Antecedents And Consequences Of Employees Adjustment To Overseas Assignment A Meta-Analytic Review

APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2003, 52 (2), 213–236
© International Association for Applied Psychology, 2003. Published by Blackwell Publishing,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Oxford, UK
APPS
Applied Psychology: an International Review
0269-994X
© International Association for Applied Psychology, 2003
April 2003
52
2
1
000
Original Article
ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF EMPLOYEES’ ADJUSTMENT
HECHANOVA ET AL.
Antecedents and Consequences of Employees’
Adjustment to Overseas Assignment:
A Meta-analytic Review
Regina Hechanova*
Ateneo de Manila University, The Philippines
Terry A. Beehr and Neil D. Christiansen
Central Michigan University, USA
La recherche sur les antécédents et les conséquences de l’ajustement des
expatriés a été revue de façon qualitative et avec la méthode quantitative de
méta-analyse. Les prédicteurs individuels, environnementaux, reliés au travail
et reliés à la famille, de l’ajustement général, interactionnel et au travail ont
été analysés. L’efficacité personnelle, la fréquence des interactions dans le pays
hôte, et le soutien familial ont prédit les trois types d’ajustement. De plus, des
compétences élevées en relations interpersonnelles ont été associées à un
meilleur ajustement à l’environnement en général. Les résultats ont égale-
ment démontré que la variable “conflit de rôle” était corrélée négativement
avec l’ajustement au travail alors que l’ambiguïté du rôle et la discrétion ont
été associés avec l’ajustement au travail. Un modèle d’équations structurelles
a été développé avec les corrélations agrégées pour illustrer les relations cau-
sales possibles impliquant un facteur général d’ajustement et les résultats des
tensions au travail, la satisfaction au travail, l’engagement organisationnel,
l’intention de quitter, ainsi que la performance au travail. L’hypothèse était que
l’ajustement influencerait les tensions et la satisfaction au travail et que ces
deux dernières variables auraient un effet sur l’engagement organisationnel,
la performance et l’intention de quitter. Le modèle a bien correspondu aux
données.
Research on the antecedents and consequences of expatriate adjustment was
reviewed using meta-analytic methods. The antecedents and outcomes of three
facets of adjustment were examined. Self-efficacy, frequency of interaction
with host nationals, and family support consistently predicted all three types of
* Address for correspondence: Regina Hechanova, Department of Psychology, Ateneo
de Manila University, Loyola Heights, Quezon City, Philippines. Email: rhechanova@
ateneo.edu.ph

214 HECHANOVA ET AL.
© International Association for Applied Psychology, 2003.
adjustment. In addition, better interpersonal skills were associated with greater
adjustment to general environment. Greater cultural novelty was associated
with less interactional adjustment. Role conflict, ambiguity, and discretion
were also strong predictors of work adjustment. A structural equations model
that illustrated causal relationships involving expatriate adjustment and
outcomes of job strain, job satisfaction, organisational citizenship, intent to
turnover, and job performance generated a good fit with the data.
INTRODUCTION
Each year a growing number of corporations adopt a multinational strategy
to remain successful in highly competitive markets, seeing opportunities for
profit in the customers and labor resources of other countries. The increase
in globalisation has led to more employees being sent on long-term interna-
tional assignments than ever before, with every indication that the use of
expatriates will continue to expand into the 21st century (Dolins, 1999). For
example, it has been estimated that more than 100,000 executives from for-
eign countries are relocated to the United States annually (Micco, 1998) and
there are around 3.3 million US expatriates around the world (International
Herald Tribune, 1997).
International assignments can be extremely challenging. Apart from
changes in job responsibilities, expatriates typically need to adjust to a dif-
ferent climate, a new culture, and a variety of language barriers. Expatriate
assignments also often involve either uprooting families to a new country or
causing the expatriates to live away from their families—either of which
puts strain on both expatriates and their families.
Understanding the factors that predict expatriate success is particularly
important because such assignments are very costly. On average, organisa-
tions spend over two and a half times more money to send an employee on
expatriate assignment than they would to hire locally (McGoldrick, 1997)
and a 3-year assignment is estimated to cost around one million dollars
(Allerton, 1997). Research on repatriated managers has found that more than
20 per cent leave the company within a year of returning to their nation of
origin, limiting any further return on the organisation’s investment. Even
worse, some firms lose their repatriates to competitors who know how to
use their skills better (Cook, 1997). There are also intangible costs to failed
global assignments such as the erosion of the company’s ability to recruit
and retain top quality candidates. This, in turn, increases the likelihood of
failure. Failure can also cause damage to a company’s important constituents
—local national employees, host government officials, local suppliers,
customers, and communities (Black, Gregersen, & Mendenhall, 1992).
Apart from costs to the organisation, failure has costs for the individual as
well such as a loss of self-esteem, self-confidence, and prestige among peers
(Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985).

ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF EMPLOYEES’ ADJUSTMENT 215
For the past two decades, research has examined a variety of causes for the
performance problems and dissatisfaction that are associated with foreign
assignments. Much of the research has focused on expatriate adjustment.
Although the term “adjustment” has been used in a general sense to indicate
feelings of acceptance and satisfaction (Brislin, 1981), acquisition of cul-
turally acceptable skills and behaviors (Bochner, McLeod, & Lin, 1977), or
the lack of mental health problems such as stress or depression (Berry &
Kim, 1988), it has also been measured directly as the psychological comfort
an individual feels in a new situation (Gregersen & Black, 1990). The re-
search on expatriate adjustment generally focused on three specific facets:
general, interaction, and work adjustment. General adjustment refers to the de-
gree of comfort with general living conditions, such as climate, food, housing,
cost of living, transportation, health facilities, etc. Interactional adjustment
involves comfortably socialising and interacting with host nationals. Finally,
work adjustment pertains to specific job responsibilities, performance
standards and expectations, and supervisory responsibilities (Black, 1988;
Black & Stephens, 1989).
There have been earlier attempts to review adjustment literature (e.g.
Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; Church, 1982; Mendenhall & Oddou,
1985). These reviews, however, have been qualitative in nature. The primary
goal of the present study was to summarise, in meta-analytic format, com-
mon predictors of expatriate adjustment. Although the literature in this area
is still accumulating, a summary of research that does exist would be useful
in highlighting current knowledge and pinpointing future areas of research.
In addition to the above-mentioned goal, work-role transition theories
suggest that adjustment to a new role and/or situation is fundamental to
subsequent outcomes in the role (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Nicholson, 1984).
Thus, adjustment is viewed as affecting other work-related outcomes such as
strain, job satisfaction, organisational commitment, performance, and turnover
intent.
Several years ago, there was little research that actually measured and
tested the relationship between adjustment and these outcomes among
expatriates (Naumann, 1993). Fortunately, the emergence of additional studies
and more contemporary quantitative methods now allow a review with an
empirical focus. In this light, a secondary goal of this study was to develop
and test a model that integrates how adjustment impacts other expatriate
outcomes in order to better understand the processes that lead to the eventual
success or failure of international assignments. The model conceptualised
adjustment as being multifaceted, composed of adjustment to both work
and non-work situations. Adjustment was also viewed as a temporal and
primary outcome in an expatriate’s assignment that would influence the devel-
opment of secondary or more distal expatriate adjustment (see Figure 1).
The model proposes, therefore, that overall adjustment, the focus of this

