[81]

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Business has always been about competing for markets, territories and most importantly,

customers. Today the customer‟s expectations are higher than ever before, and the range of

choices available to them is wider than ever before (Brown, 1991). With the pace of

globalization, it becomes quite eminent and crucial for individuals to have the appropriate

skills as well as knowledge to effectively handle the needs and expectations of any customer,

be it a customer who belongs to a familiar nationality or even a customer who belongs to a

distinct cultural background. Cultural Intelligence, being an individual capability that enables

managers to smoothly sail through situations that are marked by cultural diversity, helps

managers to carefully study, analyze and function with those who are culturally different in

terms of their cultural orientations, value systems, language, behaviors, attitudes, etc.

Managers and individuals, dealing with others from diverse cultural backgrounds, therefore,

need to acquaint themselves with this capability in order to smoothly handle cross-cultural

interactions and situations. The construct of Cultural Intelligence, which is recently

introduced to the management literature, holds enormous potential to help explain the

effectiveness of individuals in situations that are characterized by cultural diversity.

Significantly therefore, the present review of literature marks upon eminent works conducted

in the domain of Cultural Intelligence and the impact of culture on the hospitality industry as

well as the service encounters. None of the previous works on Cultural Intelligence have

[82]

embarked upon the relationship of Cultural Intelligence with customer satisfaction. Thus, this

broader framework comprising of the vast bundle of information as well as theoretical global

relevant literature shall facilitate in providing an insight into the conceptual framework of

Cultural Intelligence, its current applications and usage, the understanding of cultural

differences in the context of service encounters in the international hospitality industry. The

present review has been drawn from a number of books, journal articles, research papers,

articles on the internet, thesis, etc.

2.1. CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE

Tan (2004) identifies the concept of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) to be composed of an

intersection of three components. In his opinion culturally intelligent individuals are those

who initially learn to make adjustments in an unfamiliar culture that requires cultural strategic

thinking associated with both learning and acquiring cultural knowledge (declarative and

procedural) which are critical to success. Secondly, managers working in an intercultural

context need to energize themselves in order to stay motivated. Motivation facilitates in

making suitable adjustments as well as adapting to culturally diverse situations. Lastly,

appropriate display of actions that are dynamic and flexible to match the changing nature of

the work environment, are necessary for ensuring success in the contemporary business

environment. The author has also exemplified the role of Cultural Intelligence in shaping the

constitution of organizations towards a bent for realizing that CQ enhances customer

relationships, performance, providing a competitive edge for product development and market

strategies. Organizations like IBM, Lloyds TBS, Levi Strauss, Lufthansa, etc., have realized

how culturally intelligent individuals can frame better organizations.

[83]

Ng et al. (2005) discussed the potential of Cultural Intelligence to be accommodated in

military leadership development. The role of military forces has now been revised and their

presence is expected in situations other than war. As they now function with culturally diverse

command troops and teams, they need to be trained consequently in the context of cross-

cultural awareness and acquaint themselves with Cultural Intelligence in order to successfully

handle intercultural interactions. The authors also devised a framework to facilitate in

developing a comprehensive guide for the cultural education curriculum and training

programme for the military personnel. The person (qualities or capabilities of an individual in

the context of CQ), the operational context (the other cultures involved along with specific

mission requirements) and the host country (the provider of the supporting environment)

determine the training needs of the military personnel and enables formulating the training

curriculum. This ultimately results in assessing the training outcomes.

Ang & Ng (2005) have talked about Cultural and Network Intelligence as two crucial aspects

for equipping people with the desired leadership qualities to transform SAF into 3G military

force. While network intelligence is expounded to be essential for creating mental maps of

present networks along with their goals, resources and configuration failing an individual

cannot strategically position himself in the network, Cultural Intelligence enables to equip

them with the appropriate knowledge, strategy, behavior and motivation to function

effectively in the cross-cultural context and develop a broader, open-minded and global

mindset to acquire from others belonging to diverse cultural backgrounds.

Janssens & Brett (2006) have developed a culturally intelligent fusion model of collaboration

for global teams that facilitates to increase the possibility of such teams to take creative and

realistic decisions. As these global teams consist of members who are different in their

[84]

cultural backgrounds as well as in their approach towards making decisions ( Maznevski &

Di Stefano, 2000), the fusion model establishes to extract information and enable political

decision making simultaneously while formal interventions are recommended in order to

counter balance the unequal power relations among global team members. The fusion model

of collaboration is based upon the principles of dominant coalition as well as the integration

and/or identity and establishes the generation of superior solutions to handle global problems.

Sternberg & Grigorenko (2006) discuss the relevance of understanding intelligence in its

cultural context. Incorporating the theory of successful intelligence that uses the implicit and

explicit theories of intelligence, the authors seek to point out that intelligence must be

understood in a cultural context as what seems to be intelligent in one culture may be very

different from what is intelligent in another culture (Berry, 1974). Successful intelligence, on

one hand, is applicable within one culture while Cultural Intelligence, on the other hand, is

applicable across cultures. An individual can be relatively successful across cultures but may

be highly successful and intelligent within any one of those cultures. As a consequence, the

cultural views of intelligence help in understanding the concept of intelligence in a much

broader way.

Turner & Trompenaars (2006) have presented the credibility of the concept of Cultural

Intelligence. In their opinion, it is of vital significance to identify the critiques of this concept

and understand the possibility of existence of such a concept. Three major critiques or

objections are said to be underlying the concept of Cultural Intelligence. These are:

i) “Cultures are entirely relative in their values. No better way of understanding

culture as an issue, or other cultures, can possibly exist. These merely are.”

[85]

ii) “Cultural studies are a form of post-modernism and are, as such, a backward step.

We need to return to scientific objectivity and verifiable propositions.”

iii) “All attempts to categorize cultures are crude stereotypes inferred from the most

superficial features of those cultures, which miss entirely deeper and more subtle

meanings.”

The answer to the first objection lies in the „synergy hypothesis‟ which explains the measure

of extent to which the contrasting values can be synergized. This enables to regard values as

relative, holding with themselves the universal themes and are more or less synergistic.

The answer to the second objective lies with the „complementary hypothesis‟. It provides that

even though cultures are different that look upon a phenomenon to help see varying

perspectives as well as realities, as two opposed ends, yet these cultures and viewpoints

converge in a fuller description. Cultural Intelligence seeks to establish respect for both ends

and realize the movements between the two.

The solution to the third objection is help with the „latency hypothesis‟ which states that

cultures comprise of dominant and latent values, which are complimentary ends. One end is

presented at the surface of culture and the contrasting value tends to be latent within that

culture that finds its way out through indirect expression. The role of Cultural Intelligence,

here, seeks to permit latent values to the surface and qualify its dominant values. Thus, the

three hypotheses enable the objections of Cultural Intelligence to be met.

Earley, Ang & Tan (2006) and Earley & Mosakowski (2005) define Cultural Intelligence as

“an outsider‟s seemingly natural ability to interpret someone‟s unfamiliar and ambiguous

gestures the way that person‟s compatriots would”. They posit that Cultural Intelligence is a

[86]

composition of the body, heart and head that drives an individual‟s emotional/ motivational,

physical and cognitive capabilities to work in an intercultural environment. They also discuss

that managers fit in at least one of the six profile of Cultural Intelligence provided by them.

Firstly, the provincial profile elaborates on those individuals who function effectively with

other from similar cultural backgrounds though they are uncomfortable in situations where

they came across individuals from unfamiliar cultural backgrounds. Secondly, the analyst

profile deals with accommodating oneself to a number of learning strategies that would

decipher the rules and expectations of a foreign culture. Next is the natural profile that is

based upon intuition instead of a systematic learning style. Then comes the ambassador

profile wherein individuals are not really aware of the culture where they interact though they

are convincing enough to communicate that they belongs to that culture. Their confidence

justifies their position. Another profile is the mimic who bears immense control over his

actions as well as behavior which facilitates putting the parties in the interaction at ease,

builds trust and enhances communication. Lastly, the chameleon is associated with higher

levels of all the three components of CQ which is quite uncommon. Such individuals may

sometimes be mistaken for the native of the country primarily because of the insider‟s skills

and outsider‟s perspectives possessed by them.

Thomas (2006) establishes the concept of Cultural Intelligence wherein mindfulness plays an

eminent as well as crucial role in integrating facets of knowledge, along with behavioral

capability which he regards as the three primary components of Cultural Intelligence (CQ).

The knowledge component of culture deals with the understanding or knowledge of cultures

and the basic principles involved in cross-cultural interactions comprising of content as well

as process knowledge. Mindfulness is fundamentally a heightened awareness of an enhanced

[87]

attention to current experience or present reality (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Adapting to Ting-

Toomey (1999), the author uses mindfulness as a key component that acts as an interlink

between knowledge and behavior. Mindful approach of managers in cross-cultural

interactions is relevant to the construct of Cultural Intelligence signifying the knowledge of

cultures with its simultaneous impact on behavior that enhances interactions in an

international context. The behavioral ability involves the choice of appropriate behavior from

a well developed repertoire of behaviors that are applicable for different intercultural

situations and also extrapolate to generate new behaviors (Thomas, 2006). Thomas (2006) has

also proposed a developmental model of CQ which suggests that CQ exists on a continuum

that develops overtime. It begins with acquiring knowledge, gaining alternative perspectives

through mindfulness and accommodating this knowledge through behavioral capability. This

iterative process may be regarded as an iterative process with a series of S curves

(Govindarajan & Gupta, 2001).

Ang, Van Dyne & Koh (2006) in their research have established the relationship between Big

Five personality traits and the four dimensions of CQ with a sample of business

undergraduates from Singapore which is a multicultural nation. The results established

significant links between conscientiousness and meta-cognitive CQ, agreeableness and

emotional stability with behavioral CQ, extraversion with cognitive, motivational, and

behavioral CQ and openness with all four factors of Cultural Intelligence. As openness to

experience was observed to establish relationships with all four factors of CQ, it is regarded

as a crucial personality trait that associates itself with functioning effectively in diverse and

multicultural settings.

[88]

Ng & Earley (2006) have revealed that in organizational psychology literature, extensive

research has been presented in the domain of culture and intelligence, though research in the

context of the synthesis of the two constructs is limited. The authors have, therefore, worked

towards describing the two constructs independently and later presented a framework to

reconcile them by the medium of two approaches broadly named as:

The cultural variation of intelligence (e.g., Berry, 1974; Ferguson, 1956; Sternberg,

1985) and

Cultural Intelligence (Earley, 2002; Earley & Ang, 2003; Thomas & Inkson, 2004).

While the former approach is associated with recognizing that the attributes formulating

intelligence likely vary across cultures, the latter approach reflects upon the capability of

individuals to work effectively across cultures. Despite the two constructs are representative

of two distinct avenues for integrating culture and intelligence, still the interconnection

between them can be explained by adopting the etic-emic distinction or perspective. Pike

(1967) pointed out that the emic viewpoint studies behavior from outside that system, whereas

the etic viewpoint studies behavior from inside the system. The cultural variation of

intelligence approach deals with the emic perspective of intelligence defining the constitution

of intelligence in a particular culture and its liaison with other constructs in that culture. On

the other hand, the Cultural Intelligence approach reflects upon the etic perspective of

intelligence enabling individuals to be capable of working effectively in multiple cultures.

Brislin, Worthley & Macnab (2006) have reflected upon the various complementary meanings

of Cultural Intelligence. They point out that it can either explain the behaviors to be

considered intelligent from the diverse perspectives of individuals of different cultural

[89]

backgrounds and may comprise of instant application of information that is learnt previously

in other cultures as well as slow but deliberate consideration of alternative ways of

performing or behaving in other cultures or it may consider the adaptability skills of

individuals that facilitate easy adjustment with minimal stress where greater intercultural

interactions take place. Both the elements in terms of behaviors and skills are harmonious as

individuals seeking to become sensitive to others can identify intelligence in the context of its

definition or as demonstrated in other cultures and simultaneously adapt to a gamut of

behaviors during intercultural encounters.

Triandis (2006) points out that in organizations where intercultural interactions are expected,

such interactions can become successful only when organizations are culturally intelligent.

The author reveals certain attributes that needed to be imbibed in oneself in order to become

culturally intelligent. Firstly, culturally intelligent individuals learn to suspend judgments

based upon a number of multiple cues as conclusions can‟t be framed merely upon the

nationality or ethnicity of an individual and may also consider certain personality attributes.

In addition to suspending judgments, culturally intelligent individuals lay immense

significance to situations. Moreover, they need to be trained in order to overcome

ethnocentrism which is possible only by providing a great deal of training. It is done mainly

by exposing trainees to different cultural norms in order to facilitate healthy criticism in the

context of why people in different cultures look at the same thing differently. Another

approach that is adopted in the said frame of reference is participation in various activities

that enhance the understanding of culture (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Pedersen, 2003). Even

behavioral modification training (Paige & Martin, 1996) enhances the probability of desirable

and appropriate behaviors and decreases the chances of undesirable behaviors. Examining the

[90]

positive as well as negative aspects of one‟s own culture as well as cultures around us

enhances the level of Cultural Intelligence in organizations.

