Christof Miska

Intercultural competencies as antecedents of responsible global leadership

To date, little is known about the intercultural competencies that enable global leaders to effectively address CSR-related demands of global stakeholder communities. In order to explore this gap in the literature we empirically investigate several intercultural competencies and their influence on Responsible Global Leadership (RGL). In delineating the antecedents of RGL we studied three CSR decision-making approaches: the globally standardised, the locally adapted, and the transnational. We found that different competency configurations were related to each of the three approaches and that intercultural competencies are most critical for the utilisation of the transnational approach. Our study contributes to the CSR literature by delineating some of the antecedents of RGL, and to global leadership research by establishing the scope of intercultural competencies within the domains of CSR and stakeholder management.

The upside of cultural differences: Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in cross-cultural management research

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to encourage scholars to look at commonly considered phenomena in international business and cross-cultural research in new ways and to theorize and explore how cultural diversity, distance, and foreignness create value for global organizations. These considerations should result in a more balanced treatment of culture in cross-cultural management (CCM) research. Design/methodology/approach The idea that there are negative consequences associated with cultural differences is pervasive in hypotheses formulation and empirical testing in international business and CCM literature, as reflected in widely used constructs such as “cultural distance,” “cultural misfit,” “foreignness,” and related concepts. Consistent with a Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) perspective on culture and cultural differences, the authors emphasize the positive role of distance and diversity across national, cultural, institutional, and organizational dimensions. In addition, they provide an overview of the contributions to the special issue. Findings Examining the positive side of culture is not only beneficial theoretically in terms of filling the existing gaps in the literature, but is also crucial for the practice of international and global business. Accordingly, the contributions to the special issue highlight how explicitly considering positive phenomena can help better understand when and how cultural diversity, distance, and foreignness can enhance organizational effectiveness and performance at multiple levels. They include five research papers, a Distinguished Scholar Essay by Kim Cameron, the Founder of the POS movement, and an interview piece with Richard Nisbett, a Pioneer Researcher in culture and cognition. Originality/value The overemphasis on adverse outcomes associated with cultural differences in existing research has hindered the understanding of the processes and conditions that help organizations leverage the benefits of cultural differences in a wide range of contexts. This introductory paper together with the contributions included in the special issue showcases the positive dynamics and outcomes associated with cultural differences, distance, and diversity in a wide range of international business contexts.

Looking out or looking up: gender differences in expatriate turnover intentions

Purpose With the steady increase in the number of female expatriates and multinational corporations’ (MNCs’) pressing need for global female talent, understanding the factors that attract and retain female expatriates is urgent. Drawing from the literatures on gender differences in (domestic) labor turnover and gender differences in social networks, the purpose of this paper is to investigate gender differences in expatriates’ turnover intentions. Design/methodology/approach The authors collected data via a questionnaire survey from an international sample of female (n=164) and male (n=1,509) expatriates who were on a company-sponsored international assignment at the time of completing the survey. Findings The findings show that female expatriates’ turnover intentions are mainly explained by satisfaction with company support. In contrast, male expatriates’ turnover intentions are explained by repatriation concerns and perceived gap between within- and outside-company career-advancement opportunities, in addition to satisfaction with company support. The authors did not find any gender differences in the levels of turnover intention per se. Practical implications Since males dominate the expatriate cadre of most companies, existing expatriate retention strategies are likely to be geared toward males. Companies that value and want to retain their female talent need to gain a better understanding of what matters to female expatriates in their decisions to stay or leave the company, and adjust their expatriation and repatriation management strategies accordingly. Originality/value The study is one of the first to empirically test the gender differences in expatriate turnover intentions. The authors propose two underlying mechanisms that explain gender differences in expatriate turnover intentions: social integration and career advancement. The findings point to an important new research frontier that focuses on gender differences in the underlying mechanisms of turnover intentions rather than in the level of turnover intentions.

Responsible Global Leadership in Emerging Markets

Abstract Highly publicized scandals and increased stakeholder activism for sustainable development have resulted in calls for more responsible global leadership. At the same time, emerging economies characterized by weak institutions, political instability, and a shaky rule of law have gained in importance for global business. Under the lens of responsible global leadership, we highlight the challenges that global leaders face in addressing the needs of diverse, cross-boundary stakeholders, with a particular focus on Western multinational enterprises (MNEs) doing business in emerging markets. We identify three prototypical approaches that MNEs and their leaders take in responding to calls for responsible global leadership, focusing on the tensions and possible trade-offs between globally integrated and locally adapted approaches. We discuss the implications in view of managerial decision making and behavior and offer recommendations for how organizations may promote responsible global leadership.

Responsible Leadership – a Rational Perspective

Business leaders are increasingly expected to take on responsibility for the environmental and societal impact of their actions. Yet, conceptual views on responsible leadership differ considerably in their degrees of stakeholder inclusion and definitions of responsibility, and are nurtured by diverse theoretical points of departure. We seek to integrate the different views in order to understand under which conditions responsible leadership may be rational, according to rational egoism theory. We propose a formal model of stakeholder engagement which incorporates the principles of rational egoism theory. We find that a positive effect of stakeholder engagement on a company’s profits is neither necessary nor sufficient for business leaders to consider stakeholder interests. Indeed, a positive impact on profits is not necessary as a leader’s non-financial incentives may overcompensate potential financial disadvantages. A positive impact on profits is not sufficient either since leaders may have too concise ...

„Positive Organizational Scholarship“: Ein neues Paradigma in der interkulturellen Managementforschung

Die gegenwartige Forschung im internationalen und interkulturellen Management geht uberwiegend von der Annahme aus, dass Kulturunterschiede Hemmnisse darstellen, die es zu verhindern, uberwinden oder zumindest effektiv zu managen gilt. So werden unterschiedliche Phanomene wie das Scheitern von internationalen Allianzen und Unternehmenszusammenschlussen (z. B. Cartwright und Schoenberg 2006), Fehlentscheidungen bei der Wahl der Markteintrittsstrategie (z. B. Harzing 2004), Anpassungsprobleme von Fuhrungskraften bei Auslandseinsatzen (Black et al. 1991), Konflike und Kommunikationsprobleme in gemischtnationalen Arbeitsgruppen (z. B. Mannix und Neale 2005) und Schwierigkeiten beim grenzuberschreitenden Transfer von technischem Wissen und Management-Knowhow (Ambos und Ambos 2009) auf „Kulturbarrieren“ zuruckgefuhrt, wobei meist davon ausgegangen wird, dass Unterschiede in Landeskulturen ein groseres Hindernis darstellen als Unterschiede in Unternehmenskulturen. Geert Hofstede, der wohl am haufigsten zitierte Experte auf dem Gebiet der interkulturellen Managementforschung, vertritt etwa die Ansicht: „Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster.“ (www.geert-hofstede.com).