study, can affect both attitudes toward the job (e.g. job satisfaction) and
more general psychological reactions such as strain. The term strain is
borrowed here from the job stress literature and refers to an individual’s
aversive health or welfare reactions to environmental stressors (e.g. Beehr,
1995). Examples of strain from the studies reviewed here include feelings of
stress due to time constraints, feelings of anxiety, and (poor) mental health.
Job satisfaction, in turn, has been proposed elsewhere as leading to less
strain (e.g. Cooper & Marshall, 1976; O’Driscoll & Beehr, 1994) as well
as to greater organisational commitment (e.g. Ostroff, 1992). Strain was
posited to lead to poor performance and to turnover intent. Individuals with
more commitment to the parent organisation were expected to perform
better and to be less likely to leave the assignment prematurely (Cotton &
Tuttle, 1986; DeCotiis & Summers, 1987; Reichers, 1985; Shore & Martin,
1989). Finally, some past research among non-expatriates suggests a negat-
ive relationship between performance and turnover (McEvoy & Cascio, 1987;
Williams & Livingstone, 1994). The model generalised from this turnover
finding to suggest intent to leave the overseas assignment might be similarly
affected by performance. These relationships have been suggested in previ-
ous literature in regard to workers who are not expatriates. The data in the
current study were used to determine the extent to which the model would
explain expatriates’ intentions to leave their current overseas assignments.
METHODS
A computer-aided literature search was conducted using both management
and psychological databases to identify studies examining expatriate adjust-
ment and related outcomes. Both published and unpublished studies were
FIGURE 1. Conceptual model of expatriate outcomes.

included. A number of characteristics of each study were recorded separ-
ately: (a) sample size, (b) type of predictor, (c) reliability of scales used to
measure predictors, (d) type of criterion, (e) reliability of scale used to meas-
ure criterion, (f) effect size of the predictor–criterion relationship (e.g. a
correlation coefficient). Several decision rules were used to decide whether
a study should be included. First, only studies that utilised expatriates
(defined as employees who were sent by their companies on a cross-cultural
assignment) were included. Studies involving irrelevant samples, e.g. stu-
dents or volunteers, were excluded from this review. Second, in studies that
utilised same population (as determined by identical sample characteristics)
effect sizes were cited only once. Third, only predictor–criterion relations
that were cited in at least two studies were cited in the meta-analytic sum-
mary (however, predictors found in single studies were also discussed in the
qualitative review).
The final sample consisted of 42 empirical studies, nine of which were
unpublished dissertations or theses. Counting only independent studies, the
total number of respondents was estimated to be 5,210. The sample size,
sample characteristics, and methodology of the studies are summarised in
the Appendix. Using formulae obtained from Hunter and Schmidt (1990),
average correlation coefficients (r) weighted by sample size were computed
for each predictor and outcome along with variance of observed coefficients
(Sr2
), the variance due to sampling error (Se2
), and the variance remaining
after subtracting the variance due to sampling error (Sp2
). The average correla-
tion coefficient corrected for the reliabilities of the measures (rc) was likewise
computed for each predictor–outcome relationship. Since not all studies
reported the reliability of their scales, the average reliabilities across reported
scales were used. Credibility intervals for average corrected correlations
(95%) were computed.
RESULTS
The results are presented in two parts to address the goals of this study. The
first part describes the predictors of general, interactional, and work adjust-
ment. These were organised into individual, work-related, environmental,
and family-related predictors. The second part of the results includes the
relationship between adjustment and other outcomes in terms of average
correlations and a structural equation model.
Adjustment
Four factors were common predictors of all three facets of adjustment
(see Tables 1 to 3). Self-efficacy, or the belief in one’s competencies, was
correlated to all three facets of adjustment with correlations ranging from

