new cognitive elements added to it.
they are exposed to an increasing number of cul-
tures. Therefore we propose:
Convergence
Proposition 4: Convergence multiculturalism
Convergence multiculturalism is defined as the inter-
develops as a simplification solution, when indi-
nalization of select meanings from multiple cultures
viduals have been exposed to a large number of
based on overlapping similarities. In essence, this countries but have not developed very deep
pattern constitutes a simplified and reduced content
understandings of any of them. It is reflected in
based on a common subset of cultural cognitions
a reduced subset of cultural cognitions, that is
that are shared between the cultures. The selection
shared among all the cultures, but continue to be
of the common subset occurs through a cognitivesituated in each culture. This ensures a basic and
matching mechanism. The emerging views oftennon-conflictual cultural understanding across
ignore details while preserving common charac- multiple contexts.
teristics (Smith, 1996); cultural idiosyncrasies are
reduced and details and variations discarded, and
only the shared and overlapping cognitions areGeneralization
retained. The overlapping cognitive configurationsGeneralization multiculturalism is defined as inter-
evoke similar interpretations across contexts. The nalization of cultural meanings and emergence of
common cognitions, while simplified and ignoringcultural cognitions that are based on, but are not the
details, are an essential part of, and therefore stillsame as, the original cultures. These new cognitions
situated in, each of the cultures involved. Conver-reflect abstraction of regularities and generation
gence multiculturalism varies with regard to the sizeof higher-order principles across multiple meaning
of the overlap of content (from limited to extensive)systems. Generalization is conceptually distinct from
as well with regard to symmetry of the represen-the previous patterns, as they all incorporate various
tation of different cultures, with some cultures moreelements of the multiple original cultures that have
177
been recombined or selected into a coherent set. In is created that allows operation across contexts.
contrast, generalization, while based on learning Examples include serial expatriates habitually living
from many cultures, involves the generation of new and traveling in various cultural contexts, or man-
cultural content that is less contextual, more wide agers with extensive and diverse exposure. To
ranging, and universally applicable than what other summarize:
patterns can achieve. This is similar to aspects of
Proposition 5: Generalization multiculturalism
cultural intelligence when interacting knowledge
develops as a simplification solution, when indivi-
is linked by an individual's cultural metacogni-
duals face substantial cultural multiplicity and in
tion at a higher level, involving abstraction from
response develop new meta-cultural cognitions
cultural specifics and focusing of cognitive resources
generalizable across cultures. The original cultural
(Thomas, 2006, 2010). The resulting understandings
cognitions are no longer retained regularly or used
do not exist in any culture as part of the original
for interpretations. The generalized cultural cogni-
cultural meaning system, but they resonate with
the various cultures. This resonance is inherent in
tions allow cultural understanding and interpreta-
tion in many, even unfamiliar, cultural contexts.
how cognitions function with pattern recognition
mechanisms in terms of similarity or resonance of
MULTICULTURAL ABILITIES AND MNC TASK
cognitions (i.e., interpretations, ways of thinking,
affect involvement) in order to find underlying EFFECTIVENESS
regularities (D'Andrade, 1995; Smith, 1996). When
Past research has already proposed a number of
generalizing, details of cultures are ignored, positive
and outcomes of bi- and multiculturalism and
common patterns and overarching understandings their various patterns. For example, Fitzsimmons
are extracted instead (Houghton, 2005). Here,ettheal. (2011) argue that multicultural identity posi-
resonance-matching cognitive process occurs cross-
tively impacts the work of teams, intercultural nego-
culturally, so that insights can be gained tiations,
that ethics and leadership, and cross-border
would not be possible without bringing several
alliances and acquisitions. Hong (2010) proposes
influences on team effectiveness, and Brannen,
cultures together. The underlying cognitive structure
Garcia, and Thomas (2009) suggest an impact on
is therefore based on strong intercultural linking,
and the more stable these links become, the morehigher cultural metacognition, which facilitates
likely it is that they will guide decisions and adjustment and learning. Multicultural experiences
behaviors. have also been found to enhance creativity (Leung,
Generalization develops when the multiplicity Maddux,
of Galinsky, & Chiù, 2008; Maddux, Adam, &
cultural experiences itself become the learning Galinsky, 2010; Maddux & Galinsky, 2009). We seek
ground. It is likely to emerge when individuals
to add to this literature in two ways.
have been exposed to many cultures, which creates
First, we direct our discussion to the MNC con-
inconsistencies and thus necessitates some kind text, which is both practically significant and theo-
of cognitive simplification in meaning-making. retically appropriate for these questions. The very
existence of the MNC depends on a firm-specific
Resonance-based generalization is a natural property
of connectionist models that arises when diffe- advantage - typically knowledge, innovation, or
rent cultural perspectives can be matched, based practice - which must be transferred across units
on similarities deriving from parallel cultural worlds
and borders to leverage global presence and accu-
(Houghton, 2005; McClelland & Rogers, 2003; Rogers
mulate rents (Buckley & Casson, 1976, 2003, 2009).
& McClelland, 2004). Park (2010), for example,
The most critical tasks in the MNC thus revolve
suggests that such processes occur during stressful
around cross-border knowledge transfer (Birkinshaw,
life events, owing to discrepancies of appraised Bresman,
and & Nobel, 2010; Bresman, Birkinshaw, &
existing meaning. Exposure to multiple cultures Nobel, 1999; Fransson, Hãkanson, & Liesch, 2011;
may also be associated with high levels of stress,
Gupta & Govindarajan, 1991, 2000; Kogut & Zander,
and thus lead individuals to search for compre-
1993, 2003) and integration across the naturally
fragmented and dispersed operations (Foss &
hensibility across contexts, and to engage in proce-
sses of reflective abstraction by considering com-
Pedersen, 2004; Noorderhaven & Harzing, 2009;
monalities and inconsistencies (Linn & Songer, Tippmann, Scott, & Mangematin, 2012), so that
1991), resulting in significant cognitive changes
the distributed capabilities of the company are leve-
(Wenger, 1998; Wertsch, Tulviste, & Daniels, 2005).
raged on a global basis, an idea captured by the term
As a result, a non-culture-specific metacognition
"transnational company" (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1991;
^
178
Prahalad & Doz, 1987). Such a model is not easythe

