This article was downloaded by: [Washington University in St Louis]On: 21 December 2014, At: 23:06Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Creativity Research JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hcrj20

Crossing Cultures: Training Effects on the DivergentThinking Attitudes of Spanish-Speaking South AmericanManagersMin Basadur , Pam Pringle & Darryl KirklandPublished online: 08 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Min Basadur , Pam Pringle & Darryl Kirkland (2002) Crossing Cultures: Training Effects on the DivergentThinking Attitudes of Spanish-Speaking South American Managers, Creativity Research Journal, 14:3-4, 395-408, DOI: 10.1207/S15326934CRJ1434_10

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1434_10

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Creativity Research Journal 395

ABSTRACT: Field experiments investigated the ef-fects of training Spanish-speaking South Americanmanagers in creative thinking and problem solving.The Spanish translations of two attitude measures as-sociated with divergent thinking practice (an impor-tant aspect of creative thinking and problem solving)were tested and validated. The two attitudes weremeasured both before and after training. The resultsindicate that the concepts and methods of similartraining provided in previous Japanese and NorthAmerican research are applicable to Spanish-speakingSouth American managers. The first experimentalgroup (n � 149) showed significant gains on bothmeasures versus a placebo control group. The secondand third experimental groups (n � 54 and n � 14)were given revised versions of the 14-item question-naire, and the results showed significant improvementin the reliability of the Spanish translations. Future di-rections for research include increasing the reliabilityof the Spanish versions of the two attitudinal measuresand extending the training effect investigation beyondattitude changes to include behavior changes andlong-term persistence and portability to the job.

Cross-cultural comparisons of creative thinking andproblem solving have many applications in a globalperspective on business. Thus far, there have been fewstudies outside North America offering data on the atti-tudes of managers toward creative thinking. This may,in part, have been due to a lack of opportunity for studyin the past. As the world economy develops and cultural

walls erode, there will be more opportunity and moreneed for cross-cultural studies. The ability to learn, un-derstand, problem solve, settle disputes, and cooperatebetween cultures takes on greater importance. This re-search involved field experiments designed to investi-gate the effect of training Spanish-speaking SouthAmerican managers in creative thinking and problemsolving. Further investigation will be needed before theresults can have an effect on the principles of business,but even at this stage, the results are worth sharing tobroaden the basis for future comparison.

Creativity is a necessary requirement for organiza-tional effectiveness. Mott’s comparative research(1972) showed that effective organizations are simul-taneously efficient and creative. Efficiency means op-timizing, stabilizing, and polishing current methods(routines) for highest quantity, quality, and customersatisfaction at the lowest cost possible. Organizationalcreativity means deliberately changing current meth-ods to make new levels of quantity, quality, cost, andcustomer satisfaction possible. Both new methods andnew products result from creativity.

Creativity can be developed, increased, and managedby organizations (Basadur, 1993, 1994). Specific resultsfrom increasing organizational creativity can be identi-fied, including new products and methods, increased ef-ficiency, greater motivation, job satisfaction, teamwork,

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be sent to Min Basadur, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamil-ton, Ontario L8S 4L8, E-mail: basadur@mcmaster.ca

Creativity Research Journal Copyright 2002 by2002, Vol. 14, Nos. 3 & 4, 395–408 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Crossing Cultures: Training Effects on the Divergent Thinking Attitudes ofSpanish-Speaking South American Managers

Min Basadur School of Business, McMaster University

Pam PringleSchool of Business, Christopher Newport University

Darryl Kirkland School of Business, McMaster University

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

396 Creativity Research Journal

a focus on customer satisfaction, and more strategicthinking at all levels.

One of the most significant changes to affect theNorth American economy during the past decade hasbeen the North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico, and the UnitedStates. It is expected that this agreement will soon beextended to include parts of South America. Chile andPeru are two countries that are emerging quickly asthe most likely potential new members of such an ex-tended NAFTA. For example, in Chile’s fast growingeconomy, per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in-creased from US $1,734 to US $2,240 from 1988 to1991, and exports in 1991 were US $8.9 billion. Totalconsumption in Chile doubled from 1992 to 1997, asdid gross national savings and gross exports. Chile’seconomic surge dates back to the 1980s in the post-Pinochet era. In 1990 Chile signed a free trade agree-ment with Mexico. Peru has followed in Chile’s eco-nomic growth footsteps, especially as the threat ofterrorism subsided during the 1990s. With this newstability, Peruvian banks are now willing to loanmoney for homes and cars, and foreign banks are in-vesting in the country. For example, a large Canadianbank recently merged with a major Peruvian bank.Real growth in Peruvian GDP has been positive everyyear since 1992, averaging �6.1%. Inflation hassteadily decreased from an annual rate of 139%(1991) to 6% (1998).

The overall purpose of this research is to furtherour understanding of how managers in different coun-tries approach innovation and creativity, especiallyhow they approach problems requiring creativity. Inparticular, this research investigated how Spanish-speaking managers in South America react to trainingin creative thinking and problem solving. The morewe know of how managers are similar or different inthese respects, the more quickly and efficiently inno-vation can be stimulated, thereby allowing NorthAmerican and other global players to capitalize on theopportunities for innovation and partnering that willemerge as markets open in South America.

Background

Primary Points of Reference

Divergent thinking—the act of generating manyoptions without judging or analyzing them—has long

been credited with being an important aspect of cre-ative thinking and problem solving (Guilford, 1967;Meadow, Parnes, & Reese, 1959; Parnes & Meadow,1959, 1960). Many researchers and practitioners in thefield of creative problem solving use conceptual mod-els that involve divergent thinking. (For a literature re-view, see Basadur, 1994; Basadur, Graen, & Scandura,1986.) A field experiment in an industrial research or-ganization found that appropriate practice-orientedtraining resulted in improvements in divergent think-ing attitudes that accompanied improvements in diver-gent thinking practice and in creative performance(Basadur, Graen, & Green, 1982). This finding coin-cides with Kraut’s (1976) training model, suggesting acausal chain of attitude change leading to performancechange. Basadur and Finkbeiner (1985) modeled howdivergent thinking attitudes enhance divergent think-ing skills. They also established measures of two suchattitudes. The two attitudes are called “preference foractive divergence in problem solving” and “preferencefor premature convergence in problem solving.”