218
HECHANOVA
ET
AL.
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003.
TABLE 1
Meta-analysis of Correlates of General Adjustment (∆Av = .84)
Factor ∆Av
No. of
coefficients
Total
Sample
Size r Sr2
Se2
Sp2
% Variance
Unexplained rc
95% Credibility
Interval
Lower
boundary
Upper
boundary
Individual
Age 5 947 −0.01 0.0146 0.0053 0.0093 64% −0.01 −0.03 0.00
Gender 5 947 −0.08 0.0130 0.0052 0.0078 60% −0.09 −0.10 −0.07
Education level 3 655 0.03 0.0148 0.0046 0.0102 69% 0.03 0.02 0.05
Interpersonal skills 2 324 0.22 0.0002 0.0056 0.0000 0% 0.24 0.23 0.24
Language skills 3 370 0.11 0.0435 0.0079 0.0356 82% 0.12 0.11 0.19
Self-efficacy 0.72 2 222 0.21 0.0049 0.0082 0.0000 0% 0.27 0.26 0.27
Work-related
Job level 3 524 −0.08 0.0060 0.0056 0.0000 0% −0.09 −0.10 −0.09
Work experience 3 340 0.04 0.0094 0.0088 0.0006 6% 0.05 0.03 0.05
Previous overseas experience 8 1,635 0.08 0.0150 0.0048 0.0102 68% 0.08 0.07 0.10
Tenure in organisation 5 1,297 −0.01 0.0093 0.0039 0.0055 59% −0.01 −0.02 0.00
Months on assignment 8 1,792 0.13 0.0246 0.0043 0.0203 82% 0.14 0.13 0.18
Outcome expectancy 0.82 4 534 0.05 0.0137 0.0075 0.0062 46% 0.06 0.05 0.07
Promotion 2 551 0.11 0.0064 0.0035 0.0029 45% 0.12 0.11 0.12
Role ambiguity 0.80 4 639 −0.13 0.0027 0.0060 0.0000 0% −0.16 −0.17 −0.16
Role discretion 0.84 4 639 0.08 0.0023 0.0062 0.0000 0% 0.10 0.09 0.10
Role conflict 0.81 4 639 −0.17 0.0015 0.0059 0.0000 0% −0.20 −0.21 −0.20
Training 6 1,021 −0.12 0.0018 0.0057 0.0000 0% −0.14 −0.15 −0.14
Environmental
Culture novelty 0.70 6 1,119 −0.08 0.0603 0.0053 0.0550 91% −0.11 −0.12 0.00
Frequency interaction—host 5 820 0.22 0.0126 0.0055 0.0071 56% 0.24 0.23 0.25
Frequency interaction—home 3 432 0.05 0.0478 0.0069 0.0409 86% 0.05 0.04 0.13
Family-related
Spouse interaction adjustment 0.86 2 324 0.36 0.0025 0.0047 0.0000 0% 0.42 0.41 0.42
Spouse general adjustment 0.91 3 355 0.55 0.0054 0.0041 0.0013 24% 0.64 0.63 0.64
Family adjustment 0.78 3 241 0.65 0.0059 0.0042 0.0017 29% 0.86 0.85 0.87
Note: ∆av is the average internal consistency reliability coefficient, r is the sample-weighted average, Sr2
is the variance of observed coefficients, Se2
is the variance due to
sampling error, Sp2
is the variance remaining after subtracting the variance due to sampling error, and rc is the sample-weighted average correcting for unreliability of
measurement. Credibility intervals were computed from weighted average corrected for unreliability of measurement. Gender was coded 0 male, 1 female.

ANTECEDENTS
AND
CONSEQUENCES
OF
EMPLOYEES’
ADJUSTMENT
219
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003. TABLE 2
Meta-analysis Results of Correlates of Interactional Adjustment (∆Av = .89)
Factor ∆Av
No. of
coefficients
Total
Sample
Size r Sr2
Se2
Sp2
% Variance
Unexplained rc
95% Credibility
Interval
Lower
boundary
Upper
boundary
Individual
Age 5 947 0.00 0.0024 0.0053 0.0000 0% −0.03 −0.04 −0.03
Gender 4 824 0.24 0.0480 0.0043 0.0437 91% 0.15 0.15 0.24
Education level 3 655 0.04 0.0199 0.0046 0.0153 77% −0.05 −0.06 −0.02
Self-efficacy 0.72 2 222 0.30 0.0001 0.0074 0.0000 0% 0.37 0.36 0.37
Job-related
Job level 3 524 0.06 0.0008 0.0057 0.0000 0% 0.08 0.07 0.08
Tenure in organisation 5 1,181 0.03 0.0053 0.0042 0.0011 20% 0.05 0.04 0.05
Months on assignment 4 768 0.21 0.0021 0.0047 0.0000 0% 0.17 0.16 0.17
Role ambiguity 0.84 2 251 −0.10 0.0148 0.0078 0.0000 0% −0.17 −0.18 −0.17
Role discretion 0.84 2 251 0.14 0.0012 0.0077 0.0000 0% 0.19 0.18 0.19
Role conflict 0.81 2 251 −0.10 0.0043 0.0078 0.0000 0% −0.09 −0.10 −0.09
Cross-cultural training 4 604 −0.03 0.0050 0.0066 0.0000 0% −0.06 −0.07 −0.06
Environmental
Culture novelty 0.72 5 976 −0.18 0.0019 0.0048 0.0000 0% −0.23 −0.24 −0.23
Frequency interaction—home 2 324 0.07 0.0131 0.0061 0.0070 53% −0.01 −0.02 0.00
Family-related
Note: ∆av is the average internal consistency reliability coefficient, r is the sample-weighted average, Sr2
is the variance due to
sampling error, Sp2