tomanager to have sufficient cultural cognitions
and expertise. Second, managers need to be able
achieve, however. Many of the associated difficulties
stem from the diversity of meanings in the cross- to interpret or make sense of situations in a multi-
cultural context. When organizational concepts,
cultural manner, for which they need to hold and
ideas, or practices cross cultural boundaries, they evoke
are related cognitive structures that allow them to
subject to new sets of interpretations and changes compare and contrast the different understandings.
in meaning, which causes disruptions and misinter- Third is the ability to translate a particular situa-
tion
pretations (Brannen, 1992, 2004; Brannen, Liker, & into one that is meaningful in a different
Fruin, 1999; Brannen & Wilson, 1996; Gertsen & context, involving understanding, reinterpretation,
Zolner, 2012; Hung, Li, & Belk, 2007). For example,active transformation, and re-embedding (Brown &
the adoption of a practice developed in a foreignDuguid, 1991; Buck & Shahrim, 2005; Czarniawska,
cultural context is often inhibited because of its 2012; Czarniawska & Sevón, 1996; Giddens, 1984;
different cultural meaning, which may be inconsis- Gould & Grein, 2009; Morris & Lancaster, 2006;
tent with the existing cultural interpretationsPowelland & Colyvas, 2008; Zilber, 2006). For that, they
may lead to lack of comprehension and acceptance also need to be capable of modifying, recombi-
(Fiss & Zajac, 2004; Gibson & Zellmer-Bruhn, 2001; ning, or integrating related meanings, and maybe
Hanges et al., 2006). Such differences in meaning even creating new ones if necessary. For example,
can seriously undermine the legitimacy and evena the
manager can frame a message in host cultural
fundamental understanding of a transferred concept while retaining the essence of it. In fact, it is
terms
often necessary to recontextualize knowledge or a
(Buck & Shahrim, 2005; Jensen & Szulanski, 2004;
specific practice to fit the new cultural settings to
Meyer & Höllerer, 2010). Similarly, it will be difficult
which it is being exported (Brannen, 2004; Buck &
to capture unique indigenous capabilities arising
Shahrim, 2005; Gertsen & Zolner, 2012; Peltokorpi
in specific countries and to develop practice inno-
& Vaara, 2012). Fourth is the ability to generate
vations based on that - a phenomenon Hart (2007)
explained as co-inventing contextual knowledge new ideas through processes of juxtaposition and
recombination.
and solutions. Finally, differences in cultural under-
Below we will explain how the different patterns
standings inhibit intercultural interactions, ranging
from building relationships with external players oftomulticulturalism induce cognitive processes that
are associated with different cultural capabilities
the effectiveness of diverse teams (Earley & Gibson,
2002); they challenge the creation of culturally and competences, and thus impact the effectiveness
diverse knowledge networks and the buildingofofindividuals in various strategically important
social capital (Kostova & Roth, 2002). tasks in MNCs. Table 1 summarizes this discussion.
Second, the connectionist perspective and the
patterns of multiculturalism that we derive basedCompartmentalization
on it help in understanding the developmentThe of content and structure of compartmentalization
multiculturalism implies a plurality of cultural inter-
respective capabilities, and also highlight additional
pretations available to the manager, whereby inter-
capabilities not addressed in previous research. Fun-
damentally, depending on the pattern of multicul- pretations are evoked based on only one culture at a
time. Peterson and Wood (2008) refer to the out-
turalism, managers will develop certain capabilities
and competences, and as a result will be more or come less of the cultural learning process as gaining
effective in the critical MNC tasks discussed above. cultural expertise. Accordingly, a compartmentaliza-
Specifically, the varying cultural content and struction multicultural is a cultural expert in two or more
ture in the different patterns impact cultural differ- cultures. Such managers have deep, broad, and
ently on understanding, sense-making and ways of differentiated understandings in each culture, and
thinking, social interaction and communication, do not perceive, or are not disturbed by, discrepan-
being insider and/or outsider to a culture, and cies and competing explanations. They can fill in
creativity, among others. There are several key cap- missing information in a culture-congruent way,
abilities affected by the pattern of multiculturalism. make sense out of new information, and make
First is the ability to make sense of foreign MNC predictions about what is going to happen in cul-
ture-typical settings. Motivations, rewards, and
contexts. Culture-cognitive aspects of foreign cultu-
appropriate behavior are not only understood but
res are difficult to observe and interpret correctly,
because they are tacit and often unstated (Scott, also accepted as normal within a given context. They
2001; Zucker, 1983). Thus, understanding requires successfully interact and communicate with others
179
Table 1 Patterns of multiculturalism and critical tasks in MNCs
Pattern of multiculturalism Description Multicultural capabilities Task effectiveness
Compartmentalization Individuals internalize multiple Understanding multiple cultures Transfer of codified knowledge
meaning systems, which are Enriched interpretation within No cultural or practice innovation
retained and invoked separately each culture Intra-cultural relationships and
Negligent cross-cultural acceptance by locals
translation
Integration Individuals internalize multiple but Understanding multiple Comprehensive cross-cultural

interconnected meaning systems, connected cultures transfers and organizational change
which are used simultaneously for Complex interpretation across Culture and practice innovation
interpretation cultural contexts Cross-border boundary-spanning
Translation across cultural Cross-cultural social networks
contexts
Creativity across cultural