Two later field experiments indicated that suchtraining positively affects these two divergent thinkingattitudes, even in manufacturing engineers (who tendto be quite skeptical of the value of creativity in theirpractical work; Basadur et al., 1986), and in a broadcross section of organizational members from variousfunctions, hierarchical levels, and types of industries(Basadur, Wakabayashi, & Graen, 1990). There wereindications that such training effects may persist for atleast 5 weeks back on the job and that effects weremore consistent with intact work groups than withparticipants from diffuse locations.

The preceding research, conducted in North Amer-ica, was extended into a different culture, Japan, byBasadur, Wakabayashi, and Takai (1992). Their studyinvestigated the effects of similar training in creativethinking and problem solving on Japanese managers.The two divergent thinking attitudes discussed earlierwere measured both before and after training. This re-search tested and validated the Japanese translationsof the two attitudinal measures. It also indicated thatthe applicability and receptivity of the concepts andmethod of training provided may be at least as strongin Japanese business and industry as was found in pre-vious North American research. The experimentalgroup showed significant gains on both measureswhen compared to two control groups. Compared toNorth American managers from similar studies, the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 397

Japanese managers appeared to make at least equalgains after training. This study extended that researchinto a different culture, Spanish-speaking SouthAmerica, and explores the effects of providing thesame training to a sample of Peruvian and Chileanmanagers on the same divergent thinking attitudes.The study also reports reliability data for the Spanishtranslations of the scales used to measure these atti-tudes. This is the first time in which this particulartraining in creative problem solving has been providedto a Spanish-speaking South American sample, andchanges in these divergent thinking attitudes havebeen measured. This preliminary study focused onmeasuring only immediate attitudinal changes and ontesting and validating the Spanish translations of theattitudinal measures. Further research on behavioraland performance changes and longer term persistencewould follow if encouraging results were found.

Secondary Points of Reference for This Study

The design and content of the training provided tothe South American managers replicated that describedin Basadur et al. (1992). In brief, the creative problem-solving process, as trained, has three different phases:(a) problem finding, (b) problem solving, and (c) solu-tion implementation. In each of these phases, a two-stepthinking process called “ideation–evaluation” occurs.Ideation is the generation of options, different points ofview, and perceptions of facts and ideas without anycritical judgment or analysis. This constitutes the diver-gent aspect of the process. Evaluation, on the otherhand, is the judging and selecting from these freely gen-erated thoughts. This is the convergent aspect. Thesetwo opposite kinds of thinking skills are synchronizedthroughout the three phases. The training is geared to-ward practice rather than abstract discussion. Partici-pants are trained to acquire skills in various techniquesand processes of both divergent and convergent think-ing. They practice synchronizing these two skills forhypothetical as well as real problems throughout thethree phases noted earlier. A multiphase creative prob-lem-solving process that takes into account both diver-gence and convergence, as described, is called a “com-plete” process (Isaksen & Treffinger, 1985; Parnes,Noller, & Biondi, 1977; Rickards, 1994).

Two components of divergent thinking and creativeproblem-solving performance are low premature con-vergence and high active divergence. Individuals who

practice high active divergence aggressively generatelarge quantities of thoughts without regard to merit.They use previous thoughts (their own and others’) asstepping-stones to new ones. Individuals who practicelow premature convergence keep an open mind and re-frain from judging or analyzing fledgling thoughts toohastily (their own and others’). The attitudes of highpreference for active divergence and low preferencefor premature convergence facilitate high active diver-gence and low premature convergence practice. Howthese two divergent thinking attitudes are measured isfurther described in the method section.

Crossing Cultures

The literature suggests that the positive effects of thetraining process described later should also be of bene-fit in other cultures outside North America. One of themost important ways in which the training works is toovercome blocks to participants’ divergent thinking at-titudes and practices that have long been culturally con-ditioned into them. Such blocks work against the ac-ceptance of divergent thinking and creative problemsolving, not only in North America, but elsewhere, suchas Japan (Basadur et al., 1992). For example, mostNorth Americans undergo educational and socializationprocesses in which they learn to value knowledge accu-mulation and converging processes more than knowl-edge creating and diverging processes (Mackinnon,1962, 1977; Osborn, 1963; Thurstone, 1950; Wallach,1971). Engineering university students, after comple-tion of a 4-year academic program, were shown to loseground in the ability to apply their imagination (Alte-meyer, 1966; Doktor, 1970). Organizational norms alsohave a strong tendency to negate divergent thinking, thequestioning of assumptions, creativity, and new ideas(Rickards, 1980; Shore, 1980). Basadur, Taggar, andPringle (1999) identified three specific attitudes preva-lent in organizations that interfere with the acceptanceof divergent thinking: not valuing ideas, the belief thatcreativity is only for a select few, and being too busy fornew ideas. Kirton (1976) discovered that organizationalmembers who produce and champion innovative ideasare more susceptible to negative perceptions by othersbecause they cause apprehension and mistrust.

There is evidence that even the cultural aspects ofwhether one is viewed as a manager or as a nonman-ager within an organization may affect one’s divergentthinking in North America. Basadur, Graen, Takai,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

398 Creativity Research Journal

and Wakabayashi (1989) found that when compared tononmanagers, managers display less positive attitudestoward active divergence. This may indicate that thosein higher organizational positions may be more con-servative than those in lower positions because theycannot afford to appear too adventurous or to bethought of as people who come up with new, unusual,“off-the-wall” ideas. Such behavior might be associ-ated with a lack of seriousness or dedication to the jobat hand and could label the individual a bad risk takeror a dreamer.