Temper, Tay & Chandrasekar (2006) have explored the relationship of motivational Cultural

Intelligence with realistic previews in the context of cross-cultural adjustment with regard to

work, general as well as interaction adjustment of the global professionals (HR and global

managers in Singapore). The results indicated a positive relationship between motivational

CQ and the three criteria for adjustment while controlling for age, gender and time in the host

country, and prior international assignment. The study elucidated the significance of

motivational CQ in comprehending cross-cultural adjustment. The authors inferred that

realistic job preview was related to work adjustment, realistic living conditions preview was

related to general adjustment while motivational CQ justified its relationship with both work

and general adjustment better than realistic job and living conditions preview.

Ang et al. (2007) have worked upon enhancing the theoretical precision of Cultural

Intelligence (CQ) by testing the four dimensions of CQ (metacognitive, cognitive,

motivational and behavioral) against three intercultural effectiveness outcomes namely

cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance in

multicultural settings. The authors have cross-validated the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS)

across samples, time and country. They conducted three eminent studies in educational

settings where samples were drawn from the US and Singapore. The results indicated that

metacognitive CQ and cognitive CQ predicted cultural judgment and decision making;

motivational CQ and behavioral CQ predicted cultural adaptation, whilst metacognitive CQ

and behavioral CQ predicted task performance.

[91]

Plum (2007) draws attention by highlighting that Cultural Intelligence is a composition of

three dimensions corresponding to the classical division between emotion, understanding and

action. The emotional dimension is a crucial aspect of CQ that is associated with the feeling

component and generates motivation to achieve a fruitful intercultural encounter. This

dimension, also referred to as intercultural engagement, signifies the attitudes of individuals

towards differences facilitating the flexibility to change during such an encounter. The

cognitive dimension deals with the rationality part. It enables to develop the appropriate

mental structures that facilitate thinking, understanding along with judging the inter-cultural

encounters based on the conceptual frameworks together with language. This dimension

associates with the ability of the individual to regard himself as a cultural being and

comprehend the complexities of individuals of diverse nature. It is also called as cultural

understanding. The third dimension is indicative of the actions that are involved in an

intercultural encounter. It is associated with the various types of interpersonal communication

skills and is responsible for bringing the other two dimensions into play by developing the

content of communication. The content of the encounter is descriptive of the problem to be

encountered or the decisions to be made. This dimension is also referred to as intercultural

communication. All the above mentioned dimensions hold significant relevance in the context

of gaining a deeper insight into the intercultural encounter in order to enhance the overall

outcome.

Lee & Sukoco (2007) have dealt with issues of expatriate adjustment in the context of the

intervening role played by personality as well as Cultural Intelligence. This empirical

investigation conducted on 200 Taiwanese expatriates substantiated the impact of personality

traits on Cultural Intelligence as well as adjustment. The results of this research confirmed the

[92]

results of Ang et al. (2006) that the level of an individual‟s Cultural Intelligence can be

determined by personality traits. It also revealed that personality bears an impact on the level

of comfort on general living conditions, working environment along with interactions with

local people (e.g., Caligiuri,2000; Hechanova, Beehr & Christiansen, 2003; Ones &

Viswesvaran, 1999). The results also pointed out that adjustment of expatriates may be

enhanced when they try to adapt themselves appropriately in a different culture. Also, pre-

departure training as well as cognitive and experiential training favorably enhances the

possibility of expatriates to appropriately adapt to a new & unfamiliar environment.

Moody (2007) in his study, found openness to experience to be the most significant predictor

of CQ which was followed by conscientiousness. In another study conducted by Oolders,

Chernyshenko, & Stark (2008) in New Zealand, relationships were estimated between the

sub-facets of openness to experience (intellectual efficiency, ingenuity, curiosity, aesthetics,

tolerance, and depth) and Cultural Intelligence (CQ) and the results indicated significant

relationships between all the subjects to CQ. However, tolerance and curiosity were identified

to be most strongly related to CQ.

Beyene (2007), in a study of cross-cultural interactions between native English speakers and

non-native English speakers in a French multinational firm, demonstrated that after

controlling the ability of employees to speak multiple languages it was observed that the non-

native English speaking employees with higher levels of CQ had greater and frequent

interactions with the native English speaking employees.

Ward & Fischer (2008) tested the mediation model of personality, CQ and cross-cultural

adaptation by using a sample of 346 international students recruited through a New Zealand

[93]

University‟s international orientation program. A structured model of cross- cultural

adaptation with direct path from emotional stability to general adjustment as well as mediated

paths from cultural empathy, flexibility, open mindedness and social initiative through

motivational CQ, were tested by the research. The results demonstrated that flexibility alone

was mediated by motivational CQ though limited support was provided for Ang et al. (2004)

mediation model of personality, CQ and cross-cultural adaptation. It also suggested that

motivational CQ enhances general adjustment as well as cross-cultural adaptation. Social

initiatives along with emotional stability were also revealed to have direct effect on the

adaptation outcome. Cultural empathy and open mindedness were positively correlated with

motivational CQ whereas it did not establish significant relationships with CQ after

controlling for flexibility.

Sauer, K. (2008) in a study of 125 Black South African (BSA) leaders and 295 White South

African (WSA) leaders assessed the Cultural Intelligence levels of the two groups. The results

indicated significantly higher CQ scores for BSA over WSA restoring primarily to the

collectivist BSA culture, the South African history (apartheid) and exposure to multiple

cultures, as the main reasons for greater CQ levels in BSA. Ethnic group and age are regarded

as the main determinants of CQ in the research framework. In another study of managers in

South Africa and Netherlands, Bergh (2008) established that the two groups were relatively

similar in the context of cross-cultural interactions as well as Cultural Intelligence while

scoring high in terms of both „Cultural identity‟ and „Willingness to learn about other

cultures‟ and scoring moderately in the context of „Adaptability to multi-cultural settings‟.

Rockstuhl & Ng (2008) studied the dyads within multicultural teams and found that the

interpersonal trust between the partners was observed when (a) the focal persons had higher

[94]

metacognitive and cognitive CQ; (b) partners had higher levels of behavioral CQ and most

importantly (c) when the parties belonged to diverse cultural backgrounds. Significantly

therefore, the impact of CQ on interpersonal trust was evidently identified in culturally

diverse dyads than in case of culturally homogeneous dyads which justifies the applicability

of the construct of CQ in multicultural settings. Similar results were put forward by Chua &

Morris (2009) in a study of executives of diverse cultural backgrounds. They demonstrated

that CQ enhanced affect based trust (and not cognitive based trust) among the members of

culturally diverse professional work groups or networks though the impact of CQ was not

observed in the context of idea-sharing behaviors in such networks.

Ang & Van Dyne (2008) have presented the conceptualization of Cultural Intelligence by

highlighting the four factors of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) and positioning it in a nomological

network and placing it in the broader domain of individual difference eliciting the role that

CQ plays towards individual effectiveness. The nomological network establishes four major

relationships. Firstly, it is proposed that there is an indirect relationship between distal

individual differences and individual effectiveness through statelike individual differences on

the four factors of CQ. Secondly, the four factors of CQ significantly affect the intervening

variables in the form of the subjective perception of cultural encounters held by the

individuals along with their participation and involvement in intercultural activities that

facilitate individuals to acquire the required knowledge and skills in order to perform

effectively in intercultural situations. Thirdly, the nomological network works upon the other

possible contributions of the cognitive abilities of individual to what individual outcomes are

foreseen at the times of intercultural situations. Lastly, the significance of context is

[95]

recognized that affects the affiliation between Cultural Intelligence (CQ) and intermediate

outcomes.

Thomas et al. (2008) have drawn upon the conceptualization of Cultural Intelligence (CQ)

and presented the concept of CQ as a system of interacting abilities that facilitate in producing

culturally intelligent behavior. Cultural Intelligence here has been defined as „a system of

interacting knowledge and skills, linked by cultural metacognition that allows people to adapt

to, select, and shape the cultural aspects of their environment‟. Culturally intelligent behavior,

according to the authors, is supposed to dwell out of cultural knowledge and skills along with

cultural metacognition. Cultural knowledge includes the content component (e.g. knowledge

about cultures, social interaction, personal history), as well as stored processes like the culture

general processes directed towards finding solution of specific problems. In addition to the

cultural knowledge, there are three types of skills namely perceptual, relational, and adaptive

skills. The perceptual skills are inclusive of open-mindedness, tolerance for uncertainty and

non-judgmentalness. Relational skills include flexibility, sociability and empathy which are

adopted in a cross-cultural interaction. The adaptive skill involves being able to exhibit the

appropriate behavior that is adopted from a well framed repertoire or instantly developed

behaviors during a cross-cultural interaction. It involves self-monitoring, behavioral

flexibility and self-regulation. The cultural metacognition component refers to metacognition

in a particular domain specifically one that relates to cultural experiences and strategies. As

such, the complete amalgamation of cultural knowledge and skills in addition to cultural

metacognition facilitates the development of culturally intelligent behavior. The authors have

also presented an episodic view of the relationship between cultural metacognition and the

[96]

relationship between cultural metacognition and the dimensions of cultural knowledge and

skills.

Deng & Gibson (2008) have elicited the significance and implementation of Cultural

Intelligence as an essential component of cross-cultural leadership capabilities with reference

to the Western-Chinese cultural differences. On the basis of the inferences drawn from the

personal interviews conducted with western expatriates and Chinese managers who

represented the top and middle-level executives, it was inferred that the CQ capability held by

the expatriate leaders can positively influence cross-cultural leadership effectiveness. Cultural

awareness, motivational cultural adaptation as well as behavioral skills contribute towards

leadership effectiveness in multicultural workplaces. In addition to these key facets of CQ that

enhance leadership effectiveness, effective cross-cultural communication also plays a

significant role in determining the overall effectiveness of the individuals.

Kumar, Rose & Subramaniam (2008) contribute to the Cultural Intelligence literature by

providing theoretical support in the context of the relationship between Cultural Intelligence

and expatriate effectiveness outcomes. It enriches the literature on expatriate management and

presents an in-depth analysis for the mechanism that holds CQ and personality traits

responsible for expatriate assignment effectiveness.

Menon & Narayanan (2008) have discussed the significance of accommodating the concept of

Cultural Intelligence as a strategic model for the globalized economy especially in the context

of globalized delivery systems like production, financing, marketing or even human

resources. The top management needs to comprehend the need for bridging cultural

[97]

differences. A strategy like Cultural Intelligence enables managers to function effectively in

globalized organizations.

Van Dyne, Ang & Koh (2008, 2009) have discussed the development as well as the validation

of CQS (Cultural Intelligence Scale). Based upon the operational definitions of the four

dimensions of CQ, the initial scale consisted of 40 items which was tested with 576 business

school undergraduates in Singapore. On conducting confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) only

20 items with the strongest psychometric properties were retained that constituted the CQS.

The CQS was further tested with four subsequent studies to testify and validate it across

samples, time and countries and judged its relationship with cultural judgment and decision-

making, interactional adjustment and mental well-being. While metacognitive CQ and

cognitive CQ enabled in predicting cultural judgment and decision making and explained

variance by 4%, motivational and behavioral CQ explained variance in interactional

adjustment by 3% and motivational and behavioral CQ explained variance in mental well

being by 6%.

Crowne (2008) investigated into the various antecedents of Cultural Intelligence. As many of

the previous studies integrated to determine the possible outcomes of CQ, this study aimed at

understanding the potential antecedents that could lead to Cultural Intelligence. The findings

indicate that certain types of exposures to different cultures like education abroad,

employment abroad, vacation abroad and other experiences as well, enhance the Cultural

Intelligence of individuals. Also, the level of exposure from these experiences augments the

level of Cultural Intelligence (CQ). These findings are quite crucial for those organizations

that hire, promote, train and prepare managers for international assignments. The study also

revealed that international work experience predicted all CQ factors but motivational CQ. The

[98]

number of countries visited for the purpose of education predicted cognitive and behavioral

CQ though the number of countries visited for vacation indicated motivational CQ. Even the

study conducted by Shannon & Begley (2008) established that international work experience

in terms of the number of countries that the individuals worked in, predicted metacognitive as

well as motivational CQ. The work of Tay, Westman & Chia (2008) reflected that the length

of international work experience was only related to cognitive CQ. Furthermore, it pointed

out that this relationship between international work experience and CQ was found to be

stronger for individuals with lower need for control as those with low need for control

capitalized on their previous work experiences and did not undergo much of pre-departure

training. Tarique & Takeuchi (2008) identified that all the factors of CQ were predicted by the

number of countries visited by the individuals, although cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ

were predicted by the length of stay.