contexts
Inclusion Individuals incorporate elements of Sophisticated understanding of Transfer of MNC core belief
foreign cultural meaning systems the home culture different cultural contexts
into their dominant cultural Interpretation by drawing on Some ability to transfer knowled
cognition. This expanded cognition home-cultural cognitions and practices to home-cultural
is used for interpretation across Limited translation across context
cultures cultural contexts Incremental innovation
Convergence Individuals develop a coherent Understanding of overla
cultural cognition based on the multiple cultures kno
overlapping content and structure Interpretation of multiple
across cultures. This common core connected cultures in overla
cognition is used for interpretation area Cross-cultural social networks
across cultures Limited translation and
recontextualization
Generalization Individuals develop a new meta- Little in-depth understanding of Transfer of supra-national practices
cultural cognition based on particular cultural contexts; and knowledge
generalizations and abstractions of limited cross-cultural Meta-cultural networks
multiple cultures. This interpretation and translation Meta-cultural innovation
metacognition is used for Understanding and interpreting Enhancing global organizational
interpretation across contexts meta-environment image and legitimacy
Novel meta-cultural insights and
understandings
(Tadmor, et al., 2010), and are capable of developing do not consider multiple cultural perspectives of an
meaningful relationships in each context. For exam- idea, which prevents a more complex understanding
ple, Li and Hong (2001) found that more accurate thereof and the recognition of its potential for cross-
knowledge of the host culture results in more satis- cultural dissemination. These managers also lack
factory interactions with locals. Thoughts, goals, and capabilities for cross-cultural translation.
behaviors can be expressed in a way that is aligned Considering the task of transferring organizational
with the respective culture, and so are more likely to practices and knowledge, the effectiveness of these
be perceived as acceptable or even desirable. This is managers will depend on the type of practice and
critical for motivating and persuading others. knowledge that is being transferred. If the knowl-
Compartmentalized multiculturais do not typi- edge is codifiable and easily articulated, they would
cally combine interpretations rooted in diffe- likely be rather successful, given their understanding
rent cultures. These managers therefore lack the of the recipient environment. They can adapt the
mediating capabilities necessary for cross-cultural practice to the local context; however, they will not
interpretation, in that they can understand ideas engage in cultural or practice innovation, because
and practices within a culture, but will be unable this requires the availability of multiple views for
to do this beyond the specific cultural context. They recombinative and innovative processes to occur
1
180
(Clemens Sc Cook, 1999; Friedland & Alford, 1991;sophisticated interpretations in light of their overall
Seo & Creed, 2002; Thornton, Ocasio, & Lounsbury,multicultural cognitions. Their understanding of
2012). The success of these managers in practice situations is enhanced, and these managers will
transfer is also related to their unique abilitybe tocapable of recontextualization and translation
understand, engage, and motivate the recipients, across
as contexts. Specifically, inherent in the addi-
they are viewed essentially as locals. The effective-
tional cognitive linking is an ability to develop more
ness of these managers diminishes, however, differentiated
for insights, and to consider more distinct
practices where knowledge becomes more tacit, aspects.
or This is consistent with the observations
has a higher social embeddedness component. Then of Benet-Martinez, Lee, and Leu (2006: 386) that
the lack of cognitive links between the different"exposure to more than one culture may increase
individuals' ability to detect, process, and organize
cultures makes it harder for them to reinterpret and
everyday cultural meaning, highlighting the poten-
translate the practice across meaning systems. There-
fore we suggest: tial benefits of biculturalism" and findings of
increased cognitive complexity (e.g., Tadmor et al.,
Proposition 6a: Managers with compartmen-
2010; Tadmor & Tetlock, 2006). Furthermore, the
talization multiculturalism are cultural experts in
multiplicity of meanings allows some of the taken-
multiple cultures, which gives them the ability
for-granted assumptions to be overcome as they
to communicate, interact, function successfully,
come to light in contrasting views. Consistent with
and be an insider in these cultures. They are not
connectionism, such views can change or weaken
experts in a cross-cultural sense.
existing cognitive pathways, reducing the automati-
Proposition 6b: Managers with compartmenta- city of processing and increasing the likelihood that
lization multiculturalism will be effective in trans- assumptions can be considered more consciously.
ferring practices and sharing knowledge to the These managers will be effective in a number of
extent that these practices and knowledge are not tasks critical to the transnational MNC. With regard
strongly embedded in culture, and therefore to practice transfer, they will have strong capabilities
for correctly understanding, interpreting, and trans-
require little sense-making or translation to fit the
local culture. Such managers are perceived by local lating practices and knowledge across meaning sys-
employees as credible agents for implementingtems, even when the practices are tacit, and differ
foreign practices, because they are viewed as cul- widely in their cultural meanings. Since their under-
ture sensitive and knowledgeable. standing is deep and complex, such managers can
draw and utilize knowledge from all contexts in effec-
tive ways, and can discover the taken-for-granted
Integration and unstated value judgments and reasoning. Com-
The culture-cognitive content and structure of inte- prehension of cultural assumptions and taken-
gration multiculturalism imply plurality and depth for-granted aspects in the receiving environment is
of cultural understanding. For integrated multi- essential for transfers, because such comprehension
culturais the world is inherently interconnected, allows the knowledge or practice to be assessed,
and a plurality of viewpoints is natural. Similar to explained, and justified to the given environment
compartmentalized multiculturais, integration multi- (Green, 2004). As insiders and outsiders to multiple
culturais have a broad and detailed set of cultural cultures, integrated managers can effectively fulfill
tools, and are cultural experts in more than one this function. The transfers that they conduct will be
culture. This gives them similar abilities of cultural meaningful, and will resonate with the local under-
understanding, communication, interaction, and standings, in that they are able to translate the prac-
judgment in each of these cultures. These managers tice and recontextualize its social and cultural mean-
are also multicultural experts, in that their integrateding to make it acceptable and even desirable for the
cognitive structure evokes simultaneous interpre-recipients. Such interpretation and in-depth com-
tations from multiple cultures. The integration of prehension of meanings are also critical for selecting
different cultural cognitions makes the plurality in practices for adoption in a different environment
meanings available to the manager relatively inde-(Strang & Soule, 1998). They will also have capabi-
pendent of the context in which they are. Conse-lities of better identification, interpretation, and
quently, we expect these managers to have greatertranslation of indigenous ideas and practices.
variety in cultural competence, in that they are Furthermore, owing to the sophisticated and
capable of understanding each context and makinginterrelated cognitive structures they possess, these
181
managers will be able to recombine and reformulate logical and internally consistent ways that do not
knowledge. Such complex cognitive structures are contradict the multiple cultural contexts. On the
consistent with recombinative processes supporting downside, such managers may be unable to simplify
innovation. Based on the multiplicity and contra- cultural situations when this is in fact possible.
diction inherent in their integrated multicultural Because of the overly complex cognitive represen-
structure, they can develop the awareness necessary tations and processes, they may compromise effi-
to identify patterns and break with deeply ingrained ciency in certain tasks. Psychological effects are
views. Several studies have indicated that multi- unclear. On the one hand, they face much contra-
cultural experience facilitates creativity (Chiù diction
& in meaning, which can cause distress in
Hong, 2006; Galinsky, Maddux, & Ku, 2006; addition Leung to the positive effects; on the other hand,
& Chiù, 2010; Leung et al., 2008). Multiple inter- the integrated nature of their cultural cognitions also
pretations enable creative expansion and recombi- awards them the chance to better integrate their
nation processes (e.g., Abraham, Windmann, multiple Daum, selves or possibly develop a new self. In
& Güntürkün, 2005; Leung et al., 2008; Ward, 1994).
summary:
By becoming aware of the relativity of meanings
Proposition 7a: Managers with integrated multi-
across cultures, integrated multiculturais may deve-
culturalism are both cultural experts in multiple
lop what has been called a paradoxical frame - that
cultures and multicultural experts having sophi-
is, mental templates that allow individuals to recog-
sticated and comprehensive cultural understand-
nize and embrace contradictions, and which gene-
ings within and across cultural contexts. They
rate new, creative insights (Chiù & Hong, 2005;
have increased cognitive complexity and creati-
Miron-Spektor, Gino, & Argote, 2011; Smith &
vity, are capable of conscious processing of cul-
Tushman, 2005). As individuals who are culturally
tural cognitions, and can mediate and influence
diverse in their thoughts, integrated multiculturais
(or shape) multicultural meanings.
can use their multicultural schémas flexibly as a gene-
rator for innovative views (e.g., Clemens & Cook,
Proposition 7b: Managers with integrated multi-
1999; Lévi-Strauss, 1966; McAdam, 1982; Mutch, culturalism will be effective in transferring socially
2007). Thus, they have a greater capability to embedded
suc- and complex practices, and in sharing
ceed with the task of practice innovation. tacit knowledge that requires significant sense-
In addition, integrated multiculturais will be effec-
making, interpretation, and translation to fit the
tive in bridging cultures for themselves andlocal for culture. This pattern of multiculturalism is
others, based on the cognitive flexibility inherent
effective in creating cultural and practice innova-
in drawing on different cultural perspectives,tions,and as well as in serving in cross-border bound-
the ability to maintain shared understandings ary-spanning
with roles and building cross-cultural
social networks. Integrated multiculturais have
culturally diverse others. Thus they can successfully
create social networks across cultural divides. They
the multicultural expertise vital for large-scale
are also able to build cross-border trust, because,
organizational transformations.
although foreign, they are perceived as culturally
competent, and as respecting and appreciating all
Inclusion
cultures involved. They can be very good in bound-
ary-spanning roles and in building social networks
The content and structure of inclusion multicultural-
within the MNC (Kostova & Roth, 2002; Zander, ism imply limited pluralism of cultural meanings,
Mockaitis, & Butler, 2012). manifesting only within the home-cultural cogni-
Finally, owing to their deep and sophisticatedtions.
viewWe suggest that inclusion managers are home-
of the entire portfolio of contexts of the MNC, and
cultural experts, possessing excellent abilities to
the complex multicultural interlinking, they have
understand and interpret ideas and practices within
the highest potential capability of leading organiza-
their home culture. However, they have structurally
tional change, especially when the particular change
incorporated insights from multiple cultures that
effort is related to changing cultural understand-
expand their understandings. Their internalized alter-
ings. They can understand what kind of change nativeiscultural interpretations provide weak links to
necessary and possible, they know how to challenge
the respective cultures; what has been cognitively
what would appear to be cultural taboo, they can
incorporated might not even be recognized as foreign
anticipate the ramifications of a change initiative,
meaning when it has firmly become part of existing
and finally they can reengineer the organization in
cognitions.
182
Understanding and interpretation are excellent home-cultural context. Inclusion managers would
in the home culture, but limited everywherebeelse. also able to actually recontextualize and imple-
Inclusion multiculturais do not view other cultures ment this knowledge in their cultural context, and
in their own terms, but as extending their own thus engage in some forms of import innovation.
understanding and knowledge. Like monoculturals, These capabilities are enhanced when inclusion
they have in-depth home-cultural knowledge, of butcontrasting views has weakened home-cultural
schémas and increased their capability to assess their
at the same time they are likely to have more com-
own cultural assumptions more consciously. Inclu-
plex representations, as they have broader and more
sion multiculturais can become aware of new ways
diverse perspectives available. In contrast to inte-
of looking at existing problems, see new aspects, and
grated multiculturais, the foreign cultural interpreta-
tions that they have included in their cognitions know when to challenge existing notions with novel
only incompletely (and possibly falsely) represent ideas. We would note, though, that such innova-
actual foreign meanings. Their ability to assesstions and will be only incremental, because the managers
adjust to foreign cultures is restricted to understand- are limited in their ability to process the contra-
ings that guide behavior in simple but not in com- dictions and multiplicity necessary for more signifi-
plex settings and tasks. Nevertheless, facing and cant innovations. Another negative is that inclusion
incorporating contrasting views will weaken exist- managers will have limited capabilities of social
ing cognitive interconnections, so that automatic bridging, and in fact may be ineffective in dealing
responses may be overridden, and managers can with
be individuals from other cultures, especially
more conscious and reflexive when making sense because of they will likely be viewed as ethnocentric.
practices.
Proposition 8a: Inclusion multiculturais are
Managers who have such enriched views are better
home-cultural experts with increased complexity
able to recognize all aspects of their home cul
and awareness of home-cultural schémas, owing
ture, possibly even the taken-for-granted subtleties.
to the incorporation of elements of foreign cul-
This distinguishes them from monoculturals, who,
tures. They have limited host cultural and multi-
while similarly embedded in the home culture, lack
cultural interpretation capabilities.
the enhanced and deepened views. Translation of
a situation into one that is meaningful in a foreign Proposition 8b: Managers with inclusion multi-
context is problematic, owing to the limited knowl- culturalism are effective in preserving practices in
edge of other cultures and the absence of strong the process of cross-cultural transfers, which is
cognitive links with them. Although they are better particularly important for practices tightly linked
than monoculturals, the lack of true multicultural to the core belief systems of the organization. They
understanding of practices or ideas limits their effec- can be trusted with representing the organization's
tiveness in cross-cultural transfer tasks. However, strategic vision, goals, and policies, as well as with
inclusion multiculturais will ensure the integrity of implementation for activities originating from
practices that are being exported from their primary their home culture. Inclusion managers are likely
or home culture, as they have deep understanding to engage in incremental cultural innovations as
of such practices and their meaning. Thus they will they import ideas from foreign cultures into their
be strong carriers of the core beliefs of the organi- (home) cultural cognitions.
zation if their home culture is from the home
country of the MNC. Convergence
In addition, we suggest that such managers might The culture-cognitive content and structure of con-
be effective in identifying valuable ideas and vergence
prac- multiculturalism implies the extraction of
tices indigenous to the other cultural contexts, and simplifying prototypes based on similar-
culturally
in importing such knowledge into their home ity. cul-
Convergence managers view the world as essen-
ture. Their enriched cultural content and position tially overlapping and compatible, in which cultural
as outsiders allow them to detect these ideas in the pluralism can effectively be managed by focusing on
foreign contexts in the first place. Furthermore, thewhat is common between cultures rather than on
cognitive links between their original schémaswhat distinguishes them. They believe that there is a
and those borrowed from foreign contexts allow set of cultural understandings that allow them to
these managers to make more sophisticated inter- interact with various cultural contexts in a mean-
pretations and translations of the foreign know- ingful way. They have a limited ability to interpret
ledge for the purposes of implementation in the local contexts in cross-cultural communication and
183
interaction. The characteristics of the overlap, itsof each culture and as a result are accepted in
breadth and depth, and its symmetry in culturalall cultures. These managers are also effective in
representations, will determine the degree to which building integrated social networks linking people
convergence managers develop a capability forand units across borders - that is, they are good in
both understanding and interpretation. When thebuilding cross-border social networks. They can be
overlap is significant, they will be more culturally particularly effective at disseminating processes
competent, especially with regard to cultures that and practices that have a common universal core
have greater overlap in activation patters. Therefore but allow for some local adaptation.
interpretations will be more complete. Because
of the focus on similarities, these managers will
Generalization
have limited ability for translation and recon-
textualization. The content and structure of generalization multi-
Instead, their expertise rests in the ability to
culturalism constitutes an integrated, inherently
recognize similarities where others see differences,multicultural level of interpretation, where schémas
harmony rather than conflict, cross-cultural rele- are extracted from but not immediately situated in
vance and integration rather than isolation. Theany of the multiple cultural contexts. The general-
ized but resonating views are activated in various
strength of this pattern is thus intercultural rather
than local. Convergent managers will be effective incultural contexts. A generalization multicultural
identifying practices consistent with their set views
of the world as a diverse place that is nonetheless
common schémas, as well as in transferring such structured by overarching principles that can be
practices across cultures. In addition, they will beapplied to different cultural settings. Such an indivi-
capable of designing global practices that would dual has a "bird's eye view" of processes in different
be more readily implementable in many cultural cultures, and can find broad regularities among
contexts, inasmuch as they are built around thethem. This pattern presents a trade-off between
shared cognitions between the cultures. Thus, the depth and complexity of cultural understanding, on
managers can facilitate global integration and stan-the one hand, and efficiency and insights in dealing
dardization in MNCs. We would also note that as with multiple contexts, on the other. However, the
convergent managers remain relatively cogniti- salience of general views means that specific con-
vely embedded in all cultures, they will have texts some are interpreted with these views in mind,
capabilities of transmitting and adapting practices lacking cultural details and the situated nature of
and knowledge to diverse cultural contexts when specific meanings. Such managers are multicultural
practices and knowledge hold similar meanings experts rather than experts in multiple cultures,
across cultures. Finally, another distinctive compe-evoking broad insights over deep, extensive cultural
tency of these managers is their potential ability knowledge
to of any one setting. This does not mean
foster cross-border personal relationships based thatonthese managers do not employ culture-consis-
shared cognitions. Similar to integration multicul- tent thoughts and actions, particularly in routine
turais, and much more so than the other patterns of
situations; they might. However, in many situations
multiculturalism, they can successfully play thethat role require making sense of concepts and ideas,
of cross-cultural liaison. Convergent managers their cognitions evoke broader interpretations; as
should be effective in boundary-spanning tasks aand result, problems will be solved based on insights
in building cross-border social networks in organiza-
derived through multicultural generalization.
tions. To summarize, we propose: The true strength of this pattern is the formation
of cultural cognitions that are removed from the
Proposition 9a: Convergence multiculturais
original culture while not being culture-free. In fact,
have host cultural understandings that are limited
generalization multiculturais are quite aware of cul-
by the multicultural similarities. They have increa-
tural relevance, and their goals are not to overcome
sed capabilities of recognizing commonalities
culture but to gain and apply broader interpreta-
across cultures or sets of cultures, but lack in-depth
tions, thought processes, and solutions. These man-
cultural knowledge in the multiple contexts.
agers might identify, for example, that certain social
Proposition 9b: Managers with convergence
aspects tend to be particularly influential in a certain
multiculturalism will be effective in bridging practice
cul- in different cultural contexts. They do not
tural contexts and bringing cultures together, develop a catalog of general truths, but rather dyna-
because they understand and share essential parts
mically generate and apply generalized ideas from
.Sļ/.
_ļ_
184
sets of resonating cultures. They can be seen as

