Comparison of Two Articles on Cultural Intelligence in Organizations - Essay Example

Comparison of two articles on Cultural Intelligence in Organizations of Number Total Numberof Words: 2,000 Introduction Ang (2008, p. 3) defined cultural intelligence as “the capability of an individual to function effectively in situations characterized by cultural diversity” whereas Peterson (2004, p. 89) defined cultural intelligence as “the ability to engage in a set of behaviours that uses language or interpersonal skills and qualities such as tolerance for ambiguity and flexibility that are tuned appropriately to the culture-based values and attitudes of people who one interacts”. Based on these definitions, cultural intelligence serves as an important skill wherein employees would able to able to solve organizational problems related to cultural conflicts. In order to assist the manager of Global Alliances in having a better understanding with regards to the importance of cultural intelligence when dealing with managers from different organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel, this report will closely examine the differences between two articles. By summarizing the research findings of these two articles, this report will determine which among the two articles is more useful in the case of the manager. Literature Review Several authors mentioned that cultural intelligence is a complex subject in the sense that this particular topic is composed of four distinct dimentions known as: the CQ drive (motivational CQ), CQ knowledge (cognitive CQ), CQ strategy (metacognitive CQ), and CQ action (behavioural CQ) (Ang and Dyne 2010; Ward et al. 2009). Despite the complexity of cultural intelligence, Triandis (2006) mentioned that it is possible to develop an effective cultural intelligence by suspending judgments, examining the importance of a situation, and training to overcome ethnocentrism. Culture could somehow affect the attitude and personality of each individual. Therefore, each person is unique in their own little ways. Since it is quite difficult to understand how cultural differences could affect the way people would interpret the actions and behaviour of other people, Triandis (2006) explained that it is necessary to practice judgment suspension before judging how other people think, feel, or behave. It is common for most of the businesses in Saudi Arabia to be family-owned enterprises. With this in mind, the manager of Global Alliances should consider that it is common for some members of the family to play a significant role as the senior business executive (Long 2005). Under the Islamic tradition, men in Saudi Arabia are accepted to be in a polygamous relationship. For this reason, the manager of Global Alliances should avoid immediate judgment concerning the personal values of businessmen in this country. Aside from practicing judgment suspension, Triandis (2006) also mentioned the importance of examining the situation first before making actions. In line with this, Kline (2005, p. 189) mentioned the “men and women should not mix at workplaces”. With this in mind, the manager of Global Alliances should not take it against the business people in Saudi Arabia is he/she notice that he/she could not talk with business people of the opposite sex in private. Wood (2009, p. 189) mentioned that ethnocentrism is all about “using one’s own culture and practices as the standard for interpreting the values, beliefs, norms, and communication of other cultures”. Since one’s own culture and practices dictates the socially accepted values, beliefs and norms, Triandis (2006) highlighted the importance of training to overcome ethnocentrism. For example, earlier it was mentioned that people in Saudi Arabia accepts polygamous relationships as part of their norms. In the case of Jordan, the Jordanian laws is against the practice of polygamy (Sonbol 2003). Since each country has their own unique culture and business practices, the manager of Global Alliances should consider the importance of educating himself/herself about the specific culture and business practices in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel. By learning more about the specific cultural differences of each manager in different business organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel, the manager of Global Alliances can increase his/her chances of being able to effectively interact with them without the having the risks of causing personal conflicts related to cultural differences. Even though Triandis (2006) was able to provide a persuasive arguments that cultural intelligence is culture bound, the author did not mention anything about the tools which can be used in measuring cultural intelligence. Unlike the article that was written by Triandis (2006), Ward et al. (2009) focused on discussing the significance of the psychometric analyses when using tools such as the Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS), the Wonderlic Personality Test (WPT), the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ), Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZSDS), and