220
HECHANOVA
ET
AL.
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003. TABLE 3
Meta-analysis Results of Correlations of Work Adjustment (∆Av = .87)
Factor ∆Av
No. of
coefficients
Total
Sample
Size r Sr2
Se2
Sp2
% Variance
Unexplained rc
95% Credibility
Interval
Lower
boundary
Upper
boundary
Individual
Age 5 605 0.06 0.0028 0.0082 0.0000 0% 0.07 0.05 0.08
Gender 4 824 0.08 0.0030 0.0048 0.0000 0% 0.09 0.08 0.09
Education level 4 824 0.11 0.0296 0.0047 0.0249 84% 0.12 0.11 0.13
Self-efficacy 0.72 2 222 0.32 0.0009 0.0072 0.0000 0% 0.41 0.39 0.42
Job-related
Tenure in organisation 5 1,110 0.05 0.0040 0.0045 0.0000 0% 0.06 0.05 0.07
Months on assignment 5 937 0.14 0.0048 0.0051 0.0000 0% 0.15 0.14 0.16
Job level 3 524 −0.13 0.0001 0.0055 0.0000 0% −0.14 −0.15 −0.13
Role ambiguity 0.84 2 287 −0.35 0.0004 0.0054 0.0000 0% −0.41 −0.42 −0.40
Role discretion 0.82 2 287 0.37 0.0025 0.0052 0.0000 0% 0.43 0.42 0.44
Role conflict 0.81 2 287 −0.38 0.0144 0.0051 0.0093 65% −0.46 −0.47 −0.45
Cross-cultural training 4 604 −0.07 0.0083 0.0066 0.0017 21% −0.07 −0.08 −0.06
Environmental
Culture novelty 0.74 4 945 −0.06 0.0002 0.0042 0.0000 0% −0.07 −0.08 −0.07
Frequency interaction—home 3 505 0.18 0.0065 0.0056 0.0009 13% 0.19 0.18 0.20
Family-related
Family adjustment 3 281 0.17 0.2053 0.0102 0.1952 95% 0.18 0.16 0.20
Note: ∆av is the average internal consistency reliability coefficients, r is the sample-weighted average, Sr2
is the variance due
to sampling error, Sp2