and concern for instance novel strategies and new
multiculturally fluent, flexibly interpreting and
organizational approaches.
reinterpreting the world(s) around. We expect these managers also to be effective
Multicultural expertise in this type lies in recogni-
in building global networks with similar people from
zing and generating overarching principles, having other companies with whom they share similar
a more general outlook, and applying broader theo- global universal cognitions. Belonging to such glo-
ries to dealing with cultures. Such cultural cogni- bal managers' networks will in turn impact the
tions allow somewhat successful interactions with visibility and the reputation of their companies as
foreigners, but this is born out of an awareness being plugged into the community of truly global
of cultural multiplicity and an understandingorganizations.
and Generalization managers contribute
capability of simple resonance and alignmentfurther with to the legitimacy of MNCs because of their
situated cultural meanings. Adaptation to foreign emphasis on, and effectiveness in, implementing
settings is thus limited, as are their capabilities meta-practices,
for as discussed above. On the down-
concrete recontextualization tasks. These managers side, generalization multiculturais will not be
will be low on all key cultural and cross-cultural particularly suitable for tasks that require a deep
cognitive processes - understanding, interpretation,understanding of any particular local context (e.g.,
and translation with regard to particular contexts. local adaptation), or sophisticated interpretation
However, we suggest that, inasmuch as theyand con-
translation of organizational issues across borders.
As a result of their limited ability to get deep into the
struct inductive theories, they will develop an under-
mindset of multiple cultural groups, generalization
standing and interpretation of the meta-cultural
context, and on that level can translate to other
managers may be viewed somewhat unfavorably by
employees in different locations.
contexts, operating effectively across borders. These
managers do not disregard culture, but cultural
Proposition 10a: Generalization multiculturais
multiplicity is their métier, and they can be viewed
do not have sophisticated and comprehen-
as globe-trotters.
sive cultural understanding within and across
Managers with generalization multiculturalism
cultural contexts. However, they have a potential
will be particularly effective in world-scope activities
for novel insights, and can identify multicul-
that are not tied to any specific context. A meta-
turally resonating ideas and practices. They have
understanding of situations helps in formulating
a bird's eye view of cultural differences and
global strategies that resonate with various cultures.
commonalities.
A practice, rather than being identified in one con-
text and transferred to another, is conceived of Proposition
as 10b: Managers with generalization
having inherent patterns that align with various multiculturalism will be effective in identifying,
cultures. Managers will tend to focus on ideas and appreciating, and disseminating meta-practices
practices with a similar global appeal. We referand to knowledge globally, because of their ability
to separate cognitively from any specific culture
these practices (e.g., environmental practices, safety)
as meta- or supra-national (Kostova, Roth, & Dacin, and to operate at the meta-cultural level instead.
2008). They usually do not need much translation These managers are particularly skilled in building
or recontextualization, as they innately resonate meta-cultural networks of like cosmopolitan
with multiple contexts, and therefore generalizationexecutives. As a result, they are able to enhance
multiculturais can be effective with them. However, the image and legitimacy of their organizations.
they do not excel in the concrete implementation They can engage in innovation in the meta-
tasks. The process of establishing innately multi- environment.
cultural cognitive content and structure is also one

