Developing Cultural Intelligence

813 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
813
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Developing Cultural Intelligence

  1. 1. Developing Cultural Intelligence:The IATA CaseGuido GianassoUniversity of Geneva8 September 2011
  2. 2. 8 September 2011Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case2Research GapsGlobal Competence: No generally accepted definition of the construct andvalidated assessment instrument Prior studies have focused on expatriates adjustment.Little research exists on the relationship between globalcompetence and individual job performance Little research exists on how organizations can developglobal competence
  3. 3. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case3Research Questions What makes “global” individuals more capable tooperate across cultural boundaries and what isthe relationship between this capability and jobperformance when individuals operate ininterculturally diverse contexts How can CQ capability be developed and howcan organizations do soResearch Context: IATA
  4. 4. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case4Intended contributions to research To examine the link between employees’ CQ andjob performance in a global organization (only onestudy to date) To provide first insight to whether employeesdemonstrate improvement in their CQ afterundergoing a structured CCT interventioncombining didactic and experiential activities (nostudy to date) To propose an integrative model for future research
  5. 5. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case5Intended contributions to practice To provide the empirical evidence to show thatorganizations need to seriously consider how toselect and develop employees working inintercultural environments To provide a concrete example of how a CCTintervention could look like
  6. 6. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case6Theory DevelopmentCultural Intelligence (Ang & Early, 2003; Ang et al., 2007) Capability to interact effectively in culturally diversesetting Four factor conceptualization (Sternberg & Detterman,1986) Selected among different conceptualizations of globalcompetence for itsTheoretical soundness and parsimonyInstrument reliability, validity and easiness ofadministration in IATA
  7. 7. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case7Study 1 - HypothesisH1: all four CQ factors are positively associatedwith job performance in culturally diverse settings H1A: Metacognitive CQ is positively related to jobperformance H1B: Cognitive CQ is positively related to job performance H1C: Motivational CQ is positively related to job performance H1D: Behavioral CQ is positively related to job performance
  8. 8. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case8Study 1: ResultsNote: Results are controlled for participants’ age, gender, observer liking, andsuperior-subordinate similarity.** p < .01 *p < .05Observer CQ ratings across A and B playersObserver Ratings A Players B PlayersCQ Factors M SD M SDMotivational CQ 5.93 0.51 5.35 0.71Cognitive CQ 5.47 0.65 5.09 0.73Meta-Cognitive CQ 5.40 0.57 4.93 0.59Behavioral CQ 5.01 0.58 4.69 0.61
  9. 9. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence9Study 1: ResultsNote: Results are controlled for participants’ age and gender.** p < .01 *p < .05 † p < .10Self CQ ratings across A and B playersSelf CQ Ratings A Players B PlayersM SD M SDMotivational CQ 6.13 1.03 6.12 0.99Cognitive CQ 5.57 1.05 5.49 0.96Meta-Cognitive CQ 5.50 0.89 5.58 0.95Behavioral CQ 5.47 1.07 5.27 1.20
  10. 10. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence10Study 1: Discussion Observer – ratings All four factors are positively correlated with jobperformance Self-ratings Only behavioral CQ is positively correlated with jobperformance (metacognitive and behavioral in Ang’s study)≠ Degree of cultural diversity≠ Difference in sample size≠ Observer ratings vs. self rating  self enhancement
  11. 11. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case11Study 1: Theoretical contributions First study showing that all four factors of CQ arepositively correlated with job performance Study addressing the methodological limitations ofAng’s study (size, self-reported CQ, limitedgeographical scope)
  12. 12. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case12Study 1: Limitations Research design does not allow to assert that CQcauses performance, but that only employees with ahigher CQ are more likely to perform better I did not control for multiple types of intelligence I focused on task performance only I assessed the relationship between CQ andperformance but not the psychological / behavioralmechanism underlying the relationship