rc = .27 to .41. Family and spouse adjustment were also strongly correlated with
expatriate general and interaction adjustment (rc = .32 to .64) and weakly
related with work adjustment (rc = .18). The importance of family adjustment
was also echoed in qualitative studies where expatriates cited family adjust-
ment as important to their success while on assignment (Arthur & Bennett,
1995; Ritchie, 1993). Finally, frequency of interaction with host nationals was
moderately correlated with general and work adjustment (rc = .24 to .28) and
was strongly correlated with interactional adjustment (rc = .49).
Apart from these common predictors, there were other factors that pre-
dicted each facet of adjustment. As seen in Table 2, interpersonal skills was
moderately correlated with expatriate general adjustment (rc = .24). Expatri-
ates with greater ability to accurately understand feelings of another person,
empathise with another person, and work effectively with other people
reported greater adjustment to their new environment. Language skills were
positively correlated with general adjustment (rc = .12). Hulinger’s (1982)
qualitative study of American expatriates and their local colleagues in
China found that the lack of language skills isolated expatriates and made
it difficult for them to communicate and understand the local culture.
Interestingly, amount of cross-cultural training received was weakly but neg-
atively correlated with general adjustment (rc = −.14). Other factors found to
be correlated with general adjustment in single studies included sociability,
self-monitoring, social support (Caligiuri, 1995), extraversion (Parker &
McEvoy, 1993), flexibility (Black & Stephens, 1989), participation (Li, 1995),
and presence of organisational sponsors (Gregersen & Black, 1992).
Table 3 shows the predictors of interactional adjustment. Expatriates who
were in cultures vastly different from their own reported more difficulty in
interacting with host nationals (rc = −.23). Women expatriates (rc = .15),
as well as those who had been on assignment longer, reported more adjust-
ment to interacting with host nationals (rc = .17). Job-related factors such as
role ambiguity (rc = −.17) and role discretion (rc = .19) were also moderately
correlated with interactional adjustment. Other factors associated with inter-
actional adjustment (as reported in single studies) included relationship
and perceptual skills (Cathcart, 1996), language skills (Rehany, 1994), flexib-
ility, social orientation, conflict resolution skills, willingness to interact (Black,
1990), self-monitoring (Harrison, Chadwick, & Scales, 1996), promotion
(Shaffer & Harrison, 1998), extraversion, and frequency of interaction with
expatriates (Parker & McEvoy, 1993). Ethnocentricity was also negatively
correlated with interactional adjustment.
Not surprisingly, job characteristics such as role ambiguity (rc = −.41),
role discretion (rc = .43), and role conflict (rc = −.46) were all moderately
correlated with expatriate work adjustment (see Table 3). Months on assign-
ment (rc = .15) and job level (rc = −.14) were associated with work adjust-
ment. Individuals who believed their assignment would benefit their career

(outcome expectancy) also reported greater work adjustment (rc = .14).
Amount of interaction with co-nationals was positively correlated with work
adjustment (rc = .19). Other work adjustment-related factors reported in
single studies were willingness to interact, flexibility, social orientation, and
conflict resolution (Black, 1990).
Relationships between Primary and
Secondary Outcomes
Based on the meta-analytic findings, the model was tested using a two-step
approach in analysing structural equation models (Anderson & Gerbing,
1988). The average correlation coefficients corrected for sampling error
are summarised in Table 4. A measurement model with eight observed and
six latent variables was tested. The variable adjustment had three indicators
(general, interactional, and work). The reliability of the variable adjustment
was adjusted for by taking the variance that the three subscales (general,
interaction, and work adjustment) have in common. The variables strain, job
satisfaction, organisational commitment, job performance, and turnover
intent had single indicators. These variables were corrected for unreliability
by fixing the loading between the observed and latent variable to be equal
to the square root of the reliability of the measure. The sample size used to
test the model was N = 1,010, representing the average sample size.
The measurement model had a χ2
(5, N = 1,010) = 81.72, p < .05. Although
this was significant, it must be noted that the chi-square statistic is sensitive
to sample size such that with a large enough sample, even a model that
reproduces that observed correlations quite well will yield a significant
χ2
. Other fit indices such as root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA = .12), goodness-of-fit index (GFI = .98), and comparative fit
index (CFI = .95) indicated the measurement model has reasonably good fit.
The whole model (measurement and structural model combined) likewise
displayed good fit. However, the path between strain and intent to leave
(β = .01) was neither statistically nor practically significant. This path was
removed and the more parsimonious model tested (Figure 2). The fit indices
of the revised model indicated good fit with χ2
(13, N = 1,010) = 90.69,
p < .05, and RMSEA = .07; GFI = .98, CFI = .96.
The revised model showed moderate relationships of adjustment with
strain and job satisfaction. This was consistent with conceptual models of
adjustment (Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; Aycan, 1997). However,
the model went beyond existing models in establishing the relationship
between primary (adjustment) and secondary outcomes (strain, job satis-
faction, organisational commitment, performance, and turnover intent).
Among the various outcomes, the weakest relationships were between strain
and organisational commitment and between organisational commitment