of recombination, and the generalization away from
DISCUSSION
specifics can also invoke novel insights (O'Reilly,
2005). We therefore expect that these managers The
will objective of this paper was to offer a discussion
show increased creativity, born out of creativeon multiculturalism informed by recent conceptua-
expansion and recombination processes (e.g., lization
Chiù of culture in cognitive connectionist terms.
This perspective allowed us to focus on the indivi-
& Hong, 2006; Galinsky et al., 2006; Leung & Chiù,
dual
2010; Leung et al., 2008). Through this they arein more detail than is typical for culture
effective in cultural innovation tasks, especiallyresearch
for in the management field. Furthermore,
innovations that pertain to the meta-environment, unlike previous research in this area, which has
185
typically emphasized particular types of individualand multicultural self (Nguyen & Benet-Martinez,
(e.g., immigrants, ethnic minorities, expatriates),2010; Tadmor et al., 2010). Understanding how
and has used a different perspective to study each cognition influences identification and sociali-
zation, and vice versa, and how identification
of them, this approach addresses the conceptual core
of multiculturalism - culture-cognitive content andimpacts the development of particular patterns of
structure - which should be valid across different multicultural cognitions later in life would be an
types of individual. The connectionist lens also interesting contribution on both sides. We believe
allowed us to theorize on the various patterns connectionism
of provides the theoretical basis for
multiculturalism, and helped us explain why global studying the interplay between identity-related acti-
vation of self and cultural schémas, but further
managers holding different patterns of multicultur-
alism will be more or less effective in certain tasks in
integrative work is necessary. It could be suggested,
modern MNCs. for example, that priming cultural identities influ-
ences the accessibility of certain cultural schémas,
We suggest several contributions to the literature
on multiculturalism. To start with, our cognitive
which results in a push away from or pull toward
a particular culture. Integrating cognition-based
perspective allows a different way of thinking about
management development in a global context. ideas
It could also shed light on some fascinating
considers managers' multicultural development situations
in in which individuals behave in culturally
incongruent ways (e.g., Asian Americans behaving
light of the cognitive effects that different cultural
more like Asians when exposed to American cues)
experiences have on their ways of thinking, under-
standing, and acting. This provides a foundation (Benet-Martinez,
for Leu, Lee, & Morris, 2002; Mok &
a more differentiated approach to the design of
Morris, 2009). Furthermore, it is important to con-
sider in which situations cultural identities matter
specific sociocultural experiences that facilitate par-
ticular patterns of multiculturalism, and thus
for thought and action, and in which situations
improve managers' effectiveness in different tasks.
other parts of self are more salient. This may affect
The focus on cognition also adds specificity tomanagers'
the individual performance, as well as their
more general notion of individual worldviews,roles in multicultural teams.
such
as cosmopolitanism and global mindset, and has A the
central contribution of the paper is the discus-
sion of the development of different patterns of
potential to enrich the literature on biculturalism.
multiculturalism. We note that our suggested pro-
We offer a cognitive connectionist view on multi-
culturalism based on internalized meaningstotypes and show similarities to previously advanced
ways of thinking without requiring identification or
categorizations of forms of biculturalism (e.g., Berry,
1997;
early socialization. Our thesis is that managers can Birman, 1994; LaFromboise et al., 1993;
function effectively in multiple cultural contexts
Phinney Sc Devich-Navarro, 1997). Our objective
without having to identify with them or change was to provide a theory-based description, one that
their value system - that is, without developingallows us to understand how cultures come together
in a person's mind, with an emphasis on his or her
strong affect to the cultures involved, or expressing
"an attachment with and loyalty to these cultures"
cultural understandings, thoughts, and capabilities.
(Nguyen & Benet-Martinez, 2010). This is parti- We view this as the first step in a bigger research
agenda on this topic, which can be extended in
cularly important when identity and identification
do not correspond to cognitions that determine various ways. For example, it would be important to
individuals' cultural capabilities. For example,study
an in depth the antecedents of the different
Italian American can identify with both countries,
patterns. While we offered a brief description of how
and yet lack critical knowledge to function effec-
they might develop, this was primarily for the pur-
tively in Italy. Furthermore, we suggest that inter-
pose of providing conceptual clarity to the definition
of patterns. A further examination of antecedents
nalizing more, or multiple, cultures is not necessarily
a simple extension of what can be called bicultural-
could include, for example, individual cognitive
ism, but may lead to new multicultural patternsabilities,
such personality predispositions, organizational
as generalization and convergence, and associated
and cultural contexts, and others. Another direction
capabilities and task effectiveness. for future research could be to study the depth of
There are interesting opportunities for further
cultural understanding as it relates to patterns of
linking of the multicultural cognition and bicultural
multiculturalism. Based on our theorizing, it could
identity streams of research, as they represent be
thesuggested that compartmentalization and inte-
distinct but related constructs of multicultural mind gration imply both broad and deep knowledge of
1
186
the multiple cultures, whereas convergence and

particular values and openness? Finally, a fascinat-
generalization may reduce breadth but maintain
ing question to explore would concern the possible
simultaneous existence of more than one pattern of
some depth by retaining only critical shared elements
of the multiple cultures. Further conceptual multicultural
and cognition for the same individual.
empirical work is needed to understand this It could be that individuals follows convergence
topic,
which could have important normative implica- with some cultures in which they operate (e.g.,
tions. Finally, the concept of cultural intelligence
European culture), but maintain compartmentaliza-
that suggests the existence of both general cognitive
tion or generalization with regard to other cultures
structures and processes in addition to culture-
in their portfolios.
specific cognitions (Thomas, 2006, 2010; Thomas Anet important contribution of our paper is that
al., 2008; Thomas & Inkson, 2005) is highly relevant we place multiculturalism within the organizational
to the different patterns of multiculturalism context.
we The second set of propositions that we
proposed. In particular, the connectionist perspec- offered contributes directly to understanding the
tive can help explain how culture specifics can
effectiveness of global managers in MNCs. While
become interlinked and changed in an individual's recognizing the importance of this issue, current
mind. Through the different patterns of multi- literature tends to be more descriptive than theore-
culturalism, cultural intelligence can be linked tical,to
viewing the global manager as a "black box,"
managers' multicultural skills and intercultural without in-depth explanation of what drives their
effectiveness. capabilities in certain roles. We have tried to open
We also see a big theoretical opportunity in study- this black box to explain why different managers
ing the stability and evolution of patterns of multi- have different cultural cognitions and therefore
culturalism over time. We expect the patterns to different capabilities. We recognize that this discus-
be fairly stable, since the cognitive interconnections sion needs to be taken further. For example, here we
in which cultural understanding is embedded focused selectively on a few cross-border tasks, such
emerge and change only over time with new expe- as practice transfer, innovation, and social capital
riences. It would be instructive to study the condi-creation. We argued that these are critical tasks for
tions for stability and change. For example, we could the existence and success of MNCs, but it might be
address questions such as: How does the number ofinstructive to expand this list of potential outcomes
cultures affect the pattern of multiculturalism? Isto include other functions of global managers, such
there a limit to the number of cultures that could fit as strategic decision-making, team management,
into any one particular pattern - that is, when might and global leadership and motivation. The state of
the addition of another culture trigger a shift to multiculturalism might also affect the individual
another pattern? Could it be, for example, that with regard to their sense of self-efficacy, psychic
owing to its complexity, the integration pattern will comfort, ability to adapt to many contexts, career
have a limit, so that after including a certain number and growth opportunities, and other interpersonal
of cultures, the individual may switch to other and personal outcomes. Finally, it could be interest-
patterns that simplify the cultural situation, such ing to explore possible negative effects of patterns of
as generalization? Similarly, the convergence may multiculturalism in organizations.
become more and more difficult to achieve with the Although this is a conceptual paper, it can be
learning of additional cultures, and at some pointused as a basis for empirical multiculturalism
the individual may switch (consciously or sub-research. This is facilitated by the emergence of new
consciously) to another pattern - generalization, for methods for studying culture and cultural schémas
example. There is also the question of how thefrom a cognitive perspective, including frame analy-
particular cultures involved in the portfolio affect sis (Benford, 1993; Creed, Langstraat, & Scully, 2002;
the pattern of multiculturalism. Does it matter, for Fisher, 1997; Fiss & Hirsch, 2005; Johnston, 2002,
example, if the cultures are more or less similar to 2005; Johnston & Klandermans, 1995; McLean,
one another? Relatedly, how does the original cul-1998; Mohr, 1998), analysis of widely shared sche-
ture of an individual influence the consequent mata (D'Andrade, 2005; Quinn, 2005; Strauss, 2005),
expansion of their cultural cognition, and their and meaning in organizational research (Gephart,
capacity to develop different patterns of multicul- 1993; Geppert, 2003; Gibson & Zellmer-Bruhn,
turalism? What additional conditions might come 2001). These techniques use interviews, public and
into play in these dynamics - for example, degree private texts, and ethnographic accounts as the data
of internalization of the home culture, and its source for cultural analysis. In this, they bear
187
holds promise for enriching the field's approach to