Ang & Inkpen (2008) have discussed the significance of firm-level CQ in the context of

international business ventures like off shoring. Three types of capabilities have been assessed

that constitute the firm-level Cultural Intelligence namely: managerial, competitive and

structural capabilities. Managerial Cultural Intelligence refers to the possession of CQ by the

managers of a firm especially when held by the top management team or the project managers

in an offshoring venture. It is crucial for the organization as the top management team holds a

vision of the firm as well as takes decisions by developing mental models that enables to cope

with the fast changing external environments as well as devise strategies subsequently (Huff,

1990). However, the firm-level Cultural Intelligence capabilities are incomplete without

competitive and structural CQ. Thus, the competitive CQ may be regarded as the meta-

capability (Teece, 2007) that draws on the technical or operational capabilities which

[99]

facilitate in integrating the knowledge assets within and between the firms as well as their

international partners (Kogut & Zander, 1992; Grant, 1996). The structural CQ, stresses on

the development of structural norms that determine the inter-organizational interface along

with considering the potential faultiness that could occur at the interface.

Janssens & Cappellen (2008) have contextualized Cultural Intelligence with special focus on

the global managers, who have been differentiated from the traditional expatriate managers as

they possess a position with cross-border responsibility and need to have a world view rather

than a nationwide perspective. By conducting in-depth interviews with global managers it was

assessed that these managers need to be culturally intelligent in order to appropriately handle

the diverse business perspectives of those with whom they interact. The data supports the

four-dimensions of the construct of CQ. As the global managers come across short-term but

highly frequent intercultural interactions, cognitive, metacognitive and behavioral CQ holds

significant implications for them. Also, culturally intelligent global managers must be able to

strategically adopt the communication tools corresponding to the facets of the message being

sent. The behavioral, motivational as well as metacognitive dimensions of CQ enable to

determine the nature of managers. Consequently, culturally intelligent colleagues can

appropriately maintain their cultural ways of functioning while looking for synergistic

solutions in the context of functioning across cultural boundaries (Adler & Bartholomew,

1992).

Research work in the context of identifying the impact of Cultural Intelligence on social

networks, has also been conducted. Fehr & Kuo (2008) conducted a study with a culturally

diverse sample of students who studied and lived in the United States and a sample of

American students who had taken up a study-abroad program. The results of the study

[100]

indicated that CQ was responsible for predicting the development of social networks in the

sample, after controlling for international experience, host country language fluency, and

cultural distance. Another study conducted by Gjertsen, Torp, Koh & Tan (2010) with a

sample of 87 engineers from 12 countries in a multinational company in Singapore

demonstrated that the homophily in social friendship networks was negatively predicted by

Cultural Intelligence (CQ) after controlling for gender, age, rank and organization tenure.

However, an individual‟s rank as well as tenure demonstrated greater advice network

predictability.

Certain studies have dealt with the impact of international experience gained through specific

programs for the development of CQ. In a study conducted by Shokef & Erez (2008) of

individuals participating in virtual multicultural teams comprising of members of five

different nations and lasting for four weeks, it was observed that their level of meta-cognitive,

motivational and behavioral CQ was significantly augmented. MacNab (2011) in his study

demonstrated that a program design based upon experiential learning and social contact

principles positively influences the CQ of the participants. Moreover, greater time spent while

interacting with others from diverse cultural backgrounds also affected the rate of CQ

development. This was also supported by Crawford-Mathis (2010) who identified that

volunteers in a service project in Belize who spent a lot of time to interact with the locals

enhanced their level of CQ. Similarly, Crowne (2007) revealed that individuals who stayed at

the hostels as well as ate with the locals of the country, enhanced the possibility of attaining

greater levels of CQ as they spent more time with the locals in comparison to those who

stayed at the expatriate compounds. Even Wilson & Stewart (2009) elicited that individuals

[101]

who experienced the overseas service learning through international service programs for the

first time displayed the highest development in their level of CQ.

Ng, Van Dyne & Ang (2009) have presented the role of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) in the

form of a strategic selection tool for managers keeping in mind the altered nature of

international assignments which is even more challenging. As the international assignments

are now implemented on a short-term basis and do not provide enough time for pre-departure

training, it necessitates the need for selecting employees on the basis of their ability to learn

from the international experiences. The authors seek to provide an insight into the use of CQ

as a selection tool along with strengthening the relationship that exists between experience

and effectiveness of the employees in the context of the international responsibilities held by

them.

Koh, Joseph & Ang (2009) have presented the need and relevance of Cultural Intelligence for

the global IT workforce and substantiates on its necessity to function effectively in the global

work environment. Stevens & Campion (1994) suggested five team competencies that are

needed for effective team performance. These are: conflict resolution, collaborative problem

solving, communication, goal setting and performance management and planning along with

task coordination. As a consequence of differences in culture, global IT professionals face

challenging situations due to which goal and task achievement becomes a little complicated.

However, Cultural Intelligence (CQ) has been suggested as a key competency or a critical

capability that facilitates effective interaction between the diverse IT professionals as well as

smoothens the process of goal accomplishment. While cognitive CQ enables to acquaint

individuals with salient cultural knowledge and have a fair knowledge of culture specific as

well as culture universals to enable IT professionals to rightly understand the broader

[102]

institutional environment, meta-cognitive CQ facilitates them to plan their interaction and

suspend judgments while seeking additional cues in order to adjust their mental models

accordingly. Behavioral CQ helps the IT professionals to attain flexibility in both verbal and

non-verbal behavioral patterns to be able to adjust and exhibit appropriate behaviors keeping

in mind the specifics of the situation. Also, motivational CQ provides the necessary drive to

the individuals towards understanding cultural differences and managing them.

Ng, Tan & Ang (2009) have reflected upon the composition of global culture capital which

comprises of the organizational values of a “global mindset” along with the organizational

routines that are adopted in organizations to promote this global mindset by providing cross-

cultural training as well as building commitment through an effective reward system. They

argue that employees who work with a global mindset are expected to acquire cosmopolitan

human capital through international experiences. As such, these authors establish a theoretical

link between the cultural capital and Cultural Intelligence (CQ) of its employees. The

development of CQ capabilities has been proposed to develop as a result of direct and indirect

experiences of the employees and acquired through cross-cultural interactions along with

managing cross-cultural working relationships.

Ng, Van Dyne & Ang (2009 a,b) have grounded their research on the experiential learning

theory (ELT) based upon which they provide that Cultural Intelligence (CQ) is an essential

learning capability that leaders adopt to produce potentially effective experiential learning in

culturally diverse situations through their international experiences. The authors propose a

model learning theory (ELT) along with the enabling CQ capabilities that are significant for

global leaders. The model establishes a cyclical relationship in the four learning stages in

experiential learning inclusive of the CQ capabilities. The stages are: concrete experience

[103]

(motivational and behavioral CQ), reflective observation (cognitive and meta-cognitive CQ),

abstract conceptualization (cognitive and metacognitive CQ) and active experimentation

(cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and behavioral CQ). While ELT is defined as the

“process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (Kolb,

1984, p.38), Cultural Intelligence is defined as the ability of an individual to function

effectively in culturally diverse or unfamiliar situations. The authors have indulged to focus

on Cultural Intelligence of leaders who possess the appropriate learning capabilities that

enables them to enhance their learning out of the international experiences and enables the

CQ capabilities to facilitate the transformation of the experience into experiential learning. It

is quiet necessary for the global leaders to balance their creative tension at all the four stages

in the experiential learning process.

Ward et al. (2009) have presented the psychometric analysis of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) by

conducting three studies. The first study validated the four dimensions of CQ in a large

sample comprising of international students. Another study established a strong correlation

between emotional intelligence and Cultural Intelligence while it failed to support the CQ

scores on incremental validity in predicting psychological, socio-cultural, and academic

adaptation in the sample of international students. The concluding study demonstrated

discriminant validity between CQ and a test of general cognitive ability (Raven‟s Advanced

Progessive matrices) along with establishing convergent validity across CQ scores and

multicultural personality questionnaire subscales.

Elenkov & Manev (2009), in a noteworthy piece of research work conducted on senior

expatriate leaders, demonstrated the role of Cultural Intelligence as an intermediator between

the positive relationship between visionary transformational leadership as well as

[104]

organizational innovation. Higher CQ magnified the positive influence of leadership on

innovation. Another study conducted by Groves & Feyerherm (2011) where a highly diverse

sample of working adults was chosen, revealed that Cultural Intelligence of a leader was

strongly associated with leader performance as well as team performance in a more

heterogeneous group in comparison with the less heterogeneous ones, after controlling the

demographic characteristics along with EQ.

Rockstuhl, Ang, Ng, Van Dyne, & Lievens (2009), in a study of multicultural teams, pointed

out that self-reported CQ predicted leadership emergence positively after controlling for IQ,

EQ, openness to experience, as well international experience. In another study, a sample of

graduate students from 35 nationalities was used wherein it was observed that CQ mediated

the impact of three way interactions involving home identity, host identity as well as global

identity on the perceptions of leadership (Lee, Masuda, & Cardona, 2010).

Karma & Vedina (2009) draw on the potential interlink between Cultural Intelligence and

workforce diversity. When managers function in multicultural workgroups, it becomes

necessary for them to acquaint themselves with the Cultural Intelligence skills in order to

effectively handle intercultural situations. The authors suggest accepting diversity as an

organizational value and recruit managers based upon CQ traits to ensure success for the

entire organization. The study also demonstrated relationship between openness to experience

and intercultural group performance as well as all CQ dimensions. It was also revealed that

managers possessing this trait can handle intercultural situations better than others.

Further, the impact of international work experience has also been demonstrated by Li &

Mobley (2010). Their research indicated that learning styles influenced the relationship

[105]

between international experience and Cultural Intelligence such that the relationship was

observed to be weaker for those with convergent learning styles while it was stronger for

those with divergent learning styles.

Van Dyne et al. (2010) refers to Cultural Intelligence as a capability that enables leaders to

develop an overall perspective or adopt to a set of behaviors that helps managers as well as

leaders to become more effective in their functioning. The authors provide that Cultural

Intelligence is an extension of EQ or emotional intelligence, however, focusing upon an

individual‟s capability to effectively comprehend the cultural context as a significant and

additional skill set. It is also pointed out that the foundation of CQ lies in its four different yet

interrelated set of capabilities namely metacognitive CQ (strategizing and making sense out of

culturally diverse situations), cognitive CQ (understanding cross-cultural dissimilarities and

issues), motivational CQ (showing interest, confidence, and drive to adapt cross-culturally) as

well as behavioral CQ (adopting appropriate verbal and non-verbal actions while interacting

cross-culturally). The authors have therefore suggested to follow the path of adopting the

cycle of motivational CQ (Drive) to cognitive CQ (Knowledge) to metacognitive CQ

(Strategy) to behavioral CQ (Action) to a feedback loop where the response to the behavior is

that tends to influence the motivational CQ facilitating the cycle to start all over again and

further enhance the overall level of Cultural Intelligence which helps to lead in the rapidly

globalized economy.

Ramalu et al. (2010) conducted an empirical investigation to evaluate the impact of Cultural

Intelligence on cross-cultural adjustment and job performance among the expatriates in

Malaysia. The findings of the study indicated the significance of Cultural Intelligence as a

suitable intercultural competency that enhances expatriate‟s cross-cultural adjustment as well

[106]

as job performance during international assignments. Specifically the results revealed that

meta-cognitive and motivational CQ resulted is better general adjustment of expatriates.

Higher motivational CQ was correlated to higher work adjustment. Also, it was assessed that

greater meta-cognitive and behavioral CQ were related to greater contextual performance in

expatriates while greater behavioral CQ was associated with greater specific performance.

Amiri, Moghimi & Kazemi (2010) established the relationship between Cultural Intelligence

and employee performance. By using correlation analysis, it was observed that significant

relationship exists between metacognitive, cognitive and motivational CQ and employees‟

performance or between Cultural Intelligence and overall employees‟ performance.

Employees with high metacognitive CQ are capable of understanding when to use their

cultural metaphors to apply multiple knowledge structures suiting different conditions.

Cognitive CQ enables to have the appropriate conception on job performance. Motivational

CQ enhances an individual‟s drive to perform a task better and acquire flexible behaviors to

meet the expectations of others. Consequently, as knowledge, skills, capabilities and

motivation are determinants of performance (Campbell, 1999); CQ facilitates employees to

perform effectively while interacting with others of diverse cultural backgrounds.