the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices (RAPM) when measuring cultural intelligence. In general, it is necessary to determine whether or not these tools are effective in measuring cultural intelligence. Basically, the effectiveness of these tools could enable the managers determine when there is a need for a group of employees to have proper training on cultural intelligence. In other words, the test results coming from these tools can help the managers predict whether or not a group of employees is capable of adapting to a new culture either psychologically, intellectually or socially. Cultural intelligence scale is useful when the managers try to predict the cross-cultural adaptation of each worker who has been assigned for expatriation. However, Ward et al. (2009) revealed that Cultural intelligence scale as a functional tool is not effective as a tool when measuring other cultural dimensions related to psychological, socio-cultural, and academic adaptation of each individual. Cultural intelligence is referring to “the capability of an individual to function effectively in situations characterized by cultural diversity” (Ang 2008, p. 3) whereas emotional intelligence is all about the ability of a person to reflectively regulate their emotions, understand emotions, assimilate emotions in thought, and perceiving or expressing emotions (Matthews, Zeidner and Roberts 2012). As a measuring tool, cultural intelligence scale is effective in measuring four distinct dimentions (Ang and Dyne 2010; Ward et al. 2009). Even though Ward et al. (2009, p. 102) stated that “CQ is not sufficiently distinct from emotional intelligence”, the authors found out that the cultural intelligence scale as a measuring tool is not effective when measuring emotional intelligence. With this in mind, the main challenge in the study of cultural intelligence is to develop a more effective measuring tool that can effectively measure cultural intelligence. Ward et al. (2009) mentioned that the use of self-report measurements is not effective especially when it comes to measuring the employees’ adaptive outcomes. Because of the structure of cultural intelligence, limitations are present when it comes to the use of self-report instruments. Since one’s own culture and practices dictates the socially accepted values, beliefs and norms (Wood 2009), the use of a self-report instrument could only increase the possibility wherein a biased research findings can occur. For example, an open-ended question like whether or not it is ethically acceptable for men and women to mix together in one working environment was asked to a group of business people around the world. The research survey respondents can provide bias response since it is considered unethical for male and female workers in Saudi Arabia to mix together in an office but not for other races. Analysis There are quite a lot of research studies that has tried using different measuring tools in trying to measure cultural intelligence (Ramalu, Wei and Rose, 2011; Amiri, Moghimi and Kazemi, 2010). For example, Amiri, Moghimi and Kazemi (2010) adopted the use of cultural intelligence scale that is composed of a total of 20 items followed by using a total of 30 pre-tested questionnaires. On the other hand, a Spearman’s Correlation test can also be used in measuring the relationship between employees’ cultural intelligence and work performance (Amiri, Moghimi and Kazemi 2010). Ward et al. (2009) discussed the scope and limitations of using the cultural intelligence scale when measuring cultural intelligence. Even though cultural intelligence scale can be used in measuring the four distinct dimensions of cultural intelligence (Ang and Dyne 2010; Ward et al. 2009), this particular measuring tool will never be effective in measuring emotional intelligence. Instead of quantifying the employees’ knowledge on cultural issues using the cultural intelligence scale, Sternberg and Kaufman (2011, p. 596) strongly suggest that “it is possible to assess dyadic or team level cultural intelligence using direct consensus or referent shift models”. In other words, there are many ways to measure cultural intelligence. Depending on the main purpose of the research study, the researcher will have to combine the use of cultural intelligence scale together with other types of equally useful measuring tools. Personally, it sounds quite impossible to be able to measure cultural intelligence using a single or a multiple measuring tools. In fact, there are several reasons behind the idea that makes it irrelevant to measure cultural intelligence. Aside from the fact the process of trying to measure cultural intelligence is discriminatory; Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars (2006) explained that the concept of culture alone is too broad and unique by its own nature which makes this subject relative in terms of its values. Several authors also noted that the act of trying to categorize culture into subtopics is a form of stereotype (Hampden-Turner and Trompenaars 2006; Osland and Bird, 2000). Considering the fact