An example of the evidence that similar culturalprocesses need to be overcome in societies other thanNorth America is provided by Von Glinow and Tea-garden (1988), who cite Chinese cultural biasesagainst dealing with uncertainty and favoring a com-pelling urge to obey rules. Divergent thinking favorsexploring uncharted territory and doing things thatbreak from past practice. Another example is that bothof the Japanese and Chinese cultures tend to discour-age divergence, because Confucian cultural tradition,especially in Japan, works to impose early conver-gence or group harmony (consensus) as a preferredmode of communication and decision making (Alston,1986; Rohlen, 1974; Whitehill & Takezawa, 1968).This cultural tradition among Japanese managers im-pedes them from being more divergent in group dis-cussions and communication. The training providedand explained in the present study is intended to over-come such traditions and stimulate divergent thinking.

One of the most important practices trained toachieve this increased divergence is that of separatingdivergent and convergent thinking by deliberately de-ferring convergence and delaying critical evaluation ofthe thoughts and opinions of others (and also of one’sown). Thus, three skills are required to make theideation–evaluation two-step thinking concept work:(a) active divergence, (b) active convergence, and (c)deferring convergence. This basic concept ofideation–evaluation and the three-phase process ofcreative thinking and problem solving that is funda-mental to the training in this study could reasonablybe expected to be applicable to many different cul-tures. One should be cautious when ascribing a bias toa culture or when transposing studies across culturesand drawing conclusions that are out of context. Al-though attitudinal and cognitive skills of keeping anopen mind, actively generating lots of fresh thoughts,and finding and solving problems and then imple-

menting solutions to make things better are all activi-ties with positive value, studies in other countriesshould not assume that any training is easily transfer-able across cultures, even when it appears eminentlyreasonable to expect so. Each situation will present itsown potentially disruptive variables. For example,Schneider (1988) suggested that multinational corpo-rations must beware of assuming that human resourcepractices can easily be transferred to other cultures.Hofstede (1980, 1983) and Kedia and Bhaga (1987)identified and discussed several cultural traits that dif-ferentiate cultures and can mediate the successfultransference of human resource technology fromcountry to country.

South America and Creativity

Extensive studies of values have been completed todocument some of the differences between NorthAmerican managers and their Spanish-speaking SouthAmerican counterparts. Hofstede (1983) identifiedfour dimensions of national culture: (a) individualismversus collectivism, (b) large or small power distance,(c) strong or weak uncertainty avoidance, and (d) mas-culinity versus femininity. Chile and Peru are close toeach other on all four dimensions. Both countries ex-hibit a highly collectivist dimension, as do many ofthe other South American countries. Hofstede (1983)demonstrated that the degree of individualism or col-lectivism is statistically related to the country’swealth. From this it can be hypothesized that as acountry’s wealth increases, it will move from collec-tivism to individualism. Because the economies ofPeru and Chile have dramatically improved over thelast decade, one can expect that although there may besome movement by these countries on some of the di-mensions, these changes will be similar in each coun-try, making it appropriate to include them both in asingle study. Hofstede (1978) and Hofstede et al.(1990) found that Chileans and Peruvians generallyfeel that uncertainty is a continuous threat that must bereduced. They believe that conflict and competitioncan unleash aggressive actions and therefore shouldbe avoided. Hofstede felt this encouraged Chileansand Peruvians to seek consensus and view deviant per-sons or ideas as potentially dangerous. Hofstede’swork further suggests that Chilean and Peruvian man-agers are motivated by needs for security and belong-ing. These values run somewhat counter to some of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 399

the lessons of creative thinking and problem solvingas trained in this study. For example, the practice ofactive divergence requires individuals to generatelarge numbers of diverse options and thoughts. Thesevalues also run counter to the skill of avoiding prema-ture convergence, in which participants are required tonot judge options or thoughts too hastily. Hence, thecaution (expressed earlier) against automaticallytransposing studies and concepts across cultureswould seem warranted in this case and worth testing.

With these arguments in mind, the study hypothe-sized that managers from Chile and Peru would re-spond to the training similarly to their North Ameri-can and Japanese counterparts. It was hypothesizedthat the basic training concepts would be acceptedand that Chilean and Peruvian participants would un-dergo basically the same attitudinal changes as wereseen in the previous North American and Japaneseresearch.

Hypotheses and Research Design

One objective of this research was to investigatethe effects of the training in a complete three-phaseprocess of creative thinking and problem solving onattitudes associated with divergent thinking practicesof Spanish-speaking South American managers. Itwas hypothesized that training these managers in thisprocess would lead to the following attitude changes:

• An increase in preference for active divergence• A decrease in preference for premature conver-

gence (increase in preference for avoiding pre-mature convergence)

These are attitude changes that have been observedconsistently using North American and Japanesesamples.

Another objective of this research was to test andvalidate the Spanish translations of two measures ofattitudes associated with divergent thinking practice.Therefore, there were two separate sequential studiesin this research. In Study 1, the hypotheses were testedusing a Spanish-language translation of an establishedEnglish-language questionnaire that measures thepreference for active divergence and premature con-vergence. In Study 2, an improved version of thetranslated questionnaire was established.

Study 1

Method

Site and participants. The experimental group(n � 149) was comprised of Spanish-speaking SouthAmerican managers and professionals from business,industry, and government organizations covering awide cross section of hierarchal levels and functionalspecialties. They each attended a half-day trainingseminar and were measured before and after the train-ing using the questionnaire mentioned. There were sixtraining seminars in all, and the training group sizesranged from 19 to 44. The placebo control group (n � 19) was made up of a similar cross section ofparticipants as the experimental training group. Anadditional 68 participants filled out the same question-naire (once) but were not exposed to the training. Thisprovided a total base of n � 217 for reliability testingas described later.