ANTECEDENTS
AND
CONSEQUENCES
OF
EMPLOYEES’
ADJUSTMENT
223
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003.
TABLE 4
Meta-analysis Results of Correlations Between Expatriation Outcomes
Outcome Correlate
No. of
coefficients
Total
Sample
Size r Sr2
Se2
Sp2
% Variance
Unexplained rc
95% Credibility
Interval
Lower
boundary
Upper
boundary
General
adjustment
Interaction adjustment 10 2,089 0.45 0.0359 0.0030 0.0329 91.57% 0.52 0.52 0.59
Work adjustment 11 2,156 0.33 0.0401 0.0041 0.0360 89.82% 0.40 0.39 0.47
Strain 2 227 −0.26 0.0127 0.0077 0.0050 39.27% −0.31 −0.33 –0.31
Job satisfaction 3 679 0.19 0.0110 0.0041 0.0069 62.67% 0.22 0.22 0.24
OC 3 896 0.07 0.0414 0.0033 0.0381 91.99% 0.08 0.07 0.16
Performance 2 292 0.13 0.0600 0.0066 0.0534 88.95% 0.15 0.14 0.25
Turnover intent 4 899 −0.15 −0.0350 0.0043 0.0000 0.00% −0.20 −0.21 −0.20
Interaction
adjustment
Work adjustment 8 1,508 0.34 0.0036 0.0041 0.0000 0.00% 0.39 0.38 0.39
Strain 2 227 −0.25 0.0034 0.0077 0.0000 0.00% −0.28 −0.29 −0.29
OC 3 896 0.06 0.0018 0.0033 0.0000 0.00% 0.06 0.05 0.05
Performance 2 292 0.17 0.0110 0.0065 0.0046 41.40% 0.21 0.20 0.22
Turnover intent 3 679 −0.16 0.0079 0.0042 0.0037 46.94% −0.27 −0.28 −0.26
Work
adjustment
OC 2 444 0.22 0.0018 0.0041 0.0000 0.00% 0.26 0.25 0.27
Performance 2 292 0.40 0.0400 0.0049 0.0351 87.80% 0.46 0.45 0.47
Turnover intent 2 720 −0.14 0.0227 0.0027 0.0200 88.16% −0.18 −0.18 −0.17

224
HECHANOVA
ET
AL.
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003.
Strain Job satisfaction 3 518 −0.39 0.01 0.0042 0.0013 23.70% −0.48 −0.47 −0.48
OC 1 123 0.18 0.0400 0.0000 0.0300 92.00% 0.18 0.01 0.36
Performance 2 241 −0.12 0.09 0.0081 0.0864 91.42% −0.16 −0.14 −0.17
Turnover intent 3 518 0.24 0.00 0.0052 0.0000 0.00% 0.38 0.39 0.36
Job
satisfaction
OC 4 957 0.40 0.2227 0.0030 0.2197 98.66% 0.47 0.46 0.90
Performance 2 241 0.23 0.2500 0.0075 0.2425 97.00% 0.28 0.27 0.77
Turnover intent 4 799 −0.45 0.0037 0.0032 0.0005 12.34% −0.57 −0.58 −0.57
Org
commitment
Performance 1 123 0.43 0.0400 0.0000 0.0200 88.00% 0.31 0.55 0.77
Turnover intent 4 744 −0.3343 0.0335 0.0043 0.0292 87.26% −0.45 −0.46 −0.44
Outcome:
Performance
Turnover intent 2 227 −0.38 0.0841 0.0065 0.0776 92.32% −0.51 −0.52 −0.49
Note: r is the sample-weighted average, Sr2
is the variance due to sampling error, Sp2
is the variance remaining after subtracting
the variance due to sampling error, and rc is the sample-weighted average correcting for unreliability of measurement. Credibility intervals were computed from weighted
average corrected for unreliability of measurement. ∆av (average internal consistency reliability coefficients) for the outcomes are: .85 for general adjustment, .89 for
interaction adjustment, .87 for work adjustment, .80 for strain, .84 for job satisfaction, .83 for organisational commitment, .81 for performance, and .73 for turnover intent.
Outcome Correlate
No. of
coefficients
Total
Sample
Size r Sr2
Se2
Sp2
% Variance
Unexplained rc
95% Credibility
Interval
Lower
boundary
Upper
boundary
TABLE 4
Continued