Rockstuhl et al. (2010) have talked about the concept of Cultural Intelligence in the context

of cultural neuroscience that aims to explain the neurological underpinning, that determine

cognitive as well as behavioral differences across cultures. Thus, the culturally intelligent

brain has been defined as the neurological bases of the capability of an individual to function

effectively in the multicultural context (Earley & Ang, 2003). By situating on the significance

of Cultural Intelligence in the context of functioning across international boundaries or

dealing with individuals who are culturally diverse as well as identifying the complex role of

[107]

the leader in managing multiculturalism in all respects as a consequence of the increasingly

globalized business environments, the authors propose or extend the research agenda towards

conducting cultural neuroscience research into intercultural neuroscience of the culturally

intelligent brain. This is crucial for detecting cultural differences on one hand to bridging

cultural differences on the other hand.

Rockstuhl et al. (2011) while emphasizing the significance as well as relevance of cross-

border effectiveness in the contemporary globalized world, have identified Cultural

Intelligence (CQ) as a critical leadership competency that enables managers to effectively

handle intercultural situations especially those with cross-border responsibilities. As such, by

using multiple intelligences and testing a sample of Swiss military officers having both

domestic as well as cross-border leadership responsibilities, it was identified that while

general intelligence was a predictor of both domestic and cross-border leadership

effectiveness, emotional intelligence strongly predicted domestic leadership effectiveness.

Cultural Intelligence (CQ) was identified as a strong predictor of cross-border leadership

effectiveness. Thus, effective cross border leadership requires individuals to function

appropriately in culturally diverse setting and acquire the Cultural Intelligence capability for

smoothly handling such situations.

Imai & Gelfand (2010) have touted on the importance of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) during

the intercultural processes and outcomes while controlling for other types of intelligence,

personality as well as international experience. In their study of intercultural negotiations

between East Asian and American negotiators, it was revealed that the negotiators possessing

higher CQ demonstrated greater information behaviors and cooperative relationship

management behaviors. Subsequently, these behaviors resulted into the positive prediction of

[108]

joint profits of the negotiation pairs in process. Additionally, individual‟s differences in

cognitive ability, openness to experience, EQ, extraversion as well as international experience

did not influence the negotiation behavior.

Vedadi, Kheiri & Abbasalizadeh (2010) explicated on the relationship between Cultural

Intelligence and achievement need by studying 78 middle and top managers in an Iranian oil

and gas company having some form of international exposure. The results of this study

pointed out that a positive correlation exists between Cultural Intelligence and achievement

need. Individuals having higher levels of CQ possess greater achievement need than others

and CQ is necessary for ensuring success and conducting business in multicultural

environments.

Choi, Moon, & Jung (2010), in a study of Korean expatriates demonstrated that expatriates

international non-work experience predicted CQ instead of their work experience. The results

also indicated that the goal orientation of the expatriates intermediated in developing CQ from

their international non-work experience.

In a study involving multisource as well as multilevel data, Chen et al. (2010) demonstrated

that motivational CQ bears an impact upon the work adjustment of the expatriates. It was also

pointed out that the impact was stronger in case of lower cultural distance and subsidiary

support. This study is regarded as an eminent piece of research work on CQ as its lays the

foundation for testing boundary conditions that accentuate or attenuate the effect of Cultural

Intelligence.

Tay, Rossi & Westman (2010) determined a negative relationship between emotional

exhaustion and Cultural Intelligence (CQ), in a study conducted on international business

[109]

travelers. The authors also pointed out that CQ intervened the influence of family demands

that buffer with work in such a way that the impact of family demands on emotional

exhaustion was found to be weaker for those with higher levels of Cultural Intelligence.

Smith, Shrestha & Evans (2010) have deliberated on the necessity for B-schools to equip their

students with the Cultural Intelligence skills in order to make them capable of working

productively across cultural boundaries. They conducted an exploratory research to develop

an innovative method to assess the impact of MBA students Cultural Intelligence. For the said

purpose, the movie „Crash‟ was used to determine the CQ of the students at two levels: 1)

basic cross-cultural understanding (i.e., knowledge and understanding of cultural concepts)

and 2) advanced cross-cultural understanding (i.e., ability to explain the occurrence of cross-

cultural misunderstandings and conflicts). The results of the assessment indicated that

students performed reasonably well in comprehending the reasons for cross-cultural problems

while they did not perform well in the context of their basic understanding of cultural

concepts.

Ng, Van Dyne, & Tan (2011) and Ng, Van Dyne, & Ang (2012) have reflected upon the

journey of Cultural Intelligence over the past decade highlighting various critical research

efforts that have taken place in the past years and have suggested researchers to conduct

future research in certain key areas in order to significantly advance current understanding.

They provide that greater research is needed in the context of the nomological networks of the

four facets of CQ in order to comprehend their nature, functioning as well as interaction.

Future research must take into consideration complementary approaches to assess CQ. Firm-

level CQ is exemplified as an area of higher level of analysis which is relatively unexplored

and thus provides research opportunities. Also, research in the context of driving how

[110]

individuals develop CQ is relatively limited which may also be shed light upon to explore the

development of CQ by examining their growth trajectories.

Yordanova (2011) verified that an individual‟s level of Cultural Intelligence is dependent

upon openness to experience in a general analysis. Furthermore, the analysis of the

multicultural team performance revealed that a team with clearly defined goals as well as

roles is regarded to be more successful. A positive correlation was observed between

metacognitive, cognitive and behavioral CQ with an individual‟s ability to set goals. Also, the

results indicated direct relationship between Cultural Intelligence (CQ) and multicultural team

success.

In a recent study on real estate sales performance, Chen, Liu & Partnoy (2011) established a

positive relationship between motivational CQ and the agent‟s cultural sales which refers to

the number of sales transactions with customers from a distinct cultural background. In

particular, this study conducted on 305 agents belonging to 26 real estate firms provided that

motivational CQ was positively related to their cultural sales.

Van Dyne et al. (2012) have proposed the next wave of Cultural Intelligence (CQ) research

by guiding researchers, academicians as well as practitioners to have a deeper insight into

each of the four factors of Cultural Intelligence. They have expanded on the conceptualization

of Cultural Intelligence delineating the sub-dimensions of the four dimensions of CQ. Based

upon psychometric evidence and convergent/discriminant validity of sub-dimensions, the

second order 11-factor structures of the four-factors of Cultural Intelligence is presented.

Drawing on the existing research on each of the four-dimensions of Cultural Intelligence, the

sub-dimensions were identified. Planning, awareness and checking were delineated as the

[111]

sub-dimensions of meta-cognitive CQ based upon specific research conducted by O‟Neil &

Abedi (1996) and Pintrich & De Groot (1990). Culture-general knowledge as well as context-

specific knowledge have been determined as the two sub-dimensions of cognitive CQ based

upon the research work of Cushner & Brislin (1996) and Murdock (1987). Intrinsic and

extrinsic interests (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 2002) have been drawn as

the sub-dimensions of motivational CQ. Lastly, flexibility in verbal and non-verbal behaviors

along with speech acts (Hall, 1959, 1976; Spencer-Oatey, 2008) refers to the key dimensions

of behavioral CQ. This has enabled to refine the theoretical conceptualization of CQ (Ang et

al., 2011; Gelfand et al., 2008).

Osman-Gani (2012) has presented a conceptual analysis of the construct of Cultural

Intelligence (CQ). He has discussed the relevance of the construct in terms of developing the

performance of managers during the international assignments as research in the context of

performance issues of international managers is not systematic and exhaustive. Also, the

expatriate adjustment as well as performance issues have not been addressed from the

perspective of individual traits and capabilities by focusing on relevant theories of

intelligence. As a consequence, the author offers significant implications in the domain of

intercultural effectiveness research and simultaneously for professional practice in different

areas. He insists upon the inclusion of CQ while carrying out research on various aspects of

culturally diverse situations as it facilitates enhancing the intercultural effectiveness outcomes

being conceptually as well as empirically distinct from other individual differences. Secondly,

he outlines studying the facets of CQ from different perspectives as well as studying different

relationships for varying roles, jobs and contexts. Thirdly, CQ has significant implications for

intercultural training, which has, to date, focused primarily on knowledge or cognitive

[112]

training (Earley & Peterson, 2004). Therefore, he suggested, cross-cultural training to be a

significant intervention for the purpose of developing capabilities in the said context (Osman-

Gani, 2000) and accommodating the different aspects of CQ like metacognitive, cognitive,

motivational and behavioral CQ as the foundation of trainings. Finally, CQ facilitates

predicting the strengths and shortcomings of managers, based upon recent empirical research

(Ang et al., 2007; Ang et al., 2006), on cultural grounds that influence their adjustment and

performance in overseas assignments. Thus, after analyzing the CQ profiles of individuals,

appropriate interventions may be suggested on the varying cultural dimensions before

managers are sent overseas.

Despite the newness of the construct, researchers in the context of Cultural Intelligence (CQ)

have consistently suggested for more research to address both the measurement as well as

substantive issues. Different outcome variables have been studies in relation to Cultural

Intelligence, although none of the previous studied have determined the relationship between

Cultural Intelligence and customer satisfaction. As such, the present review of literature shall

also shed light upon the impact of culture in the hospitality industry as well as service

encounters to determine how the relationship may be established.

2.2. IMPACT OF CULTURE ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND

SERVICE ENCOUNTERS IN THE INTERNATIONAL HOSPITALITY

INDUSTRY

Business success in the 21st century is dependent on how individuals and organizations

acquire and practice cross-cultural sensitivity skills in dealing with customers from diverse

cultural backgrounds (Harris, 2004). Thus, it is of great significance to identify the impact of

[113]

culture on the international hospitality industry where individuals come across customers,

employees and others belonging to varying cultural backgrounds.

When people are aware of the potential differences in thought processes, they tend to make

isomorphic attributions, defined as interpreting behavior from the actor‟s perspective and

giving it the same meaning as intended by the actor (Triandis, 2006). This holds true for the

hospitality industry where customers may belong to different cultural backgrounds and the

employees take the challenge of addressing the needs of their customer and bringing them

satisfaction, contentment and most importantly meeting their cultural expectations. When

customer expectations are not met, it often leads to disappointments, fear, loneliness which

may further lead to cultural conflicts (Weiermair, 2000).

Hospitality services are “high contact” services with a high degree of human involvement and

face to face contact (Lovelock, Patterson, & Walker, 2001). If the service provider and the

customer come from different cultural backgrounds, there can be serious implications with

regard to the most important of hospitality issues-the perception of service delivery (Strauss

& Mang, 1999).

Numerous researchers have been attempted to determine the application of customer

satisfaction theories developed by consumer behaviorists in the areas of tourism and

hospitality (Pizam & Milman, 1993; Danaher & Arweiler, 1996; Ryan & Cliff, 1997; Hudson

& Shepard, 1998) in order to investigate customer satisfaction applicability to the hospitality

and tourism industry. These researchers point out that the organizations must set their

customer satisfaction levels and develop a complete understanding of who their customer is.

They must always set their benchmarks and identify the competitive advantages that they can

[114]

have over the others while dealing with customers, including customers from diverse cultural

backgrounds.

In the hospitality industry the true measure of any company‟s success lies in an organization‟s

ability to continuously satisfy customers to gain a competitive edge by acknowledging and

managing customers of different cultural backgrounds (Kandampully et al., 2001). Global

customers have different expectations and different ways of evaluating performance (Vavra,

1997). When designing global customer satisfaction measurements, it is of pivotal

significance to take into account their regional as well as cultural aspects. Studies conducted

by Chadee & Mattson (1995) and Scott & Shieff (1993) found significant cross-cultural

differences when measuring customer satisfaction. Culture holds an impact upon the

perception and problem solving of global customers leading to a difference in the satisfaction

level for the same service. In this context, Heo et al. (2004) points out that tourism providers

must be able to accommodate culturally based needs in order to tap into the increasingly

lucrative market of international travelers. Thus, the employees need to be culturally

intelligent in order to deal with such customers. Since, cultures differ in their norms for

appropriate behaviors (Hall, 1959; Triandis, 1994); the ability to display a flexible range of

behaviors enables to create positive impressions along with developing inter-cultural

relationships (Gudykunst et al., 1988).

Pearce & Moscardo (1984) revealed a condition with respect to tourist satisfaction. It clearly

states that higher tourist satisfaction is associated with the match between value system of the

host and guest. Greater alignment between the value systems of the two cultures results in

greater satisfaction. Pearce (1991) mentioned that tourist satisfaction may be regarded as the

“fit” between the expectations as well as the perceived evaluative outcome of the experience.

[115]

For instance, the tourist satisfaction enhances with the “fit”, i.e., when the hosts meet the

tourists‟ expectations.

Reisinger & Turner (1998), in a study of Mandarin tourists and Australian hosts established

that cultural differences like communication styles, expressing feelings, establishing

relationships and attitudes, intermediated the interaction between the host and the guest

country. The study concluded while suggesting that the service providers must undergo

cultural awareness learning programmes in order to learn the basic principles for cross

cultural interaction and communication.