Design. The design is a standard quasi-fieldexperiment with a nonequivalent placebo controlgroup and pretests and posttests (Cook & Campbell,1976). This design is well known and recommendedwhen random assignment of participants is not logisti-cally possible. Only the gains are compared frompretest to posttest. The effects of the training (X) weretested comparing the gains from O1 (observationbefore) to O2 (observation after) for the experimentaltreatment group (trained) with the gains of the placebocontrol group. Measures of the two divergent thinkingattitudes of all participants were taken prior to andafter the training or placebo. The two groups wereunaware of each other. All of the participants in thetwo groups were told that the data they were providingwere nonevaluative and intended primarily to betterunderstand and improve future training efforts. Confi-dentiality was assured. The placebo group received alecture presentation on creative problem-solving prin-ciples and concepts. However, the presentation wasmostly an abstract theoretical discussion, rather thanthe concrete, practice-oriented treatment provided tothe experimental (training treatment) group. The over-all design is shown in Table 1.

The placebo design was intended to control for po-tential demand and social desirability effects. A de-mand effect is one that occurs because participants

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

400 Creativity Research Journal

feel special by merely having participated in the ex-periment and desire to perform better in some way tojustify this special treatment. A social desirability ef-fect adds the dimension of knowing what the re-searchers are looking for and trying to provide it toplease them. It is well known that North Americanparticipants sometimes tend to complete attitude ques-tionnaires after training workshops in a manner thatthey believe the researchers want to see. Iwawaki andCowen (1984) found that Japanese were very similarto Americans in social desirability rating behavior. Ifthe South Americans acted similarly to North Ameri-cans and Japanese, these individuals might also ex-hibit such an effect.

The purpose of a placebo control group is to factorout such potential demand and social desirability ef-fects. In a placebo control group, the participants aregiven a treatment so that they too may feel special andhave the same tendency to demonstrate that they havechanged as the experimental treatment group. Becausethe placebo control group received information andconcepts similar to the training treatment group, italso controls for social desirability. If the training pro-vides a real effect, then the treatment group’s gainsshould be better than the control group’s.

Training procedure. Both groups received eitherthe half-day training or the placebo treatment. Thepractice-oriented training in the three-phase process ofcreative thinking and problem solving described wasprovided to the experimental group by the seniorauthor, in English, with a simultaneous Spanish trans-lation. There were no serious trainer–participant com-munication problems. This was checked frequentlyduring the session with the participants. The same pro-cedure was used for the placebo group.

The experiential and practice-oriented trainingtreatment included a series of diverse tasks that per-mitted and encouraged participants to attempt to dis-cover concepts not considered before, such as the

value of both divergence and convergence in thinking.For example, participants individually defined a prob-lem from a case and then compared definitions withother participants, discovering that the problem couldbe viewed many different yet fruitful ways. Anotherimportant aspect of the “learning by doing” emphasiswas that the teachings and emerging skills in using theprocess also were applied to real-world problems inaddition to case studies. These processes encouragedtransference of creativity concepts to personal framesof reference.

Participants had the opportunity to experiencegains and evidence of the value of specific thinkingskills and attitudes, such as being “less likely to jumpto conclusions as to what is the real problem”; “morepositive reactions to new, unusual product ideas”;“less prone to negative evaluation during idea genera-tion”; “higher quantity and quality of problem find-ing”; “more likely to consider different problem defin-itions prior to choosing one as best”; and “more likelyto pause to try new, unusual approaches” (Basadur etal., 1982). The training provided extended the genericOsborn-Parnes Creative Problem Solving approach(see also Isaksen and Treffinger, 1985; Parnes et al.,1977) and is more fully described in Basadur (1982,1987, 1994, 1995) and Basadur, Runco, and Vega(2000).

Instrumentation. An 8-item attitude scale wasused to measure “preference for premature conver-gence,” and a 6-item attitude scale was used to mea-sure “preference for active divergence.” The items andscales and how the items form the two scales are ran-domly sorted into one 14-item questionnaire, fullydescribed in Basadur and Finkbeiner (1985). Eachitem has a 5-point Likert agreement scale (see Table 2). This 14-item questionnaire was translatedinto Spanish. The translation was independentlyreviewed by two bilingual South American Spanish-speaking people who both agreed it was satisfactory.The Spanish translation is shown in Table 3.

Analysis. The reliability of the Spanish ques-tionnaire (Table 3) was estimated by calculating theinternal consistency of each of the two scales usingthe Cronbach alpha method (Cronbach, 1951). Ananalysis of the covariance (ANCOVA) was con-

Table 1. Experimental Design

Experimental Group (n � 149) O1 X O2

Placebo Control Group (n � 19) O1 P O2

Note: X � training in creative thinking and problem solving; P �

practice oriented, experimental placebo training; O1 � observationbefore training; O2 � observation after training.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 401

Table 2. English 14-Item Preference Scale

Instructions

Listed following are several statements concerning various situations. Read each statement carefully and indicate the extent to which youagree or disagree with the statements by circling the letter that corresponds.

A � Strongly agree D � Disagree

B � Agree E � Strongly disagree

C � Neither agree nor disagree

1. I should do some prejudgment of my ideas before telling them to others.

A B C D E

2. We should cut off ideas when they get ridiculous and get on with it.

A B C D E

3. I feel that people at work ought to be encouraged to share all their ideas, because you never know when a crazy-sounding one might turnout to be the best.