similarity to discourse analysis. However, they focus
studying and understanding culture in general.
specifically on culture-laden elements such as meta-
phors, cultural keywords, reasoning, and other idea In conclusion, we believe that this paper adds to
elements like catchphrases. In addition to analyzing
the cognitive work on culture and multiculturalism,
content, these methods allow the analysis of struc-and hope that it will foster further inquiry in this
important area of research. It is a response to calls
ture, and provide tools for graphical representation
of the hierarchical nature of schemata Qohnston, stressing the importance of culture-cognitive repre-
2002; Johnston & Klandermans, 1995). Bringing
sentations of organizational situations in cross-cul-
tural management (Peterson & Wood, 2008).
such techniques into international business research
REFERENCES
Abraham, A., Windmann, S., Daum, I., & Güntürkün, O. 2005. H., Birkinshaw, )., & Nobel, R. 1999. Knowledge trans-
Bresman,
Conceptual expansion and creative imagery as a function fer of
in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business
psychoticism. Consciousness and Cognition. 14(3): 520-534. Studies, 30(3): 439-462.
Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. 1 991 . Managing across borders: Briley,
The D. A., Morris, M. W., & Simonson, I. 2000. Reasons as
transnational solution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business carriers of culture: Dynamic versus dispositional models of
School Press. cultural influence on decision making. Journal of Consumer
Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. A. 1 991 . Connectionism and the Research, 27(2): 157-1 78.
mind: An introduction to parallel processing in networks. Oxford:Brown, ). S., & Duguid, P. 1991. Organizational learning and
Basil Blackwell. communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working,
Benet-Martínez, V., Lee, F., & Leu, j. X. 2006. Biculturalism and learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1): 40-57.
cognitive complexity: Expertise in cultural representations.Buck, T., & Shahrim, A. 2005. The translation of corporate
tournai of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(4): 386-407. governance changes across national cultures: The case of
Benet-Martínez, V., Leu, J., Lee, F., & Morris, M. W. 2002. Germany. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1 ): 42-61 .
Negotiating biculturalism: Cultural frame switching in bicul-Buckley, P. )., & Casson, M. 1976. The future of the multinational
turals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. enterprise. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5): 492-51 6. Buckley, P. J., & Casson, M. 2003. The future of the multinational
Benford, R. D. 1 993. Frame disputes within the nuclear disarma- enterprise in retrospect and in prospect. Journal of International
ment movement. Social Forces . 71 (3): 677-701 . Business Studies, 34(2): 219-222.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. 1966. The social construction ofBuckley, P. )., & Casson, M. C. 2009. The internalisation theory
reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City, NY: of the multinational enterprise: A review of the progress of
Doubleday. a research agenda after 30 years. Journal of International
Berry, J. W. 1997. Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Business Studies, 40(9): 1 563-1 580.
Applied Psychology, 46(1 ): 5-34. Cerulo, K. A. (Ed) 2002. Establishing a sociology of culture and
Birkinshaw, )., Bresman, H., & Nobel, R. 2010. Knowledge cognition. In, Culture in mind: Toward a sociology of culture and
transfer in international acquisitions: A retrospective. Journal of cognition. New York: Routledqe.
International Business Studies , 41 (1 ): 21-26. Chiù, C., & Hong, Y. 2005. Cultural competence: Dynamic
Birman, D. 1 994. Acculturation and human diversity in a multi- processes. In A. Elliot, & C. S. Dweck (Eds), Handbook of
cultural society. In E. ). Trickett, R. ]. Watts, & D. Birman (Eds), motivation and competence. New York: Guilford.
Human diversity: Perspectives on people in context. San Francisco, Chiù, C, & Hong, Y. 2006. The social psychology of culture. New
CA: lossey-Bass. York: Psychology Press.
Black, ). S., & Mendenhall, M. 1990. Cross-cultural training Clemens, E. S., & Cook, ]. M. 1999. Politics and institutionalise!:
effectiveness: A review and a theoretical framework for future Explaining durability and change. Annual Review of Sociology,
research. Academy of Management Review, 1 5(1 ): 1 1 3-1 36. 25(1): 441-466.
Bourdieu, P. [1977] 2006. Outline of a theory of practice. Creed, W. E. D., Langstraat, ]. A., & Scully, M. A. 2002. A picture
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. of the frame: Frame analysis as technique and as politics.
Brannen, M. Y. 1992. "Bwana Mickey": Constructing cultural Organizational Research Methods, 5(1): 34-55.
consumption at Tokyo Disneyland. In J. ). Tobin (Ed.), Re-made Czarniawska, B. 201 2. Operational risk, translation, and globali-
in Japan 21 6-234. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. zation. Contemporary Economics, 6(2): 26-39.
Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Řecontextuali- Czarniawska, B., & Sevón, G. (Eds) 1 996. Introduction to translat-
zation, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy ing organizational change. In, Translating organizational
of Management Review, 29(4): 593-61 6. change. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Brannen, M. Y., Garcia, D., & Thomas, D. C. 2009. Biculturals as D'Andrade, R. 1 992. Schemas and motivation. In R. D'Andrade,
natural bridges for intercultural communication and collaboration. & C. Strauss (Eds), Human motives and cultural models.
Paper presented at International Workshop on Intercultural Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Collaboration. Stanford Università Palo Alto. CA.
D'Andrade, R. G. 1995. The development of cognitive anthropology.
Brannen, M. Y., Liker, 1. K., & Fruin, W. M. 1999. Recontextuali- Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
zation and factory-to-factory knowledge transfer from Japan to theD'Andrade, R. 2005. Some methods for studying cultural cogni-
United States. New York: Oxford University Press. tive structures. In N. Quinn (Ed), Finding culture in talk. New
Brannen, M. Y., & Thomas, D. C. 2010. Bicultural individuals York: Palqrave Macmillan.
in organizations: Implications and opportunity. International Dawson, M. R. W. 2004. Minds and machines: Connectionism and
Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1 0(1 ): 5-1 6. psychological modeling. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Brannen, M. Y., & Wilson, III., ). M. 1996. RecontextualizationDecoster, ]., & Claypool, H. M. 2004. A meta-analysis of priming
and internationalization: Lessons in transcultural materialism effects on impression formation supporting a general model of
from the Walt Disney Company. CEMS Business Review, 1 (1 ): informational biases. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
97-110. 8(1): 2-27.
^
188
Gould, S. ]., & Grein, A. F. 2009. Think glocally, act glocally: A