  13. 13. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case13Study 2 - HypothesisH2: the IATA Intercultural Leadership Engagementand Development (I-LEAD) program - with itsintegrative approach focusing on experientiallearning - enhances participants’ CQ. H2A: Motivational CQ will increase after attending I-LEAD H2B: Cognitive CQ will increase after attending I-LEAD H2C: Metacognitive CQ will increase after attending I-LEAD H2D: Behavioral CQ will increase after attending I-LEAD
  14. 14. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case14How I-LEAD activities will affect CQ• Lectures on Culture• Teaching Internal Teams• Traveling / Visiting• International Projects• Managing Internal/External Stakeholders• Leading Internal Teams• Producing videos onculture• CQ Self-Assessment &360°• Being Coached andCoaching junioremployeesEXPERIENTIALII--LEAD ACTIVITIESLEAD ACTIVITIES CQ DIMENSIONSCQ DIMENSIONSDIDACTICDIDACTICSELF-AWARENESSMotivationMotivationCognitionCognitionMetacognitionMetacognitionBehaviorBehavior
  15. 15. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case15Study 2: ResultsDescriptives and repeated measures ANOVA resultsfor observer CQ ratings for 55 I-LEAD change agentsNote: Results are controlled for participants’ age and gender ** p < .01Change Agents RetrospectivePre I-LeadPost I-LeadMS F (1,52)CQ Factors M SD M SDMotivational CQ 5.08 0.62 6.00 0.52 0.94 10.15**Cognitive CQ 5.03 0.60 5.90 0.52 0.68 8.11**Meta-Cognitive CQ 4.95 0.58 5.85 0.52 0.63 8.33**Behavioral CQ 4.75 0.58 5.56 0.62 0.78 9.76**
  16. 16. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case16Study 2: ResultsDescriptives and repeated measures ANOVA resultsfor observer CQ ratings for 160 I-LEAD team membersNote: Results are controlled for participants’ age and gender ** p < .01Team Members RetrospectivePre I-LeadPostI-LeadMSF(1,157)CQ Factors M SD M SDMotivational CQ 4.84 0.59 5.59 0.60 0.55 6.09**Cognitive CQ 4.75 0.56 5.39 0.56 1.06 15.94**Meta-Cognitive CQ 4.60 0.56 5.33 0.61 1.52 17.01**Behavioral CQ 4.43 0.54 5.06 0.61 1.47 16.99**
  17. 17. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case17Study 2: Discussion Change Agents who went through the program werereported as having a significant increase in CQ +14.5 % Cognitive +15.0 % Metacognitive +15.3 % Motivational +13.5 % Behavioral Finding significant results despite low statistical powersuggests strong effect size Using a comparison group (I-LEAD Members) with resultsshowing smaller CQ increase allows to rule out thepossibility of maturation effects
  18. 18. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case18Study 2: Contributions The study demonstrates that CQ is a measurablecapability that can be systematically developed Is the only study conducted in an organizational settingand based on observer reports that looked at impact onCQ specifically Demonstrates that the scope and intensity of the programaffects the level of CQ development and show cases theimportance of an integrative training approach containingdidactical, experiential and self-awareness elements
  19. 19. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case19Study 2: Limitations I-LEAD team members are not a perfect comparisongroup The non-randomized selection of change agents The retrospective pretest measurement haslimitations (socially desirable responding, etc) The study did not test the relationship betweenspecific training activities with specific dimensions
  20. 20. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case20Overall Discussion: Integrating Study 1 andStudy 2Employees’CulturalIntelligenceMotivationCognitionMetacognitionBehaviorEmployees’JobPerformanceIntegrativeCross-CulturalTraining ProgramDidacticExperientialSelf-AwarenessProposed mediating role of CQ in translating global leadershiptraining programs into performance at the workplace
  21. 21. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case21The model addresses some gaps inexisting research: Few studies on the relationship between CCTinterventions and job performance Few studies available focus on small groups ofexpatriates or students Most CCT studies have examined the direct effectsof training interventions without explaining theunderlying mechanisms
  22. 22. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case22Implications for future research: Future studies can empirically test the proposedintegrative model that CCT programs affect jobperformance via the development of culturalintelligence Future studies should conduct utility assessment ofCCT interventions on the organization’sperformance.
  23. 23. Guido GianassoDeveloping Cultural Intelligence: the IATA case23Implications for global humanresources systemsGlobal organizations should integrate CQ in their HRprocesses:Global talent acquisitionPerformance management and rewards systemsGlobal leadership development and training
  24. 24. Thank you!Guido Gianasso8 September 2011

×