Stauss & Mang (1999) in discussing service quality, stated two mutually dependent variables

presenting perspective of two interactions in service encounters, which may become a cause

of two main problem areas:

“Problems appear because the performance of the domestic service provider does not

meet the expectations of the foreign customer (inter-cultural provider performance

gap).”

“It is possible that the service cannot be fulfilled at usual performance level because

the foreign customers do not maintain the role behavior expected by domestic supplier

(inter-cultural customer performance gap).”

Pizam & Sussman (1995) revealed that during a holiday, the French customers do not interact

much with others and restrict to themselves due to language problem. They also prefer their

own cuisine. French customers perceive listening, dedication as well as competence from

service employees greater in evaluation of service encounter in comparison to the

effectiveness of the service (Chandon et al., 1997). German customers are chiefly influenced

[116]

by reliability as well as empathy and responsiveness of service employees (Witkowski &

Wolfinbarger, 2002). Indian customers lay emphasis on security, courtesy, competence and

responsiveness and their feelings at the time of the service delivery (Keillor et al., 2004).

South African domestic business travelers value the security and professionalism of staff

while staying in guest houses (Radder & Wang, 2006). Chen & Hsu (2000) pointed out that

the existence of language barriers made Korean tourists quite uncomfortable with the service

providers which subsequently affected their perception of service quality and satisfaction.

Mattila (1999), in a study of Asian and Western customers, examined the influence of culture

on the evaluation of complex services in luxury hotels. The differentiation was assessed in the

context of personalized service and pleasant physical environment wherein the results of the

conjoint analysis pointed out that customers from the Western cultural backgrounds rely upon

the tangible cues like the physical environment in comparison to the Asian customers for

whom the hedonic consumption was more significant. Mattila (2000) states that “today‟s

hospitality managers need to be aware of the parts of consumer experience that are open to

cultural influences in contrast to those that remain stable across cultures.”

Becker (2000) presented a conceptual analysis of service recovery strategies in the context of

differences prevailing in four contrasting cultural prototypes. In a comparative cultural

analysis, the American society which is individualistic in approach, is observed to be

impulsive and assertive (Peabody, 1985), selfish as well as idealistic (Nasierowski &

Coleman, 1997). They believe that the employees must competently solve problems and

expect employees to counteract the service failure in the context of discomfort or

inconvenience. The Scandinavians, who too are highly individualistic but a little less than the

Americans, engage in verbal, direct and public communication while confronting a problem

[117]

(Gudykunst & Tiny-Toomey, 1988) but are highly feminine in their dominant values in

contrast to the Americans. However, the Asians are regarded as collectivists and their

complaint behavior isn‟t supported culturally when products or services fail to meet the

expectations (Cavusgil & Kaynak, 1982). Latin societies are collectivist and exhibit power

distance amongst social strata. They are high context cultures involving high sensory

involvement in eating, entertaining and socializing. Thus, cultural differences need to be

managed appropriately.

Choi & Chu (2000) have placed in context the need for studying the perceptions of service

quality among Asian and Western travelers staying with Hong Kong hotels. It was identified

that the Asian travelers emphasize value for money and are concerned about their budget in

comparison to their western counterparts. For the Western travelers, room quality is the most

significant aspect in determining the overall satisfaction in the context of room set-up,

cleanliness, quietness, and room temperature control. Staff service quality is relevant for both

Asian and Western travelers which includes employee courtesy, understandability, language

skills, appearance and check-in/checkout efficiency. The general amenities, business services,

value, security and IDD (International Direct Dial) facility also affect the perceptions of

service quality which further affect the satisfaction levels for both Asian and Western

travelers (Le Blanc, 1992).

Gilbert & Tsao (2000) resorted to explore the Chinese cultural influences in the hotel industry

in order to deliberate on the new approach to relationship marketing in the context of eastern

culture and uncover the importance of relationships in the Chinese culture. Based upon the

sample of Chinese hotel practitioners as well as some expatriate (Western background)

managers, it was identified that Chinese managers lay strong emphasis on personal

[118]

relationships including the use of Kuan-hsi (networking), mien-tsu (face), jen-chin (personal

obligation), while interacting cross-culturally. This was also confirmed by the Western

managers in the context of their interaction with the Chinese colleagues, customers or

business partners which also suggested deeply comprehending the cultural background of the

customer to market to them appropriately.

Furrer et al. (2000), in a study of respondents from the US, Asia, the French-speaking part of

Switzerland and from other countries, demonstrated the variation in the service quality

perception across individuals of different cultural backgrounds in the context of their

positioning on the Hofstede‟s cultural dimensions. Linking the Hofstede‟s cultural dimensions

to the SERVQUAL profile, five segments of individuals have been categorized namely

followers, blame-seekers, self-confidents, sensory seekers as well as functional analyzers.

Suitable strategies are determined to meet the needs of customers from diverse cultural

backgrounds.

Liu et al. (2001) have tested the impact of culture towards behavioral intentions in relation to

perceived service quality. It was demonstrated that customers from low individualistic or high

uncertainty avoidance societies tend to praise on receiving higher quality of service but do not

complain otherwise. On the contrary, customers from high individualistic and lower

uncertainty avoidance societies tend to complain on receiving poor service while they do not

praise on receiving higher quality service. Thus, the managers believe in carefully

understanding the potential cultural influences on the behavioral intentions of the customers

and consequently adjusting the service decisions to enable minimizing the possible

managerial cultural bias as well as enhancing the business profitability.

[119]

Truong & King (2003) prescribed a conceptual framework to elucidate the determinants of

satisfaction amongst the tourists coming from diverse cultural backgrounds to Vietnam. They

pointed out that it is essential for service providers in Vietnam to take into consideration the

needs and expectations of visitors as such needs and expectations are culturally determined.

Decision-makers need to have a deep insight into the behaviors of tourists from multiple

cultural backgrounds in order to enhance their customer satisfaction in the cross-cultural

context. The conceptual model comprises of the internal individual factors as well as the

external or situational factors that determine the tourists‟ perceptions and ultimately their

satisfaction levels. The internal factors include various national cultural indicators like: (1)

cultural background of visitors; (2) socio-demographic profiles of visitors and (3) the

behavioral and travel characteristics of the visitors. The external factors are associated with

cross-cultural interaction between the hosts and the guests along with tourists‟ perceptions in

relation to destination attributes such as (1) the scope and type of attributes; (2) the price and

quality of the available products and services; (3) the personal safety of tourists and (4) the

political stability.

Barker & Hartel (2004) in reporting the service experiences of culturally diverse consumers in

multicultural society of Australia stated that on the basis of the service provider behavior

(both verbal and non-verbal), culturally diverse customers perceive that they are the recipients

of inequitable service and consequently experience low levels of satisfaction.

Crotts (2004) in a study of 302 US respondents travelling to 26 different countries exhibited

the impact of cultural distance on overseas travel behavior by analyzing the cultural

orientations of both the home as well as host culture. It pointed out that individuals are likely

[120]

to take into consideration the degree of similarities are differences while travelling in order to

adapt to the environment and facilitating to minimize the friction during their travel.

Harris (2004) pointed that a world class hotel or any hospitality organization may assess its

own status of cultural sensitivity by asking the following questions:

“Does the way of doing business in your hotel suffer severely from cultural lag?”

“Do the hotel managers seek to understand the culture of customers, employees and

suppliers?”

“Do the hotel managers utilize cultural analysis and insights in terms of their own

management styles and public relations?”

“Do the hotel managers realize the value of cultural differences and promote cultural

synergy?”

Wong (2004) deliberates on the role of cultural orientations of individuals on the customers‟

evaluations of service encounters in the context of service failure and recovery. By using

three cross-national samples, i.e., American, Singaporean and Australian samples, service

recovery was tested in the form of compensation or apology. The results indicated that in all

the three samples, compensation tends to enhance the customer‟s evaluation of the service

encounter while the positive impact on repurchase intention and word of mouth was observed

only for the American sample. On the other hand, apology enhances the satisfaction levels of

the Singaporean and Australian sample which does not hold true for Americans. Thus, culture

plays a significant role in the international service settings and service providers need to

[121]

acquaint themselves with the knowledge of the aspects of culture while designing and

implementing global service strategy.

In another study conducted by Kanousi (2005), it was demonstrated that three of five of the

Hofstede‟s (1980) cultural dimensions (i.e., individualism, masculinity and long term

orientation) are related to the service recovery expectations. In this study of 200 respondents

it was identified that individualism was linked to higher expectations about empowerment but

lower expectations with explanation. While masculinity was associated with higher

expectations about explanation and tangibles, long-term orientation established links with

higher expectations about tangibles.

Poon & Yong (2005) took into account the differences in Asian and Western travelers in

terms of their satisfaction levels with respect to their stay in Malaysian hotels. The results

indicated that for both the groups „service quality‟ is the most significant component that

determines overall customer satisfaction. The authors provided overwhelming support for the

results pointing out that service quality as well as food and beverage play an influential role in

determining the overall satisfaction for Western travelers. However, the Asian counterparts do

not spend much on the core product quality while Western travelers are more concerned about

the security aspects. Aesthetics is what attracts the Asians and they emphasize value for

money.

Yuksel et al. (2006) examined the cultural differences as well as similarities in the complaint

attitudes of British, Israeli, Dutch and Turkish hotel customers. The results indicated that the

respondents displayed a favorable attitude towards complaining. However, they differentiated

on the grounds of positive and negative attitudes with respect to their level of dissatisfaction.

[122]

Respondents with a favorable attitude towards complaining engaged in voice behavior while

those with negative attitudes comprised of switching or loyalty behavior. Loyalty was adopted

in case of high switching costs, lack or unavailability of alternatives, prior knowledge,

chances of complaint success and so on.

Mey et al. (2006) assessed the expectations, perceptions as well as satisfaction levels of

guests from Malaysia, Asia and other countries staying with the Malaysian hotels. The results

pointed out that the lowest expectations as well as perceptions of the hotel stay were held by

the Malaysian guests. Both the Malaysian and Asian guests scored highest on the assurance

dimension while non-Asians scored highest on the responsiveness dimension. No significant

variation has been judged in the context of the overall satisfaction between the Malaysian and

Asian guests as their cultural backgrounds are nearly similar. However, significant differences

were observed between the satisfaction levels of Malaysian and non-Asian customers where

the overall satisfaction levels for the Malaysian hotels was consistently lower primarily

because they were familiar with the local environment and were not so surprised or delighted

by the services provided. Hence, it was suggested for the hotel managers to ensure that all

moments of contact with the customers should result in a positive experience for the

customers (Juwaheer & Ross, 2003).

Jogaratnam & Kong (2007) explored the service encounter perceptions of customers in the

USA and the Republic of Korea. The study explored six behavioral dimensions namely:

civility, basics, personalization, conversation, concern and formality which were used to study

the behaviors of customers. The results indicated that personalization was a significant

predictor of satisfaction in the US sample while concern predicted satisfaction in the Korean

sample. Service satisfaction was highly influenced by the courtesy dimension for the Korean

[123]

sample. As the Koreans believe that status and power is unequally distributed, they expect

service employees to be polite and courteous due to the lower social status perception

associated with service employees. Individual recognition and personalization were quite

significant to the American diners in comparison to the Korean sample.

Lin et al. (2007) discuss the differences in the consumer perceptions and expectations in

China and the US in the context of cross-cultural service encounters on the basis of in-depth

interviews. Status of professional service providers is higher in China in comparison to the

ones in the US. Due to the higher status attached with certain professions by the Chinese, the

relationship between the service provider and the consumer becomes formal and distal and

becomes superficially intimate if personal relationships are developed due to repeat

purchases. However, the American customers distinguish between professional and personal

relationships and respect the decision of the service provider to treat all customers alike.

Kim, Wen, & Doh (2009) have provided valuable insights into evaluating the influence of

cultural differences on the perceptions of American and Chinese customers in the context of

crowdedness and customer attributions in the context of restaurant environment. It was

indicated by the results that Chinese customers judge crowdedness on grounds of spatial

factors in contrast to the American who rely on the number of people in the given space. In

terms of customer attribution, Chinese customers associate crowdedness to better quality of

food and better reputation of the restaurant as against the Americans, who exhibited opposite

patterns. Thus, perceptions of American and Chinese customers are affected by cultural

differences.

[124]

Tse & Ho (2009) attempted to comprehend service encounters with international customers in

luxury hotels by analyzing these encounters from the employee‟s perspective using the

Critical Incident Technique (CIT). The Hofstede‟s dimensions categorize individuals across

the globe to be differentiated in the context of their behavioral and choice patterns which is

reflected through their actions. The cultural orientation of the customers must be kept into

consideration while handling the international clients. Hotels need to spend considerable time,

efforts as well as resources in order to accommodate the culturally based needs of customers

from diverse cultural backgrounds.