DeFillippi, R., & Ornstein, S. 2003. Psychological perspectives
culture-centric comment on Leung, Bhagat, Buchan, Erez and
underlying theories of organizational learning. In M. Easterby-
Gibson (2005). journal of International Business Studies, 40(2):
Smith, & M .A. Lyles (Eds), The Blackwell handbook of organiza-
tional learninq and knowledge management Oxford: Blackwell.237-254.
DiMaggio, P. ). 1997. Culture and cognition. Annual Review Green,
of S. E. 2004. A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of
Sociology, 2 3(1): 263-287. Management Review, 29(4): 653-669.
Ear ley, P. C, & Gibson, C. B. 2002. Multinational teams : Gupta,
New A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 1 991 . Knowledge flows and the
perspectives. Mahwah, N): Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy
of Management Review, 16(4): 768-792.
Elkjaer, B. 2003. Social learning theory: Learning as participation
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. 2000. Knowledge flows within
in social processes. In M. Easterby-Smith, & M. A. Lyles (Eds),
The Blackwell handbook of organizational learning and knowledgemultinational corporations. Strategic Management journal,
management. Oxford: Blackwell. 21 (4): 473-496.
Hanges, P. ]., Dorfman, P. W., Shteynberg, G., & Bates, A. L. 2006.
Ericsson, K. A., & Towne, T. ]. 201 0. Expertise. Wiley Interdisciplin-
ary Reviews: Cognitive Science , 1 (4): 404-41 6. Culture and leadership: A connectionist information-processing
Fisher, K. D. 1997. Locating frames in the discursive universe. model. In W. H. Mobley, & E. Weldon (Eds), Advances in global
Sociological Research Online , 2(3):http://socresonline.org.uk/2/ leadership, Vol. 4: 7-37. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
3/4.html. Hanges, P. J., Lord, R., & Dickson, M. 2000. An information-
Fiss, P. C., & Hirsch, P. M. 2005. The discourse of globalization: processing perspective on leadership and culture: A case for
Framing and sensemaking of an emerging concept. American connectionist architecture. Applied Psychology: An International
Sociological Review, 70(1): 29-52. Review. 49(1 ): 1 33-1 61 .
Fiss, P. C., & Zajac, E. ]. 2004. The diffusion of ideas over Hart, S. L. 2007. Capitalism at the crossroads: Aligning business ,
contested terrain: The (non)adoption of a shareholder value earth , and humanity, 2nd edn. Upper Saddle River, N): Wharton
orientation among German firms. Administrative Science Quar- School Publishing.
terly, 49(4): 501-534. Higgins, E. T. 1990. Personality, social psychology, and person-
Fitzsimmons, S. R., Miska, C., & Stahl, G. K. 201 1 . Multicultural situation relations: Standards and knowledge activation as a
employees: Global business' untapped resource. Organizational common language. In L. A. Pervin (Ed), Handbook of personality:
Dynamics, 40(3): 1 99-206. Theory and research. New York: Guilford.
Förster, )., & Liberman, N. 2007. Knowledge activation. In Hong, H. ]. 2010. Bicultural competence and its impact on team
E. T. Higgins, & A. Kruglanski (Eds), Social psychology: Handbook effectiveness. International journal of Cross Cultural Manage-
of basic principles. New York: Guilford. ment, 10(1): 93-120.
Foss, N. )., & Pedersen, T. 2004. Organizing knowledge processes Hong, Y. Y., Chiù, C. Y., & Kung, M. 1997. Bringing culture out
in the multinational corporation: An introduction, journal of in front: Effects of cultural meaning system activation on social
International Business Studies, 35(5): 340-349. cognition. In K. Leung, Y. Kashima, U. Kim, & S. Yamaguchi
Fransson, A., Hãkanson, L., & Liesch, P. W. 2011. The under- (Eds), Progress in Asian social psychology, Vol. 1, Singapore:
determined knowledge-based theory of the MNC. Journal of Wiley.
International Business Studies, 42(3): 427-435. Hong, Y., Morris, M., Chiù, C., & Benet-Martínez, V. 2000.
Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. 1991. Bringing society back in: Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructive approach to
Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions. In culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7): 709-720.
W. W. Powell, & P. ]. DiMaggio (Eds), The new institutionalism Houghton, G. 2005. Connectionist models in cognitive psychology.
in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Hove: Psychology Press.
Press. Hung, K. H., Li, S. Y., & Belk, R. W. 2007. Giocai understandings:
Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., & Ku, G. 2006. The view from Female readers' perceptions of the new woman in Chinese
the other side of the table: Getting inside your counterpart's advertising, journal of International Business Studies, 38(6):
head can increase the value of the deal you walk away with. 1034-1051.
Here's how to do it. Negotiation, 9(3): 1-5. Jensen, R., & Szulanski, G. 2004. Stickiness and the adapta-
Garson, ]. 2012. Connectionism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed), The Stanford tion of organizational practices in cross-border knowledge
encyclopedia of philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/ transfers, journal of International Business Studies, 35(6):
win201 2/entries/connectionism/ (Winter 201 2 Edition). 508-523.
Gephart, Jr., R. P. 1993. The textual approach: Risk and blame in Johnston, H. 2002. Verification and proof in frame and discourse
analysis. In B. Klandermans, & S. Staggenborg (Eds), Methods
disaster sensemaking. Academy of Management journal, 36(6):
1465-1515. of social movement research. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Geppert, M. 2003. Sensemaking and politics in MNCs: Minnesota
A com- Press.
Johnston, H. 2005. Comparative frame analysis. In H. Johnston, fcc
parative analysis of vocabularies within the global manufactur-
J. A. Noakes (Eds), Frames of protest: Social movements and the
ing discourse in one industrial sector, journal of Management
Inquiry, 12(4): 312-329. framina oersoective. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Geppert, M., Williams, K., & Matten, ü. ¿UUi. ine socialJohnston,
con- H., & Klandermans, B. (Eds) 1995. The cultural ana-
lysis of social movements. In, Social movements and culture.
struction of contextual rationalities in MNCs: An Anglo-German
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
comparison of subsidiary choice. The journal of Management
Studies, 40(3): 61 7-641 . Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., Kawamura, T., &c Larsen, J. l. zUüá.
Gertsen, M. C., & Zolner, M. 2012. Recontextualization orPerceiving
tne an object and its context in different cultures.
Psychological Science, 14(3): 201-206.
corporate values of a Danish MNC in a subsidiary in Bangalore.
Group & Organization Management, 37(1): 101-1 32. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the
Gherardi, S., Nicolini, D., & Odella, F. 1998. Toward evolutionary
a social theory of the multinational corporation, journal of
understanding of how people learn in organizations: International
The Business Studies, 24(4): 625-645.
notion of situated curriculum. Management Learning, Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 2003. Knowledge ot the tirm and the
29(3):
273-297. evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation, journal of
Gibson, C. B., & Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. 2001. Metaphors International
and Business Studies, 34(6): 51 6-529.
Kostova, T., & Roth, K. 2002. Adoption ot an organizational
meaning: An intercultural analysis of the concept of teamwork.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2): 274-303. practice by subsidiaries of multinational corporations: Institu-
tional
Giddens, A. 1 984. The constitution of society: Outline or the and relational effects. Academy of Management journal,
theory
45(1): 21 5-233.
of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
189
Noorderhaven, N., & Harzing, A. W. 2009. Knowledge-sharing

Kostova, T., Roth, K., & Dacin, M. T. 2008. Institutional theory
and social interaction within MNEs. Journal of International
in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new
directions. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4): 994-1006.Business Studies, 40(5): 71 9-741 .
LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H. L. K., & Gerton, ]. 1993. Psycholo-
Norman, D. A. 1 982. Learning and memory. San Francisco: Freeman.
O'Reilly, R. 2005. The division of labor between the neocortex
gical impact of biculturalism: Evidence and theory. Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 1 14(3): 395-412. and hippocampus. In G. Houghton (Ed), Connectionist models in
Leung, A. K. Y., & Chiù, C. Y. 201 0. Multicultural experience, idea
cognitive psychology. Hove & New York: Psychology Press.
Orr, J. E. 1990. Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: Com-
receptiveness, and creativity. Journal of Cross-Cultura I Psychol-
ogy, 41(5-6): 723-741. munity memory in a service culture. In D. Middleton, &
Leung, A. K. Y., Maddux, W. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Chiù, C. Y.
D. Edwards (Eds), Collective remembering: Memory in society.
2008. Multicultural experience enhances creativity: The when
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
and how. American Psychologist, 63(3): 1 69-1 81 . Oyserman, D., & Sorensen, N. 2009. Understanding cultural
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1966. The savage mind. Chicago, IL: The
syndrome effects on what and how we think: A situated
University of Chicaqo Press. cognition model. In R. Wyer, Y. Y. Hong, & C. Y. Chiù (Eds),
Understanding culture: Theory, research and application. New
Levinthal, Ď., & March, ]. 1 993. The myopia of learning. Strategic
Management Journal, 1 4(8): 95-1 1 2. York: Psychology Press.
Li, Q., & Hong, Y. Y. 2001. Intergroup perceptual accuracy
Park, C. L. 2010. Making sense of the meaning literature:
predicts real-life intergroup interactions. Croup Processes and
An integrative review of meaning making and its effects on
Intergroup Relations, 4(4): 341-354. adjustment to stressful life events. Psychological Bulletin, 1 36(2):
257-301.
Linn, M. C., & Songer, N. B. 1 991 . Cognitive and conceptual change
in adolescence. American Journal of Education, 99(4): 379-41 7. Peltokorpi, V., & Vaara, E. 201 2. Language policies and practices
Lücke, G., & Roth, K. 2008. An embeddedness view of biculturalism. in wholly owned foreign subsidiaries: A recontextualization
Working Paper D-08-07, South Carolina CIBER Working Paper
perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(9):
Series. 808-833.
Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. 2009. Cultural borders Peterson,
and M. F., & Sondergaard, M. 201 1 . Traditions and transi-
mental barriers: The relationship between living abroad and tions in quantitative societal culture research in organization
studies. Orqanization Studies, 32(1 1): 1539-1558.
creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5):
1047-1061. Peterson, M. F., & Wood, R. E. 2008. Cognitive structures
Maddux, W. W., Adam, H., & Galinsky, A. D. 2010. When in
and processes in cross-cultural management. In P. B. Smith,
Rome... learn why the Romans do what they do: How M. F. Peterson, & D. C. Thomas (Eds), Handbook of cross-cultural
multi-
management
cultural learning experiences facilitate creativity. Personality and research 1 5-34. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(6): 731-741 . Phinney, ]. S., & Devich-Navarro, M. 1 997. Variations in bicultural
Markus, H. R., & Hamedani, M. G. 2007. Sociocultural psychol-
identification among African American and Mexican American
ogy: The dynamic interdependence among self systems and
adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 7(1 ): 3-32.
social systems. In S. Kitayama, & D. Cohen (Eds), Handbook
Powell,ofW., & Colyvas, ]. A. 2008. Microfoundations of institu-
cultural psychology. New York: Guilford. tional theory. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, R. Suddaby, &
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. 2010. Cultures and selves: K.
A cycle
Sahlin-Andersson (Eds), The Sage handbook of organizational
of mutual constitution. Perspectives on Psychological Science,
institutionalism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5(4): 420-430. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. 1 996. Interorga-
McAdam, D. 1 982. Political process and the development ofnizational
black collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks
insurgency, 1930-1970. Chicaqo: University of Chicaqo Press.
of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly,
41(1): 116-145.
McClelland, ]. L., & Rogers, T. Ť. 2003. The parallel distributed
processing approach to semantic cognition. Nature Prahalad,
Reviews C. K., & Doz, Y. L. 1987. The multinational mission:
Neuroscience , 4(4): 310-322. Balancing global integration with local responsiveness. New York:
McLean, P. D. 1998. A frame analysis of favor seeking in the Free Press.
renaissance: Agency, networks, and political culture. American Quinn, N. (Eds) 2005. How to reconstruct schémas people share,
Journal of Socioloqy, 1 04(1 ): 51 -91 . from what they say. In, Finding culture in talk. New York:
Meyer, R. E., & Höherer, M. A. 2010. Meaning structures in a Palgrave Macmillan.
contested issue field: A topographic map of shareholder value Rogers, T. T., & McClelland, ]. L. 2004. Semantic cognition: A parallel
in Austria. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6): 1 241 -1 262. distributed processing approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Miron-Spektor, E., Gino, F., & Argote, L. 201 1 . Paradoxical frames Roskos, K. A., & Christie, ). F. 201 1 . Mindbrain and play-literacy
and creative sparks: Enhancing individual creativity through connections. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 1 1 (1 ): 73-94.
conflict and integration. Organizational Behavior and Human Ross, M., Xun, W. Q. E., & Wilson, A. E. 2002. Language and the
Decision Processes, 1 1 6(2): 220-240. bicultural self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(8):
Mohr, ). W. 1998. Measuring meaning structures. Annual Review 1040-1050.
of Socioloqy, 24(1): 345-370. Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and organizations. 2nd edn,
Mok, A., & Morris, M. W. 2009. Cultural chameleons and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
iconoclasts: Assimilation and reactance to cultural cues in Seo, M. G., & Creed, W. E. D. 2002. Institutional contradictions,
biculturals' expressed personalities as a function of identitypraxis, and institutional change: A dialectical perspective.
Academy of Management Review, 27(2): 222-247.
conflict. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4): 884-
889. Sewell, Jr.., W. H. 1 992. A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and
Morris, T., & Lancaster, Z. 2006. Translating management ideas. transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1): 1-29.
Organization Studies, 27(2): 207-233. Shanks, D. R. 2005. Connectionist models of basic human
Mutch, A. 2007. Reflexivity and the institutional entrepreneur: Alearning processes. In G. Houghton (Ed), Connectionist models
historical exploration. Orqanization Studies, 28(7): 1 123-1 140.
in cognitive psychology. Hove: Psychology Press.
Nguyen, A. M. D., & Benet-Martínez, V. 2010. Multicultural Smith, E. R. 1 996. What do connectionism and social psychology
identity: What it is and why it matters. In R. 1. Crisp (Ed), The
offer each other? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70
psychology of social and cultural diversity: Social issues and(5): 893-912.
interventions. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Smith, E. R., & Collins, E. C. 2009. Contextualizing person
Nisbett, R. E. 2003. The geography of thought: How Asians and perception: Distributed social cognition. Psychological Review,
Westerners think differently, and why. New York: Free Press. 1 1 6(2): 343-364.
I
190
Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. 1989. Social cognitive theory of