A B C D E

4. One new idea is worth 10 old ones.

A B C D E

5. Quality is a lot more important than quantity in generating ideas.

A B C D E

6. A group must be focused and on track to produce worthwhile ideas.

A B C D E

7. Lots of time can be wasted on wild ideas.

A B C D E

8. I think everyone should say whatever pops into their head whenever possible.

A B C D E

9. I like to listen to other people’s crazy ideas because even the wackiest often leads to the best solution.

A B C D E

10. Judgment is necessary during idea generation to ensure that only quality ideas are developed.

A B C D E

11. You need to be able to recognize and eliminate wild ideas during idea generation.

A B C D E

12. I feel that all ideas should be given equal time and listened to with an open mind, regardless of how zany they seem to be.

A B C D E

13. The best way to generate new ideas is to listen to others, then tailgate or add on.

A B C D E

14. I wish people would think about whether or not an idea is practical before they open their mouths.

A B C D E

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

402 Creativity Research Journal

Table 3. Spanish 14-Item Preference Scale

Instrucciones

Abajo Vd. verá varias frases que se refieren a diferentes situaciones. Lea cuidadosamente a cada una de estas e indique debajo de cada una elgrado en que Vd. se halla de acuerdo o en desacuerdo con cada una de estas colocando un círculo alrededor de la letra que corresponda.

A � Muy de acuerdo D � Desacuerdo

B � De acuerdo E � Muy rechazada

C � Ni de acuerdo ni en desacuerdo

1. Antes de comunicarle mis ideas a otros yo debería hacer un poco de autocrítica al respecto.

A B C D E

2. Debemos eliminar nuestras ideas al ver que se tornan ridículas y seguir adelante con lo válido.

A B C D E

3. Creo que a las personas en el trabajo se les debe alentar a que compartan todas sus ideas, pues nunca se sabe cuando una idea que todoscreen es absurda, pueda resultar ser la mejor.

A B C D E

4. Una idea nueva vale lo miamo que diez viejas.

A B C D E

5. Al generar nuevas ideas es mucho más importante la calidad de las mismas que la cantidad de ideas presentadas.

A B C D E

6. Para ser capaz de producir buenas ideas, un grupo debe enfocar en una sola dirección y mantenerse encarrilada en ésta.

A B C D E

7. Las ideas absurdas hacen perder mucho tiempo.

A B C D E

8. Pienso que todos deben decir lo que se les ocurra cada vez que le sea posible.

A B C D E

9. Me gusta escuchar las ideas absurdas de otros pues aún las más disparatadas muchas veces conducen a la mejor solución.

A B C D E

10. Es importante usar el criterio mientras surgen ideas nuevas para asegurarse que solo se perfeccionan las de buena calidad.

A B C D E

11. Es necesario reconocer y descartar las ideas descabelladas durante el process de generar nuevas ideas.

A B C D E

12. Creo que toda idea nueva, por ridícula que esta pueda parecer merece que se le dedique el mismo tiempo que a las otras y en forma de-sprejuiciada.

A B C D E

13. La mejor forma de generar ideas nuevas es la de escuchar a las de los demás y secundarlas o añadirles algo.

A B C D E

14. Desearía que la gente pensase si una idea a proponer es o no práctica antes de abrir la boca para enunciarla.

A B C D E

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 403

Table 4. Factor Loading for Scales in Table 2

Preference for Preference for (Avoiding)Item Active Divergence Premature Convergence

1 — .612 — .533 .50 —4 .29 —5 — .746 — .497 — .738 .67 —9 .63 —

10 — .6811 — �.7012 .18 —13 .41 —14 — �.70

ducted to test mean attitude differences between thegroups after training by holding the before attitudemeasure as covariate. Following this initial analysis, arepeated measure ANCOVA was conducted using thegroup (training, placebo control) as a between-subjectfactor and time (before and after measures) as a with-in-subjects factor. The patterns of means were exam-ined for a compatibility with the hypotheses. Finally,as an extra analysis, the mean gain scores after train-ing on the two attitudes were compared with similarmanagerial samples obtained in North America andJapan (Basadur et al., 1990, Basadur et al., 1992).These samples comprised a similar cross section ofhierarchal levels, functions, and organization types.

Results

Reliability Testing. Cronbach alpha reliabilityestimates for the two attitude scales (in the question-naire of Table 3) were lower than expected, especiallyfor the 8-item “preference for premature convergence”scale (.31). A Cronbach alpha of .49 was calculatedfor the 6-item “preference for active divergence”scale. These figures compared to .67 and .82 for theEnglish version and .68 and .83 for the Japanese ver-sion, respectively, in previous research. Therefore, thedata were further investigated. A factor analysis of the14-item questionnaire with varimax rotation wasundertaken. Table 4 shows the loading of each of theitems on the two factors.

Surprisingly, two of the items (11 and 14) of the“preference for premature convergence” scale eachloaded strongly negatively (–.70) instead of stronglypositively as expected. When these two items were re-moved, the Cronbach alpha calculation for the 6 re-maining items rose dramatically to .78, an acceptablelevel and similar to the English and Japanese versionsof the scale.

On the 6-item “preference for active divergence”scale, all loadings were positive, although two items(4, 12) loaded relatively weakly (.29, .18), respec-tively. Removing these two items resulted in only asmall improvement in Cronbach alpha reliability,probably because only 4 items were left in the scale.

Hypothesis testing. There was clear support forboth of the hypotheses. The results are displayed in

Table 5. First, there was a significant gain in prefer-ence for active divergence (�1.7, p � .05) for theexperimental group, whereas the placebo controlgroup showed no significant gain after training. Like-wise, for preference for premature convergence, theexperimental group registered a significant decrease(3.4, p � .01), whereas the placebo control group dis-played no significant change after training. Thus, theparticipants in the experimental group appeared tohave improved their divergent thinking attitudes afterthe training; that is, preference for active divergencewas increased and preference for premature conver-gence was decreased.