Hopkins et al. (2009) has presented a conceptual model to establish the relationship between

cultural aspects and customers satisfaction with service encounter. The model proposes that

(a) the effectiveness of the service script that is adopted during a cross-cultural service

encounter is directly related to the customer satisfaction with the encounter; (b) cultural

differences between the customer and the service provider tend to influence the effectiveness

of the service script and lastly (c) the degree to which the customer identifies with his/her

culture intermediates the impact of cultural differences on the service script effectiveness.

Also, the work of Milliken & Martin (1996) highlights a general proposition that cultural

differences play a significant role in framing the customer‟s perception of service script

effectiveness during a cross-cultural service encounter.

Agrusa et al. (2010) highlights the variation in the tourist industry in the context of cross-

cultural differences. In this study of 128 Japanese and 94 German respondents in the U.S.,

Critical Incident Technique was used to discuss the service failure. “Inappropriate employee

behavior” was rated as the most significant category of service failure by both the Japanese

and German respondents. Majority of the respondents resorted to the fact that as a

[125]

consequence of such failure, they would avoid the offending U.S. business. Significantly

therefore, organizations cannot take the pressure of taking a bad word-of-mouth or less of

business that is accompanied by the failure of service encounters. Thus, these problems need

to be addressed through employee training (Sizoo & Serrie, 2009). Specifically, culturally

sensitive employees not just provide better service and better results to the organization, they

are even more attentive to the needs of their international customers. Such employees employ

greater selling skills to facilitate greater revenue generation per customer. Additionally,

appropriate intercultural skills in the multicultural environment enhances the satisfaction

levels as well as quality of service for the international customers while making the

organizations produce better results (Sizoo, 2008).

Tazun & Devrani (2010) aimed at assessing the link between hotel attributes and customer

satisfaction with the intervening role of individualism and collectivism. With a sample of 386

customers from diverse cultural backgrounds from city hotels in Ankara and Turkey, this

empirical study identified four hotel factors which were significant in determining the overall

customer satisfaction levels. These were “staff service quality”, “hotel image”, “room quality”

and “general amenities”. However, the findings revealed differentiation in the context of

individualism and collectivism with the same culture. Apart from general amenities, all the

other three factors are influential in determining the overall satisfaction levels. “Staff service

quality” has been recognized as the most significant component influencing the overall

satisfaction levels of collectivist culture while in the context of individualist customers, the

most significant component is “hotel image”.

Language proficiency is another significant area of competence (Fernandez, 1991) having

relevant implications for service script effectiveness from the perspective of communicating

[126]

with other from diverse cultural backgrounds. In the presence of cultural differences, the

customer‟s native language may not be the same as that of the employee. In this context,

Triandis (1994) asserts that intercultural communication that involves the interactions

between those whose native language differs from one another, multiplies the possibility of

ineffective communication to occur. Moreover, despite the proficiency of the employee in the

customer‟s native language, linguistic ability does not necessarily assure language

competence (Beamer, 1992). The inability to comprehend the nuances of the customer‟s

native language, may create barriers to the overall intercultural communication (Chaney &

Martin, 2000) and consequently influences the level of satisfaction of the customer.

Even in the context of non-verbal cultural cues, an employee must be well acquainted to

deliver the service script in such a manner that it reflects his etiquettes as well as his ability to

understand such non-verbal cues like kinesics (e.g., body language), oculesics (e.g., the use of

eyes, symbolizing the extent to which an employee is paying attention), proxemics (e.g., the

perception of space), and paralanguage (e.g., voice volume, speed of talking, amount or

avoidance of silence (Dahl, 1998).

Research indicates that cross culturally sensitive employees provide to customers better

service. They are able to adjust to their serving styles in order to meet the needs of their

foreign customers. Such an act in extremely beneficial for any hotel as such employees are

able to generate more revenue for the hotel through their impression on hotel guests and

suggestion selling (Mohsin, 2006).

A growing body of literature on cross cultural service encounters has emerged in the past few

years (Winsted, 1997, 2000; Mattila, 1999; Stauss & Mang, 1999; Furrer et al., 2000;

[127]

Rajpoot, 2000; Sizoo et al., 2005) but very few have attempted to evaluate the impact of

culture on service interactions, precisely in the context of intercultural interactions (Winsted,

1997,1999, Mattila, 1999; Furrer et.al., 2000). Pucik & Katz (1986) provide that culture

affects the social interactions, rules of social behavior as well as customer expectations that

tend to vary across cultures. Thus, the variation in the cultural norms as well as values can

create misunderstandings, misinterpretations which in turn may lead to cultural conflicts

(Cushner & Brislin, 1996; Sizoo et al., 2005).

Despite the importance and relevance of this topic, however, very little research has examined

the influence of culture on service perceptions (Malhotra, Ugaldo, Agarwal, & Baalbaki,

1994) and our understanding of how customers from different countries evaluate service

encounters is very limited (Winsted, 1997).

2.3. THE RESEARCH GAP

Despite emerging literature as well as empirical evidence in the context of factors that predict

Cultural Intelligence and its consequences, little research has been conducted in the domain of

cross-level predictors/ outcomes of Cultural Intelligence from the group or firm level.

Although some research has begun to take shape while considering the mediating mechanism

explicating on the Cultural Intelligence (CQ)-performance link, there is still relatively little

research on the more proximal outcomes of Cultural Intelligence. With the growing interest of

researchers in the domain of Cultural Intelligence, it has become necessary to address and

uncover issues that are still untouched. None of the previous works on Cultural Intelligence

have discussed the relevance of Cultural Intelligence in the hospitality industry and its

relationship to customer satisfaction. Keeping in mind, the increased movement of

[128]

international travelers to India for varying purposes like leisure/holiday, business, visiting

family/friends, etc., it becomes necessary for the hospitality managers to take into account the

impact of culture on the intercultural service encounters to enhance the level of customer

satisfaction of the international clients which is inevitably known to be culturally bound.

Cultural factors affect the perceptions, problem-solving, decision-making, cognition as well

as the attitudes and behaviors which results in the variation in the satisfaction levels for the

same service by global customers. International visitors generally expect the service providers

or the hospitality managers to know their cultural orientations and value systems by

exhibiting some level of cross-cultural competence (Katriel, 1995). When the service

providers are unable to understand the cultural needs and expectations of their international

customers, conflicting situations may emerge at that point. Such conflicts may even take place

when managers elicit certain behaviors which are considered to be appropriate in their

cultural context but may be considered inappropriate in the guest‟s culture (Cushner &

Brislin, 1996). Also, dissimilar cultural values and norms of both the cultures may lead to

such conflicts and thus, create dissatisfaction, frustration and stress for the guest leading to

negative outcomes for the service provider (Cushner & Brislin, 1996). However, an

unambiguous understanding of the preferences and expectations of customers from diverse

cultural backgrounds enables to provide compelling service and exceeding customer

satisfaction and expectation levels (Kandampully et al., 2001; Heo et al., 2004; Sizoo et al.,

2005).

There are still others (Tsang & Qu, 2000; Coyle & Dale, 1993) who present the service

provider‟s perspective only while marginally addressing the national and cultural differences

[129]

or leave them unexplored during the cross-cultural service encounters in the hospitality

industry. Consequently, it leaves a gap in the customer‟s fulfillment of service expectations.

At this juncture, it is significant to mention that despite the customer satisfaction literature is

replete in the context of measurement of customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry, little

research work has examined the impact of cross-cultural differences on customer satisfaction

that lead to service failures.

As Cultural Intelligence is an intercultural capability that enhances the ability of an individual

to interact and function effectively across culturally diverse settings and situations, it can be

accommodated in the service employees who come across customers from different cultural

backgrounds. As such, the service failures may be avoided when employees are culturally

intelligent and simultaneously minimize the possibility of cross-cultural misunderstandings,

misinterpretations or conflicts.

Thus, the present research work has been undertaken with the perspective of filling up the gap

in the Cultural Intelligence and customer satisfaction literature that has not yet explored the

significance as well as relevance of Cultural Intelligence in the hospitality industry in the

context of customer satisfaction.

[130]

REFERENCES

Adler, N.J., & Bartholomew, S. (1992). Managing globally competent people. Academy of

Management Executive, 6, 52-65.

Agrusa, J., Kupper, E., & Sizoo, S. (2010). How Japanese and German tourists perceive

service failures in the U.S.A. International Journal of Arts and Sciences, 3(7), 250-259.

Amiri, A.N., Moghimi, S.M., & Kazemi, M. (2010). Studying the relationships between

cultural intelligence and employees‟ performance. European Journal of Scientific Research,

42(3), 432-427.

Ang, S. & Inkpen, A.C. (2008). Cultural intelligence and offshore outsourcing success: A

framework of firm-level intercultural capability. Decision Sciences, 39(3), 337-358.

Ang, S., & Ng, K.Y. (2005). Cultural and network intelligences: The twin pillars in leadership

development for the 21st century era of global business and institutional networks. Spirit and

System: Leadership Development for a Third Generation. SAF

Ang, S., & Van Dyne, L. (2008). Conceptualization of cultural Intelligence: Definition,

distinctiveness, and nomological network. In S. Ang, & L. Van Dyne (Eds.) Handbook on

cultural intelligence: Theory, Measurement and Applications (pp. 3-15) Armonk, NY: M.E.

Sharpe.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C. (2006). Personality correlates of the four-factor model of

cultural intelligence. Group and Organization Management, 31, 100-123.

[131]

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Tan, M.L. (2011). Cultural intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg & B.S.

Kaufman (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 582-602). New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., & Ng, K.Y. (2004). The measurement of cultural

intelligence. Working paper, presented at the Academy of Management symposium on

cultural Intelligence in the 21st century, New Orleans, LA.

Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C.K.S., Ng, K.Y., Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N.A.

(2007). Cultural intelligence: Its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision

making, cultural adaptation, and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3,

335-371.

Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in a cultural context. Applied Psychology. An

International Review, 51, 269-290.

Barker, S., & Hartel, E.J. (2004). Intercultural service encounters: An exploratory study of

customer experiences. Cross Cultural Management, 11 (1), 3-14.

Beamer, L. (1992). Learning intercultural communication competence. The Journal of

Business Communication, 29, 285-303.

Becker, C. (2000). Service recovery strategies: The impact of cultural difference. Journal of

Hospitality and Tourism Research, 24 (4), 526-538.

Bergh, R.V.D. (2008). Cultural intelligence: A comparison between managers in South Africa

and the Netherlands (Master‟s thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa).Retrieved

[132]

from: http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-06032008-102941/unrestricted / dissertation.

pdf.

Berry, J.W. (1974). Radical cultural relatism and the concept of intelligence. In J.W. Berry

and R.R. Dasen (Eds.), Culture and cognition: Readings in cross-cultural psychology (p.

229). London: Methuen.

Beyene, T. (2007). Fluency as a stigma: Implications of language mandate in global work.

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, CA.

Brislin, R., Worthley, R., & Macnab, B. (2006). Cultural intelligence: Understanding

behaviors that serve people‟s goals. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 40-55.

Brown, A. (1991). Customer Care Management. Oxford, Boston: Butterworth-Hienemann.

Brown, K.W., & Ryan, R.M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role

in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 822-848.

Caligiuri, P.M. (2000). The Big Five personality characteristics as predictors of expatriate‟s

desire to terminate the assignment and supervisor-rated performance. Personnel Psychology,

53(1), 67-88.

Campbell, J.P. (1999). The definition and measurement of performance in the new age. In

D.R. Ilgen & E.D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance: Implications for

staffing, motivation and development (pp. 399-429). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Cavusgil, S.T., & Kaynak, E. (1982). A framework for cross-cultural measurement of

consumer dissatisfaction. In R.L. Day & H.K. Hunt (Eds.), New findings on consumer

satisfaction and complaining (pp. 80-84). Bloomington: Indiana University.

[133]

Chadee, D., & Mattsson, J. (1995). Customer satisfaction in tourist service encounters.

Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 4(4), 97-107.

Chandon, J.L., Leo, P.Y., & Phillipe, J. (1997). Service encounter dimensions- a dyadic

perspective: Measuring the dimensions of service encounters as perceived by customers and

personnel. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8(1), 65-86.

Chaney, L. H., & Martin, J.S. (2000). Intercultural business communication. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Chen, G., Kirkman, B.L., Kim, K., Farh, C.I.C., & Tangirala, S. (2010). When does cross-

cultural motivation enhance expatriate effectiveness? A multilevel investigation of the

moderating roles of subsidiary support and cultural distance. Academy of Management

Journal, 53, 1110-1130.

Chen, J.S., & Hsu, C.H.C. (2000). Measurement of Korean tourists‟ perceived images of

overseas destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 38(4), 411-416.

Chen, X.P., Liu, D., & Portnoy, R. (2011). A multilevel investigation of motivational cultural

intelligence, organizational diversity climate, and cultural sales: Evidence from U.S. real

estate firms. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:

10.1037/a0024697.