that culture of each nation is different from that of another, it sounds illogical to be able to find a single measuring tool which can effectively and accurately measure cultural intelligence. Between the two articles provided, the article entitled “Cultural Intelligence in Organizations” as written by Triandis (2006) is more logical as compared to the article entitled “The Convergent, Discriminant, and Incremental Validity of Scores on a Self-Report Measure of Cultural Intelligence” by Ward et al. (2009). Even though Ward et al. (2009) tried to analyze the psychometric analyses of cultural intelligence in examining the prediction of cross-cultural adapatation of international students, this article does not literally suggest how the manager of Global Alliances could improve his/her knowledge on cultural intelligence when dealing with managers from different organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel. In the real business world, the process of dealing with the managers from different organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel does not require the use of measurements in cultural intelligence approach. Taking this point into consideration, the manager of Global Alliances should focus on how to apply the five suggestions of Triandis (2006) when improving the use of cultural intelligence within a business organization. There were evidences that both the articles used references that are dated back in 1980s. In fact, one of the references used by Ward et al. (2009) was dated back in 1969. In general, the use of out-dated references strongly suggests that the idea used by the authors may no longer be applicable in the modern days of doings business. In order to benefit from the practical implications of this article, the manager of Global Alliances should only use the article written by Triandis (2006) as a base references. To ensure that the manager will be able to obtain a more up-dated resources, further research study on this topic is highly required. Conclusion and Recommendations Given that the manager of Global Alliances is dealing with managers from different organizations in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel, it is necessary to explore what cultural intelligence is all about. By learning more about the cultural business practices of people in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel, the manager of Global Alliances could increase his/her success rate when closing a future business deals with foreign businessmen and managers. The act of measuring cultural intelligence seems to be unrealistic. Each country has its own set of unique culture and business practices. Therefore, it does not make sense to categorize culture under one dominant belief. To enable the manager of Global Alliances improve his/her ability to function effectively in situations characterized by cultural diversity, this report highly recommends the need to explore the religious and business practices of people who are living in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Peru and Israel. By doing so, the manager of Global Alliances could avoid the risk of cultural conflicts. References Amiri, A., Moghimi, S. and Kazemi, M. 2010. Studying the Relationship between Cultural Intelligence and Employees’ Performance. European Journal of Scientific Research 42(3), pp. 432-427. Ang, S. 2008. Handbook of cultural intelligence: theory, measurement, and applications. NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Hampden-Turner, C. and Trompenaars, F. 2006. Cultural Intelligence - Is Such a Capacity Credible? Group Organization Management 31(1), pp. 56-63. Kline, J. 2005. Ethics for International Business: Decision-Making in a Global Political Economy. NY: Routledge. Livermore, D., Ang, S. and Dyne, L. 2010. Leading with Cultural Intelligence: The New Secret to Success. NY: Amacom. Long, D. 2005. Culture and customs of Saudi Arabia. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. and Roberts, R. 2012. Emotional Intelligence 101. NY: Springer Publishing Company, LLC. Osland, J. and Bird, A. 2000. Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: Cultural sensemaking in context. Academy of Management Executive 14(1), pp. 65-77. Peterson, B. 2004. Cultural intelligence: a guide to working with people from other cultures. London, UK: Intercultural Press. Ramalu, S., Wei, C. and Rose, R. 2011. The Effects of Cultural Intelligence on Cross-Cultural Adjustment and Job Performance amongst Expatriates in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science 2(9), pp. 59-71. Sonbol, A. 2003. Women of Jordan: Islam, labor & the law. NY: Syracuse University Press. Sternberg, R. and Kaufman, S. 2011. The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. NY: Cambridge Uniersity Press. Triandis, H. 2006. Cultural Intelligence in Organizations. Group and Organization Management 31, pp. 20-26. Ward, C., Fischer, R., Zaid Lam, F. and 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), pp. 85-105. Wood, J. 2009. Communication in Our Lives. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Read More