It is worth noting that the gain (reduction) for(avoiding) premature convergence (3.4) was substan-tially greater than the gain for active divergence (1.7).This comparison is similar to results found in the priorNorth American and Japanese studies. Table 6 com-pares all the results with prior North American andJapanese samples.

In summary, the Spanish-speaking South Ameri-can results in Table 6 show a lower gain in both(avoiding) premature convergence and active diver-gence when compared to North American and Japan-ese samples. This may be because of the two items ineach scale that were negative or weak respectively(Table 4). It is also interesting to note that in all threecultural groups, gains for (avoiding) premature con-vergence attitude were substantially greater than foractive divergence. The probable reasons for this havebeen thoroughly discussed in the previous research.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

404 Creativity Research Journal

Table 5. Mean Attitude Scores for Premature Convergence and Active Divergence Based on Groups (Training/Placebo) andTime (Before/After)

Preference for Premature Preference for ActiveConvergence (n � 149) Divergence (n � 149)

Before After Before AfterTraining Training Change Training Training Change

Group M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD

Training Group 25.2 2.9 21.6 3.6 �3.4** 3.8 22.1 3.1 23.8 3.2 1.7* 3.4(n � 149)

Placebo (n � 19) 25.5 3.3 25.8 3.2 0.3 n.s. 2.6 21.6 2.5 22.1 3.0 0.5 n.s. 2.0

Note: n.s. denotes not significant.*p � .05. **p � .01.

Basadur et al. (1992) suggested that the smaller num-ber of items (6) in the active divergence scale than thepremature convergence scale (8) and the lower relia-bility of the active divergence scale were the maincontributing factors.

Discussion

The results clearly indicate support for both hy-potheses. As predicted, the training group displayedstatistically significant improvements relative to theplacebo control group. The training program appliedto the Spanish-speaking South American managersproved to be successful in increasing preference foractive divergence and decreasing preference for pre-mature convergence. Thus, it appears that the samebasic training concepts for creative thinking and prob-lem solving likely holds for Spanish-speaking South

American managers as it does for Japanese and NorthAmerican managers.

As in North America and Japan, the magnitude ofchange in preference for active divergence amongSpanish-speaking South American managers tendedto be lower than that of preference for (avoiding) pre-mature convergence. This is further evidence of thesimilarity in response to training between NorthAmerican and Japanese participants. As discussed inprevious research, it seems more difficult to get man-agers to change active divergence attitudes than pre-mature convergence attitudes. One possible reason forgreater improvement in preference for (avoiding) pre-mature convergence relative to active divergence canbe speculated. This reason could be a cultural one.Given their values countering competition and de-viance, it may be harder for Spanish-speaking SouthAmerican managers to “let loose” and diverge too far

Table 6. Comparing Spanish-Speaking South American, Japanese, and North American Mean Attitude Gain Scores forManagers

Preference for (Avoiding) Preference forPremature Convergence Active Divergence

Before Gain After Before Gain AfterTraining Training Training Training

Group M SD M SD M SD M SD

Spanish Speaking South American 25.2 2.9 3.4** 3.8 22.1 3.1 1.7* 3.4(n � 149)

Japanese (n � 60) 23.5 3.7 6.2** 2.7 22.2 3.1 3.1** 2.9North American (n � 90) 23.7 5.3 6.0** 5.1 20.2 3.9 2.4* 3.5

*p � .05. **p � .01.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 405

for fear that differences may not be easily minimizedand settled without undue antagonism. It also may bethat Spanish-speaking South American managers,who place emphasis on consensus and prefer to avoidconflict and uncertainty, would try to limit their ideasto those they believe would be acceptable to the group.To avoid being viewed as too “deviant” or havingoverly dangerous ideas, a Spanish-speaking SouthAmerican manager might be reluctant to let suchthinking go too far.

A clear implication of these findings is that trainingin creative thinking and problem solving, as providedin this study, emphasizing divergent thinking balancedwith convergent thinking in multiple phases (includ-ing problem finding, problem solving, and solutionimplementation), would work well under the Spanish-speaking South American culture typical of Chile andPeru. The conditions for introducing and increasingdivergent thinking in Spanish-speaking South Amer-ica appear similar to Japan and North America.

Clearly, an important research direction from Study 1 was to improve the Spanish translation of the14-item questionnaire. Specifically, Items 11 and 14needed to be reworked or replaced in the preferencefor (avoiding) premature convergence scale. Similarly,Items 4 and 12 needed to be reworked for the prefer-ence for active divergence scale.

Study 2

Method

The authors collaborated with several bilingualpeople to improve the translation of Items 11 and 14(in the 8-item scale) and Items 4 and 12 (in the 6-itemscale). Minor improvements were also made to thetranslation of Items 2 and 6 (8-item scale) and Item 13(6-item scale). Back (reverse) translations were madeand compared, and then consensus on a revised ques-tionnaire was developed. The revised Spanish 14-itemquestionnaire is shown in Table 7. A new sample ofSpanish-speaking South American managers (n � 54)then filled out this revised Spanish questionnaire.

Results

The revised Items 11 and 14 both correlated posi-tively with the rest of the items in the 8-item scale. A

much improved reliability (Cronbach alpha) of .79 wascalculated for this revised 8-item scale. On the revised6-item scale, the Cronbach alpha was also much im-proved to .67. Furthermore, analysis showed that Cron-bach alpha for the 6-item scale would have increased to.76 if Item 4 had been dropped from the scale.

Study 2 continued with the focus on further im-proving the reliability of the 6-item scale. Anothernew managerial sample (n � 14) filled out the revisedSpanish questionnaire, and Cronbach alphas werecompared for the preference for active divergencescale with and without Item 4. A Cronbach alpha of.75 was calculated for the 5-item scale versus .63 forthe 6-item scale. This provided independent evidenceconfirming the increased reliability of the preferencefor active divergence scale when Item 4 was removedfrom the calculation (and used only as a distractoritem in the questionnaire).