Choi, B.K., Moon, H.K., & Jung, J.S. (2010, August). Previous international experience,

cross-cultural training, and CQ: The role of goal orientation. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the Academy of Management, Montreal, Canada.

[134]

Choi, T.Y., & Chu, R. (2000). Levels of satisfaction among Asian and Western travelers.

International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 17(2), 116-131.

Chua, R.Y., & Morris, M.W. (2009). Innovation communication in multicultural networks:

Deficits in intercultural capability and affect based trust as barriers to new idea sharing in

intercultural relationships. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard Business School, Cambridge,

MA.

Costa, P.T. Jr., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and new five

factor inventory (NEO FFI) professional manual. Odessa, Fla: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Coyle, M., & Dale, B. (1993). Quality in the hospitality industry: A study. International

Journal of Hospitality Management, 12(2), 141-153.

Crawford-Mathis, K. (2010, August). Cultural intelligence and international service learning.

Paper presented at the annual meeting of Academy of Management, Montreal, Canada.

Crotts, J.C. (2004). The effects of cultural distance on overseas travel behavior. Journal of

Travel Research, 43, 83-88.

Crowne, K. (2007). The relationship among social intelligence, emotional intelligence,

cultural intelligence, and cultural exposure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple

University, Philadelphia, PA.

Crowne, K. (2008). What leads to cultural intelligence? Business Horizons, 51, 391-399.

Cushner, K., & Brishlin, R.W. (1996). Intercultural relations: A practical guide (2nd Ed).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

[135]

Dahl, S. (1998). Communications and culture transformation: Cultural diversity,

globalization and cultural convergence. Project presented to the European University,

Barcelona. University of Luton, UK.

Danaher, P.J. & Arweiler, N. (1996). Customer satisfaction in the tourist industry: A case

study of visitors to New Zealand. Journal of Travel Research, 35 (1), 89-93.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self determination in human

behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deng, L., & Gibson, P. (2008). A qualitative evaluation on the role of cultural intelligence in

cross-cultural leadership effectiveness. International Journal of leadership, 3(2), 181-197.

Earley, P.C. (2002). A theory of cultural intelligence in organizations. In B.M. Staw & R.

Kramer (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 24, pp. 271-299). Greenwich, CT:

JAI.

Earley, P.C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures.

Stanford, CA: Standford University Press.

Earley, P.C., & Mosakowski, E. (2005). Cultural intelligence. Harvard Business Review, 82,

139-153.

Earley, P.C., & Peterson, R.S. (2004). The elusive cultural chameleon: Cultural intelligence as

a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager. Academy of Management

Learning and Education, 3,100-115.

[136]

Earley, P.C., Ang, S., & Tan, J.S. (2006). CQ: Developing cultural intelligence at work (Ist

Ed.). Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.

Elenkov, D.S., & Manev, I.M. (2009). Senior expatriate leadership‟s effects on innovation

and the role of cultural intelligence. Journal of World Business, 44, 357-369.

Fehr, R. & Kuo, E. (2008, April). The impact of cultural intelligence in multicultural social

networks. Paper presented the 23rd

Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and

Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.

Ferguson, G.A. (1956). On transfer and the abilities of man. Canadian Journal of Psychology,

10, 121-131.

Fernandez, J.P. (1991). Managing a diverse workforce: Regaining the Competitive edge.

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Furrer, O., Liu, B.S., & Sudharshan, D. (2000). The relationship between culture and service

quality perceptions: Basis for cross-cultural market segmentation and resources allocation.

Journal of Service Research, 2 (4), 355-371.

Gelfand, M.J., Imai, L., & Fehr, R. (2008). Thinking intelligently about cultural intelligence.

The road ahead. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 58, pp.

479-514). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.

Gilbert, D., & Tsao, J. (2000). Exploring Chinese cultural influences and hospitality

marketing relationships. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 12

(1), 45-53.

[137]

Gjertsen, M.J., Torp, A.M., Koh, C.K., & Tan, M.L. (2010, August). The impact of cultural

intelligence on homophily in intraorganizational multinational networks. Paper presented at

the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Montreal, Canada.

Govindarajan, V., & Gupta, A.K. (2001). The quest for global dominance. San Francisco:

Jossey- Bass.

Grant, R.M. (1996). Prospering in dynamically competitive environments. Organizational

Science, 7(4), 375-387.

Groves, K., & Feyerherm, A. (2011). Leader cultural intelligence in context: Testing the

moderating effects of team cultural diversity on leader and team performance. Group and

Organization Management, 36, 535-566.

Gudykunst, W.B, Ting-Toomey,S., & Chua, E. (1988). Culture and interpersonal

communication. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage.

Gudykunst, W.B., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

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

Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.

Harris, P.R. (2004). Success in the European Union depends upon culture and business.

European Business Review, 16(6), pp. 556-563.

[138]

Hechanova, R., Beehr, T.A., & Christiansen, N.D. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of

employees‟ adjustment to overseas assignment: A meta-analytic review. Applied Psychology:

An International Review, 52(2), 213-236.

Heo, J.K., Jogaratnam, G., & Buchanan, P. (2004). Customer-focused adaptation in New

York city hotels: Exploring the perceptions of Japanese and Korean travelers. International

Journal of Hospitality Management, 23(1), 31-53.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related

values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Hofstede, G.J., Hofstede, G., & Pedersen, P (2003). Exploring culture: Exercises, stories and

synthetic cultures. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Hopkins, S.A., Nie, W., & Hopkins, W.E. (2009). Cultural effects on customer satisfaction

with service encounters. Journal of Service Science, 2(1), 45-56.

Hudson, S., & Shepard, G.W.H. (1998). Measuring service quality at tourist destinations: An

application of importance-performance analysis to an Alpine ski resort. Journal of Travel and

Tourism Marketing, 7 (3), 61-77.

Huff, A.S. (1990). Mapping strategic thought. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Imai, L. & Gelfand, M.J. (2010). The culturally intelligent negotiator: The impact of cultural

intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes, 112, 83-98.

[139]

Janssens, M. & Cappellen, T. (2008).Contextualizing cultural intelligence: The case of global

managers. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook on cultural intelligence: Theory,

measurement and applications (pp. 356-371). New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Janssens, M., & Brett, J.M. (2006). Cultural Intelligence in global teams: A fusion model of

collaboration. Group and Organization Management, 31 (1), 124-153.

Jogaratnam, G. & Kong, M. (2007). The influence of culture on perceptions of service

employee behavior. Managing Service Quality, 17(3), 275-297.

Juwaheer, T.D., & Ross, D.L. (2003). A study of hotel guest perceptions in Mauritius.

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(2), 105-115.

Kandampully, J.A., Mok, C., & Sparks, B. (2001). Service quality management in hospitality,

tourism and leisure. New York: Haworth Hospitality Press

Kanousi, A. (2005). An empirical investigation of the role of culture on service recovery

strategies. Managing service Quality, 15 (1), 57-69.

Karma, K., & Vedina, R. (2009). Cultural intelligence as a prism between workforce diversity

and performance in modern organization. Review of International Comparative Management,

10(3), 527-542.

Katriel, T. (1995). From „context to context‟ in intercultural communication research. In R.L.

Wiseman (Ed.), Intercultural communication theory (pp. 271-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publication.

[140]

Keillor, B.D., Hult, G.T.M., & Kandermir, D. (2004). A study of the service encounter in

eight countries. Journal of International Marketing, 12 (1), 9-35.

Kim, D.Y., Wen, L., & Doh, K. (2009). Does cultural difference affect customer‟s response in

a crowded restaurant environment? A Comparison of American versus Chinese customers.

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 34 (1), 103-123.

Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the

replication of technology. Organizational Science, 3(3), 383-397.

Koh, C., Joseph, D., & Ang, S. (2009). Cultural intelligence and collaborative work:

Intercultural competencies in global technology work teams. Proceedings of the International

Workshop on Intercultural Collaboration, Palo Alto, California.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the sources of learning and

development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kumar, N., Rose, R.C., & Subramaniam (2008). The effects of personality and cultural

intelligence on international assignment effectiveness: A review. Journal of Social Sciences,

4(4), 320-328.

LeBlanc, G. (1992). Factors affecting customer evaluation of service quality in travel

agencies: An investigation of customer perceptions. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 10-16.

Lee, L.Y., & Sukoco, B.M. (2007). The effects of expatriate personality and cultural

intelligence on the expatriate adjustment: The moderating role of expatriate. Proceedings of

the 13th Asia Pacific Management Conference: Melbourne, Australia.

[141]

Lee, Y., Masuda, A.D., & Cardona, P. (2010, April). Multiple cultural identities in cultural

intelligence and leadership in multicultural teams. Paper presented at the 25th

Annual

Conference of the society for Industrial and organizational Psychologists, Atlanta, GA.

Li, M. & Mobley, W.H. (2010, August). The role of experiential learning in the development

of cultural intelligence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of

Management, Montreal, Canada.

Lin, C.C.J., Tu, R., Chen, K.A., & Tu, P. (2007). The changing expectations of consumers in

cross-cultural service encounters. International Management Review, 3 (3), 27-35.

Liu, B.S.C., Furrer, O., & Sudharshan, D. (2001). The relationship between culture and

behavioral intentions toward services. Journal of Service Research, 4 (2), 118-129.

Lovelock, C.H., Patterson, P.G., & Walker, R.H. (2001). Services Marketing: An Asia Pacific

Perspective (2nd Ed.). Australia: Pearson Education.

MacNab, B.R. (2011). An experiential approach to cultural intelligence education. Journal of

Management Education. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/10525629114121587.

Malhotra, N. Ugaldo, F., Agarwal, J., & Baalbaki, I. (1994). International services marketing:

A comparative evaluation of the dimensions of service quality in developed and developing

countries. International Marketing Review, 11(2), 5-15.

Mattila, A.S. (1999). The role of culture in service evaluation process. Journal of Service

Research, 1(3), 250-261.

[142]

Mattila, A.S. (2000). The impact of culture and gender on customer evaluations of service

encounters. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 24, 263-273.

Maznevski, M., & Distefano, J.J. (2000). Global leaders are team players: Developing global

leaders through membership on global teams. Human Resource Management, 39, 195-208.

Menon, S. & Narayanan, L. (2008). Cultural intelligence: Strategic models for a globalized

economy. Journal of Global Management Research, 4(2), 27-32.

Mey, L.P. Akbar, A.K., & Fie, D.Y.G. (2006). Measuring service quality and customer

satisfaction of the hotels in Malaysia: Malaysian, Asian and Non-Asian Hotel guests. Journal

of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 13(2), 144-160.

Milliken, F.J., & Martins, L.L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the

multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21,

402-433.

Moody, M.C. (2007). Adaptive behavior in intercultural environments: The relationship

between cultural intelligence factors an Big Five personality traits. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, The George Washington University, Washington, DC.

Murdock, G.P. (1987). Outline of cultural materials (5th rev. Ed.). New Haven, CT: HRAF.

Nasierowski, W., & Coleman, D. (1997). Lessons learned from unsuccessful transfers of

managerial techniques: Cultural impediments to the transfer of TQM practices. International

Journal of Management, 14 (1), 29-39.

[143]

Ng, K.Y., Ramaya, R., Teo, T.M.S., & Wong, S.F. (2005, November). Cultural intelligence:

Its potential for military leadership development. Paper presented at the 47th

International

Military Testing Association, Singapore.

Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (2009). Developing global leaders: The role of

international experience and cultural intelligence. Advances in Global Leadership, 5, 225-250.

Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (2009a). From experience to experimental learning:

Cultural intelligence as a learning capability of global leader development Academy of

Management Learning and Education, 8(4), 511-526.

Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (2009b). Beyond international experience: The strategic

role of cultural intelligence for executive selection in IHRM. In P.R. Sparrow (Eds.),

Handbook of international HR research: Integrating people, process, and context (pp. 97-

113). Oxford: Blackwell.

Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Ang, S. (2012). Cultural intelligence: A review, reflections, and

recommendations for future research. In A.M. Ryan, F.T. Leong, & F.L. Oswald (Eds.),

Conducting multinational research. Applying organizational psychology in the workplace

(pp.29-58). Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association.

Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Tan, M.L. (2011). Cultural Intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg & S. B.

Kaufman (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook on Intelligence (pp. 582-602). New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Ng, KY., & Earley, P.C. (2006). Culture + Intelligence: Old Constructs, New Frontiers.

Group and Organization Management, 31, 4-19.

[144]

Ng, KY., Tan, M.L., & Ang, S. (2009). Culture capital and cosmopolitan human capital: The

impact of global mindset and organizational routines on developing cultural intelligence and

international experiences in organizations. In A. Burton & J.C. Spender (Eds.), The Oxford

handbook of human capital. New York: Oxford University Press.