Smith, W. K., & Tushman, M. L. 2005. Managing strategie
contradictions: A top management model for managing inno- organizational management. Academy of Management Review,
vation streams. Organization Science, 16(5): 522-536. 14(3): 361-384.
Strang, D., & Soule, S. 1 998. Diffusion in organizations and Zander,
social L., Mockaitis, A. I., & Butler, C. L. 2012. Leading global
movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills. Annual Review teams.
of Journal of World Business, 47(4): 592-603.
Sociology, 24(1): 265-290. Zilber, T. 2006. The work of the symbolic in institutional
processes:
Strauss, C. 2005. Analyzing discourse for cultural complexity. In Translations of rational myths in Israeli high tech.
N. Quinn (Ed), Finding culture in talk. New York: Palgrave
Academy of Management Journal, 49(2): 281-303.
Macmillan. Zucker, L. G. 1 983. Organizations as institutions. In S. B. Bacharach
Strauss, C., & Quinn, N. 1997. A cognitive theory of cultural(Ed), Research in the sociology of organizations. Greenwich, CT: JAI
meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Press.
Tadmor, C. T., Hong, Y. Y., Chiù, C. Y., & No, S. 2010. What
I know in my mind and where my heart belongs. In R. Crisp
(Ed), The psychology of social and cultural diversity. West Sussex:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Tadmor, C. T., & Tetlock, P. E. 2006. Biculturalism: A model of ABOUT THE AUTHORS
the effects of second-culture exposure on acculturation and Gundula Lücke, PhD, received her PhD in interna-
integrative complexity. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37
tional business from Moore School of Business at the
(2): 173-190.
Thomas, D. C. 2006. Domain and development of cultural University of South Carolina and currently holds
intelligence: The importance of mindfulness. Croup & Organi- a post-doctoral position in international business at
zation Management, 31(1): 78-99.
Thomas, D. C. 2010. Cultural intelligence and all that jazz: Uppsala University, Sweden. Her research focuses on
A cognitive revolution in international management research? sociocultural and institutional approaches to under-
In T. Devinney, T. Pedersen, & L. Tihanyi (Eds), The past, present
standing organizational and individual processes
and future of international business á management. Bingley:
Emerald. in multinational corporations, including topics such
Thomas, D. C., & Inkson, K. 2005. Cultural intelligence. Consult- as multiculturalism, institutional multiplicity, and
ing to Management - C2M, 1 6(1 ): 5-9.
Thomas, D. C. et al. 2008. Cultural intelligence: Domain and
MNC innovation (gundula.lucke@fek.uu.se).
assessment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,
8(2): 123-143. Tatiana Kostova, PhD, is the Buck Mickel Chair and
Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. 2012. The institu- Professor of International Business at the Moore
tional logics perspective: A new approach to culture , structure ; and
process. Oxford: Oxford University Press. School of Business, University of South Carolina.
Tippmann, E., Scott, P., & Mangematin, V. 2012. Problem Her research focuses on MNC management and
solving in MNCs: How local and global solutions are (and are
not) created. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(8): includes topics such as knowledge transfer, organi-
746-771 . zational legitimacy, intra-organizational social
Vaughan, D. 2002. Signals and interpretive work: The rolecapital, of multiculturalism, dual identification, and
culture in a theory of practical action. In K. Ceru lo (Ed), Culture
in mind: Toward a sociology of culture and cognition. New York: psychological ownership. She is an AIB Fellow and
Routledge. has served as Vice President of the AIB and Chair of
Verkuyten, M., & Pouliasi, K. 2006. Biculturalism and group the IM Division of AOM.
identification: The mediating role of identification in cultural
frame switching. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(3):
312-326. Kendall Roth is Senior Associate Dean for Interna-
Ward, T. B. 1 994. Structured imagination: The role of conceptual
tional Programs and Partnerships at the Darla Moore
structure in exemplar generation. Cognitive Psychology, 27(1):
1-40. School of Business, University of South Carolina. He
holds
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning , meaning , and the J. Willis Cantey Chair of International
identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Business and Economics, and is a Fellow of the
Wertsch, ). V., Tulviste, P., & Daniels, H. 2005. L.S. Vygotsky and
contemporary developmental psycholoqy. London: Routledge. Academy of International Business. He received his
Wilson, R. A., & Clark, A. 2009. How to situate cognition: Letting
PhD in international business from the University of
nature take its course. In M. Aydede, & P. Robbins (Eds),
South Carolina in 1986, and has been on the faculty
The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. of the Darla Moore School of Business since that time.
Accepted by David C Thomas, Area Editor , 16 July 2013. This paper has been with the authors for four revisions.

Multiculturalism From A Cognitive Perspective

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multiculturalism From A Cognitive Perspective

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multiculturalism from a cognitive perspective: Patterns and implications

Author(s): Gundula Lücke, Tatiana Kostova and Kendall Roth

Multiculturalism from a cognit

Keywords: culture; social cognition; impact of culture on MNC performance

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

Figure 1 Patterns of multiculturalism.

differ in the way original cultures are connected -

journal of International Business Studies

meanings from multiple cultures, whereby thewhen

Journal of International Business Studies

cultures. Discussions or explanations of cultural

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

Prahalad & Doz, 1987). Such a model is not easythe

Journal of International Business Studies

Table 1 Patterns of multiculturalism and critical tasks in MNCs

Pattern of multiculturalism Description Multicultural capabilities Task effectiveness

Integration Individuals internalize multiple but Understanding multiple Comprehensive cross-cultural

Creativity across cultural

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

journal of International Business Studies

Journal of International Business Studies

sets of resonating cultures. They can be seen as

cultural cognitive content and structure is also one

Journal of International Business Studies

journal of International Business Studies

the multiple cultures, whereas convergence and

Journal of International Business Studies

holds promise for enriching the field's approach to

journal of International Business Studies

Gould, S. ]., & Grein, A. F. 2009. Think glocally, act glocally: A

journal of International Business Studies

Noorderhaven, N., & Harzing, A. W. 2009. Knowledge-sharing

Journal of International Business Studies

Wood, R. E., & Bandura, A. 1989. Social cognitive theory of

journal of International Business Studies

You might also like