Discussion

It is clearly difficult to translate Item 4, “one newidea is worth 10 old ones,” meaningfully or accuratelyinto Spanish. One reason is that it may represent anambiguous concept in any language, even in English.This alone would contribute greatly to this translationdifficulty. To investigate this possibility, previous Eng-lish language research involving Item 4 was reviewed.Sure enough, in the original research by Basadur andFinkbeiner (1985), which established the 14-itemscale (n � 238), Item 4 had the weakest loading (.30)in factor analysis of any of the other 13 items on eitherof the two factors underlying the two scales. (By com-parison, the other 5 items of the active divergencescale loaded from .42 to .68, and the eight items on thepremature evaluation scale loaded from .35 to .77.)Furthermore, in an earlier preliminary study (n � 186)by Basadur and Finkbeiner (1983), Item 4 was againthe lowest loading item (.33) on the preference for ac-tive divergence factor.

Thus, although Item 4 may still be worthwhile tokeep in the English-language version of the question-naire, it seems likely it should be dropped from theSpanish-language version, leaving the Spanish prefer-ence for active divergence scale with 5 items. Thisfinding should be tested with additional samples fromSouth America and also explored with samples fromMexico, Spain, and other Spanish-speaking countries.This exploration should also be extended to additional

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

406 Creativity Research Journal

Table 7. Revised Spanish 14-Item Preference Scale

Instrucciones

Abajo Vd. verá varias frases que se refieren a diferentes situaciones. Lea cuidadosamente a cada una de estas e indique debajo de cada una elgrado en que Vd. se halla de acuerdo o en desacuerdo con cada una de estas colocando un círculo alrededor de la letra que corresponda.

A � Muy de acuerdo D � Desacuerdo

B � De acuerdo E � Muy rechazada

C � Ni de acuerdo ni en desacuerdo

1. Antes de comunicarle mis ideas a otros yo debería hacer un poco de autocrítica al respecto.

A B C D E

2. Debemos eliminar nuestras ideas al ver que se tornan ridículas y a seguir adelante con lo válido.

A B C D E

3. Creo que a las personas en el trabajo se les debe alentar a que compartan todas sus ideas, pues nunca se sabe cuando una idea que todoscreen que es absurda, pueda resultar ser la mejor.

A B C D E

4. Una idea nueva vale por diez ideas “viejas.”

A B C D E

5. Al generar nuevas ideas es mucho más importante la calidad de las mismas que la cantidad de ideas presentadas.

A B C D E

6. Para ser capaz de producir buenas ideas, un grupo debe enfocarse en una sola dirección y mantenerse encarrilado en ésta.

A B C D E

7. Las ideas absurdas hacen perder mucho tiempo.

A B C D E

8. Pienso que todos deben decir lo que se les ocurra cada vez que le sea posible.

A B C D E

9. Me gusta escuchar las ideas absurdas de otros pues aún las más disparatadas muchas veces conducen a la mejor solución.

A B C D E

10. Es importante usar el criterio mientras surgen ideas nuevas para asegurarse que solo se perfeccionan las de buena calidad.

A B C D E

11. Uno necesita ser capaz de reconocer y eliminar las ideas descabelladas durante la generación de ideas.

A B C D E

12. Creo que a todas las ideas debiera dárseles el mismo tiempo y escucharlas con la mente abierta sin importar cuan extrañas parezcan ser.

A B C D E

13. La mejor forma de generar ideas nuevas es la de escuchar a las de los demás y apoyarlas o añadirles algo.

A B C D E

14. Desearía que la gente pensara si una idea es práctica o no antes de abrir la boca.

A B C D E

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Crossing Cultures

Creativity Research Journal 407

English-speaking samples and to other languages aswell. Translating concepts and terms into another lan-guage can often provide deeper insight into the realmeaning intended. The real intended meaning canemerge more accurately during probing by a neutraltranslator because such translations can rarely bemade word for word. This probing process providesfurther opportunity to improve the original languageversion of an instrument.

Just as in North America and Japan, the seeminglymore difficult task of increasing preference for activedivergence than decreasing the tendency for prema-ture critical evaluation of ideas poses an interesting di-rection for more research. Also, additional SouthAmerican Spanish studies replicating other NorthAmerican managerial creativity research would seemwarranted, given these encouraging results. In particu-lar, this study should be extended beyond attitudes toinclude measures of behavior and performance and tocheck longer term persistence and portability of train-ing effects. Extending this research to Spanish-speak-ing managers from Spain, Mexico, and other countriesalso represents an interesting future research direc-tion. Similar studies in Portuguese cultures (Braziland Portugal) would seem a natural next step in ourcross-cultural research.

REFERENCES

Alston, J. P. (1986). The American Samurai: Blending Americanand Japanese managerial practices. New York: de Gruyter.

Altemeyer, R. (1966). Education in the arts and sciences: Divergentpaths. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Institute ofTechnology, Pittsburgh, PA.

Basadur, M. S. (1982). Research in creative problem solving train-ing in business and industry. Proceedings of creativity week 4.Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Basadur, M. S. (1987). Needed research in creativity for businessand industrial applications. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers ofcreativity research: Beyond the basics (pp. 390–416). Buffalo,NY: Bearly.

Basadur, M. S. (1993). Impacts and outcomes in creativity in orga-nizational settings. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C. Murdock, R. L.Firestien, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), The emergence of a disci-pline: Nurturing and developing creativity (pp. 278–313). NewYork: Ablex.

Basadur, M. S. (1994). Managing the creative process in organiza-tions. In M. J. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving,and creativity (Chapter 12). New York: Ablex.