O‟Neil, H.E., & Abedi, J. (1996). Reliability and validity of a metacognitive inventory:

Potential for alternative assessment. The Journal of Educational Research, 89, 234-245.

Ones, D.S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1997). Personality determinants in prediction of aspect so

expatriate job success. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4,

pp. 63-92). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

Oolders, T., Chernyshenko, O.S., & Stark, S. (2008). Cultural intelligence as a mediator of

relationships between openness to experience and adaptive performance. In S. Ang and L.

Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence. Theory, measurement, and applications

(pp. 145-158). New York: M.E. Sharpe

Osman-Gani, A.M. (2000). Developing expatriates for the Asia-Pacific region. A comparative

analysis of multinational enterprise managers from five countries across three continents.

Human Resource Development Quarterly, 11, 213-235.

Osman-Gani, A.M. (2012). Human resource development and cultural intelligence for

effective performance in international assignments: A conceptual analysis. In N. Rohmetra &

A. Gupta (Eds.), Cross Cultural Management - Practice and Research. New Delhi: Primus

Ltd.

[145]

Paige, R.M., & Martin, J.N. (1996). Ethics in intercultural training. In D. Landis & R.S.

Bhagat (Eds.). Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed., pp. 35-60). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Peabody, D. (1985). National characteristics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Pearce, P.L. (1991). The social and psychological effects of tourist-host contact. In S. Bocher

(Ed.), cultures in contact: Studies in cross-cultural interaction. Oxford Pergamon Press

Pearce, P.L., & Moscardo, G.M. (1984). Making sense of tourists‟ complaints. Tourism

Management, 5 (1), 20-23.

Pike, K.L. (1967). Language in relation to a unified theory of the structure of human

behavior. The Hague: Mouton.

Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self regulated learning components

of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.

Pizam, A., & Milman, A. (1993). Predicting satisfaction among first time visitors to a

destination by using the expectancy disconfirmation theory. International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 12 (2), 197-209.

Pizam, A., & Sussmann, S. (1995). Does nationality affect tourist behavior?. Annuals of

Tourism Research, 22 (4), 901-917.

Plum, E. (2007). Cultural Intelligence: A concept for bridging and benefitting from cultural

differences. Retrieved from http://iloapp. culturalintelligence.org /blog/www? Show

File&doc=1237224822.pdf

[146]

Poon, W.C., & Yong, G.F.D. (2005). Comparing satisfaction levels of Asian and Western

travelers using Malaysian hotels. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management. Retrieved

from http://www.highbeamresearch.com/doc/1G1-133410847.html

Pucik, V., & Katz., J. (1986). Information control and human resource management in

multinational firms. Human Resource Management, 25, 121-132.

Radder, L., & Wang, Y. (2006). Dimensions of guest house service: Managers‟ perceptions

and travelers‟ expectations. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality & Tourism,

18 (7), 554-562.

Rajpoot, N. (2004). Reconceptualizing service encounter quality in a non-western context.

Journal of Service Research, 7 (2), 181-201.

Ramalu, S.S., Rose, R.C., Kumar, N., & Uli, J. (2010). Doing business in global arena: An

examination of the relationship between cultural intelligence and cross-cultural adjustment.

Asian Academy of Management Journal, 15 (1), 79-97.

Ramalu, S.S., Rose, R.C., Kumar, N., & Uli, J. (2011). The effects of cultural intelligence on

cross-cultural adjustment and job performance among expatriate in Malaysia. International

Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(9), 59-71.

Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (1998). Cultural differences between Mandarin speaking tourists

and Australian-hosts and their impact on cross-cultural tourist-host interaction. Journal of

Business Research, 42, 175-187

Reisinger, Y., & Turner, L. (2002). Cultural differences between Asian tourist markets and

Australian hosts (Part 2). Journal of Travel Research, 40 (May), 374-384.

[147]

Rockstuhl, T., & Ng, K.Y. (2008). The effects of cultural intelligence on interpersonal trust in

multicultural teams. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural Intelligence:

Theory, measurement, and applications (pp. 206-220). New York, NY: Sharpe

Rockstuhl, T., Ang, S., Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L., & Lievens, F. (2009, August). Cultural

intelligence and leadership emergence in multicultural teams. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the Academy of Management, Chicago.

Rockstuhl, T., Hong, Y.Y., Ng, K.Y., Ang, S., & Chiu, C.Y. (2010). The culturally intelligent

brain: From detecting to bridging cultural differences. NeuroLeadership Journal, 3, 1-15.

Rockstuhl, T., Seiler, S., Ang, S., Van Dyne, L. & Annen, H. (2011). Beyond general

intelligence (IQ) and emotional intelligence (EQ): The role of cultural intelligence (CQ) on

cross-border leadership effectiveness in a globalized world. Journal of Social Issues, 67(4),

825-840.

Ryan, C., & Cliff, A. (1997). Do travel agencies measure up to customer expectations? An

empirical investigation of travel agencies‟ service quality as measured by SERVQUAL.

Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 6 (2), 1-31.

Sauer, K. (2008). The comparison of cultural intelligence between black and white south

African leaders (Master‟s thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa).Retrieved

from http://upetd. up.ac.za / thesis/ available /etd-03162010-151502/unrestricted/ dissertation.

Pdf.

Scott, D., & Shieff, D. (1993). Service quality components and group criteria in local

government. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 4(2), 18-25.

[148]

Shannon, L.M., & Begley, T.M. (2008). Antecedents of the four factor model of cultural

intelligence. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory,

measurement, and applications (pp. 41-55). New York, NY: Sharpe.

Shokef, E., & Erez, M. (2008). Cultural intelligence and global identity in multicultural

teams. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory,

measurement and applications (pp. 177-191). New York, NY: Sharpe.

Sizoo, S., Plank, R., Iskat, W., & Serrie, H. (2005). The effect of intercultural sensitivity on

employee performance in cross-cultural service encounters. The Journal of Services

Marketing, 19(4), 245-255.

Sizoo, S.L. (2008). Analysis of employee performance during cross-cultural service

encounters at luxury hotels in Hawaii, London, and Florida. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism

Research, 13(2), 113-128.

Sizoo, S.L., & Serrie, H. (2009). An effective approach for developing the cross-cultural skills

of the global employee. Training and Development Methods, 23(1), 3.11-3.16.

Smith, W.I., Shrestha, N.R., and Evans, C.L. (2010). 360o approach to assessing cross-

cultural intelligence: Use of film. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies.

Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008). Face, (im)politeness, and rapport. In H. Spencer-Oatey (Ed.),

Culturally speaking: Culture, communication and politeness theory (2nd ed., pp. 11-47).

London: Continuum.

Stauss, B., & Mang, P. (1999). Culture shocks in inter-cultural service encounters. Journal of

Services Marketing, 13 (4/5), 329-346.

[149]

Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York:

Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R.J., & Grigorenko, E.L. (2006). Cultural intelligence and successful intelligence.

Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 27-42.

Stevens, M.J., & Campion, M.A. (1999). Staffing work teams: Development and validation of

a selection test for teamwork setting. Journal of Management, 25, 207-228.

Tan, J.S. (2004). Cultural intelligence and the global economy. Leadership in Action, 24 (5),

19-21.

Tarique, I., & Takeuchi, R. (2008). Developing cultural intelligence: The roles of

international network experiences. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook of cultural

intelligence: Theory, measurement and applications (pp. 56-70). New York, NY: Sharpe

Tay, C., Rossi, A.M., & Westman, H. (2010). International business travelers: Inter-role

conflicts and moderating effects on emotional exhaustion. Paper presented the annual meeting

of the Academy of Management, Montreal, Canada.

Tay, C., Westman, M., & Chia, A. (2008). Antecedents and consequences of cultural

intelligence among short-term business travelers. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook

of cultural intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and applications (pp. 126-144). New York,

NY: Sharpe.

Teece, D.J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities. The nature and micro-foundations of

(sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.

[150]

Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N.N. (2006). Motivational cultural intelligence,

realistic job preview, realistic living conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment. Group

and Organization Management, 31(1), 154-173.

Thomas, D.C. (2006). Domain and development of cultural intelligence: The importance of

mindfulness. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 78-99.

Thomas, D.C., & Inkson, K. (2004). Cultural intelligence: People skills for global business.

SanFrancisco: Berrett Koehler.

Thomas, D.C., Elron, E., Stahl, G., Ekelund, B.Z., Ravlin, E.C., Cerdin, J.L., Poelmans, S.,

Brislin, R., Pekerti, A., Aycan, Z., Maznevski, M., Au, K., & Lazarova, M.B. (2008). Cultural

intelligence: Domain and assessment. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 8

(2), 123-143.

Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford.

Triandis, H.C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw Hill.

Triandis, H.C. (2006). Cultural intelligence in organizations. Group and Organization

Management, 31 (1), 20-26.

Truong, T.H., & King, B. (2003). Comparing cross-cultural dimensions of the experiences of

international tourists in Vietnam. Journal of Business Systems, Governance and Ethics, 1(1),

65-75.

Tsang, N., & Qu, H. (2000). Quality in China‟s hotel industry: A perspective from tourists

and hotel managers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 12(5),

316-326.

[151]

Tse, E.C.Y., & Ho, S.C. (2009). Service quality in the hotel industry: When cultural contexts

matter. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 50 (4), 460-474.

Turner, C.H. & Trompenaars, F. (2006). Cultural intelligence: Is such a capacity credible?

Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 56-63.

Tuzun, I.K., & Devrani, T.K. (2010). The link between hotel attributes and customer

satisfaction: The role of individualism/collectivism orientation. In 2010 EABR & ETLC

Conference Proceedings, Dublin, Ireland.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Koh, C. (2008). Development and validation of CQS: The cultural

intelligence scale. In S. Ang, & L. Van Dyne (Eds.), Handbook on cultural intelligence:

Theory, measurement and applications (pp. 16-38). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Koh, C. (2009). Cultural intelligence: Measurement and scale

development. In M.A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural

competence: Exploring the cross-cultural dynamics within organizations (pp. 233-254).

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Livermore, D. (2010). Cultural Intelligence: A pathway for leading

in a rapidly globalizing world. In K. Hannum, B.B. McFeeters, & L. Booysen (Eds.), Leading

across differences (pp. 131-138). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., Ng, K.Y., Rockstuhl, T., Tan, M.L., & Koh, C. (2012). Sub-

dimensions of the four-factor model of cultural intelligence: Expanding the conceptualization

and measurement of cultural intelligence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(4),

295-313.

[152]

Vavra, T.G. (1997). Improving your measurement of customer satisfaction: A guide to

creating, conducting, analysing and reporting customer satisfaction measurement programs.

Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press.

Vedadi, A., Kheiri, B., & Abbasalizadeh, M. (2010). The relationship between cultural

intelligence and achievement: A case study in an Iranian company. Iranian Journal of

Management studies, 3(3), 25-40.

Ward, C., & Fischer, R. (2008). Personality, cultural intelligence CQ and cross-cultural

adaption: A test of mediation hypothesis. In S. Ang and L. Van Dyne (Eds.) Handbook of

cultural intelligence. Theory, measures and application (pp. 159-173). New York, NY: M.E.

Sharpe

Ward, C., Fischer, R., Lam, F.S.Z., & Hall, L. (2009). The convergent, discriminant, and

incremental validity of scores on a self-report measure of cultural intelligence. Educational

and Psychological Measurement, 69(1), 85-105.

Weiermair, K. (2000). Tourists‟ perception towards and satisfaction with service quality in

the cross cultural service encounters: Implications for hospitality and tourism management.

Managing Service Quality , 10(6), 397-409.

Wilson, C.E., & Stewart, A.C. (2009, August). Developing ethically and culturally intelligent

leaders through international service expectations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of

the Academy of Management, Chicago.

Winsted, K.F. (1997). The service experience in two cultures: A behavioral perspective.

Journal of Retailing, 73, 337-360.

[153]

Winsted, K.F. (1999). Evaluating service encounters: A cross-cultural and cross-industry

exploration. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, Spring, 106-123.

Winsted, K.F. (2000). Service behaviors that lead to satisfied customers. European Journal of

Marketing, 34 (3/4), 399-417.

Witkowski, T.H., & Wolfinbarger, M.F. (2002). Comparative service quality: German and

American rating across service settings. Journal of Business Research, 55, 875-881.

Wong, N. (2004). The role of culture in the perception of service recovery. Journal of

Business Research, 57 (9), 957-963.

Yordanova, G.K. (2011). Managing with cultural intelligence: The new secret to

multicultural team success (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Aarhus University, Aarhus,

Denmark.

Yuksel, A., Kilinc, U.K., & Yuksel, F. (2006). Cross-national analysis of hotel customers‟

attitudes toward complaining and their complaining behaviors. Tourism Management, 27, 11-

24.