Basadur, M. S. (1995). The power of innovation. London: PitmanProfessional Publishing.

Basadur, M. S., & Finkbeiner, C. T. (1983). Identifying attitudinalfactors related to ideation in creative problem solving. McMas-ter University Faculty of Business Research Working Paper Se-ries #207.

Basadur, M. S., & Finkbeiner, C. T. (1985). Measuring preferencefor ideation in creative problem solving training. Journal of Ap-plied Behavioral Science, 21, 37–49.

Basadur, M. S., Graen, G. B., & Green, S. G. (1982). Training increative problem solving: Effects on ideation and problem find-ing in an applied research organization. Organizational Behav-ior and Human Performance, 30, 41–70.

Basadur, M. S., Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1986). Training ef-fects on attitudes toward divergent thinking among manufactur-ing engineers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 612–617.

Basadur, M. S., Graen, G. B., Takai, J., & Wakabayashi, M. (1989).Comparing attitudes toward divergent thinking of managers andnon-managers before and after training. (In Japanese.) JapaneseJournal of Administrative Behavior, 4, 19–27.

Basadur, M. S., Taggar, S. S., & Pringle, P. F., (1999). Improving themeasurement of divergent thinking attitudes in organizations.Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(2), 75–111.

Basadur, M. S., Runco, M. A., & Vega, L. A. (2000). Understandinghow creative thinking skills, attitudes and behaviors work to-gether: A causal process model. Journal of Creative Behavior,34(2), 77–100.

Basadur, M. S., Wakabayashi, M., & Graen, G. B. (1990). Attitudestowards divergent thinking before and after training: Focusingupon the effect of individual problem solving styles. CreativityResearch Journal, 3(1), 22–32.

Basadur, M. S., Wakabayashi, M., & Takai, J. (1992). Training ef-fects on the divergent thinking attitudes of Japanese managers.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 329–345.

Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1976). The design and conduct ofquasi experiments and true experiments in field settings. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organiza-tional psychology (pp. 223–326). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structureof tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.

Doktor, R. (1970). The nature of human intelligence. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Hofstede, G. (1978). Organization-related value systems in fortycountries. European Institute for Advanced Studies Manage-ment, Place Stephanie 20 Bte 15/16 1050 Brussels Belgium. Ab-stract obtained from International Sociological Association(ISA), ASP Association Paper.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differ-ences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational prac-tices and theories. Journal of International Business Studies,14, 75–89.

Hofstede, G., Neuijen, B., Ohayv, D. D., & Sanders, G. (1990).Measuring organizational cultures: A qualitative and quantita-tive study across twenty cases. Administrative Science Quar-terly, 35, 286–316.

Isaksen, S. G., & Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Creative problem solving:The basic course. Buffalo, NY: Bearly.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

M. Basadur, P. Pringle, & D. Kirkland

408 Creativity Research Journal

Iwawaki, S., & Cowen, E. (1984). The social desirability of trait-de-scriptive terms: Application to a Japanese sample. Journal ofSocial Psychology, 63, 199–205.

Kedia, B. L., & Bhaga, R. S. (1987, September). Cultural con-straints on transfer of technology across nations: Implicationsfor research in international and comparative management.Academy of Management Review, 12, 559–571.

Kirton, M. J. (1976). Adaptors and innovators: A description andmeasure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 622–629.

Kraut, A. I. (1976). Developing managerial skills via modellingtechniques: Some positive research findings—a symposium.Personnel Psychology, 29, 325–328.

Mackinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of the creative tal-ent. American Psychologist, 17, 484–495.

Mackinnon, D. W. (1977). Forward. In S. J. Parnes, R. B. Noller, & A. M. Biondi (Eds.), Guide to creative action (p. xiii). NY:Scribner’s.

Meadow, A., Parnes, S. J., & Reese, H. (1959). Influence of instruc-tions and problem sequence on a creative problem solving test.Journal of Applied Psychology, 43, 413–416.

Mott, P. E. (1972). The characteristics of effective organizations.New York: Harper & Row.

Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination. New York: Scribner’s.Parnes, S. J., & Meadow, A. (1959). Effects of brainstorming in-

structions on creative problem solving by trained and untrainedsubjects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 50, 171–176.

Parnes, S. J., & Meadow, A. (1960). Evaluation of persistence of ef-fects produced by a creative problem solving course. Psycholog-ical Reports, 7, 357–367.

Parnes, S. J., Noller, R. B., & Biondi, A. M. (1977). Guide to cre-ative action. New York: Scribner’s.

Rickards, T. R. (1980, April). Facing the need to innovate. Interna-tional Management, 35, 40–42.

Rickards, T. R. (1994). Creativity from a business school perspec-tive: Past, present, and future. In S. G. Isaksen, M. C. Murdock,R. L. Firestien, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), Nurturing and devel-oping creativity: The emergence of a discipline (pp. 155–176).Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Rohlen, T. P. (1974). For harmony and strength: Japanese whitecollar organizations in anthropological perspectives. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Schneider, S. E. (1988, Summer). National vs. corporate culture:Implications for HRM. Human Resource Management,231–236.

Shore, S. (1980, October). Getting the creative juices flowing again.International Manager, 35, 23–29.

Thurstone, L. L. (1950). Creative Talent. Psychometric Labora-tory, 61.

Von Glinow, M. A., & Teagarden, M. B. (1988, Summer). Thetransfer of HRM technology in Sino-US cooperative ventures:Problems and solutions. Human Resource Management,201–229.

Wallach, M. A. (1971). The intelligence/creativity distinction. Mor-ristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

Whitehill, A. M., & Takezawa, S. (1968). The other worker: A com-parative study of industrial relations in the United States andJapan. Honolulu: East-West Center Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Was

hing

ton

Uni

vers

ity in

St L

ouis

] at

23:

06 2

1 D

ecem

ber

2014