and intent to leave the assignment (β = .09). The strongest relationships
were between job satisfaction and organisational commitment (β = .66) and
between organisational commitment and performance (β = .46).
Although the fit of the model was fairly robust, the variance of the out-
comes explained by the model was somewhat modest. Squared multiple
correlations were R2
= .29 for strain, R2
= .14 for job satisfaction, R2
= .38
for organisational commitment, R2
= .35 for performance, and R2
= .33 for
turnover intent. This was not unexpected, however, because there are many
other factors that would influence outcomes such as job satisfaction, perform-
ance, and turnover intent. Despite this limitation, the model is important
because it highlights the importance of adjustment and its impact on other
work outcomes among expatriates.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
An obvious limitation of this review stems from the relatively low number
of studies that focus on expatriates. Given the increasing interest in global-
isation and the cost and value of expatriation, it is surprising that there have
not been more solid empirical studies conducted on expatriates. This may
reflect, in part, the difficulty of collecting data for international research.
A second limitation of this study is related to the interdependence of
samples. Of the 37 studies, eight were by the same group of authors (Black,
Gregersen, and colleagues.). To the extent that studies had any overlapping
samples, correlation coefficients from a more limited number of studies were
cited. However, there is the danger of interdependence that results in the
over-weighting of some studies in the estimation of the relationship between
the predictors and the outcomes.
FIGURE 2. Revised model of expatriate outcomes.

This study developed and tested a model of the relationship between
expatriate outcomes using meta-analytic findings. Also related to the small
number of studies, two correlations (between organisational commitment with
both strain and performance) were based on a single study (Rehany, 1994).
The inclusion of these correlation coefficients was necessary to generate and
test a model describing the relationship among expatriation outcomes.
More studies measuring these variables are necessary to establish the rela-
tionships between these variables.
IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
This review has several implications for both research and practice.
Research Implications
The increasing number of studies that seek to establish the empirical rela-
tionship between predictors and criterion outcomes indicate the extent to
which expatriation research has developed in the past 20 years. The increased
use of reliable instruments in measuring the outcomes also increases the
confidence in the quality of the results.
There remain, however, many gaps in the studies that may be addressed
in future research. The first is the dearth of studies that utilise reference
data or control groups to which expatriates may be compared. One sort of
comparison group would be people who experienced job changes but not
changes that included expatriate assignments. There are many unanswered
questions that may be addressed by the use of control or comparison
groups. How different is the adjustment process of domestic job-changers
vs. expatriates? Are there differences in the factors that predict success of
domestic job-changers versus that of expatriates? What are the differences
in work outcomes of domestic relocators vs. expatriates when measured
during the same time frame on the new assignment?
Another weakness of the studies on expatriates is the over-reliance on
cross-sectional rather than longitudinal designs. Only three of the 37
studies reviewed utilized longitudinal designs (Caligiuri, Hyland, Joshi,
& Bross, 1998; Fisher & Shaw, 1994; Ruben & Kealey, 1979). This is unfor-
tunate because cross-culture adjustment is a dynamic process with many
authors describing the pattern in terms of a U-curve (Adler, 1975; Black &
Mendenhall, 1991). Longitudinal designs are also important because the
salience of certain predictors may vary in time and some factors may be
more important at the onset of an assignment than later in the adjustment
process.
Still another issue related to research design is common method variance.
Common method variance problems can result when individuals generate

responses that are systematically correlated because the sample people provide
information on both the independent and dependent variables. Although
this issue is pervasive in field research in the social sciences, it is particularly
salient when measuring variables that are more susceptible to perceptual
bias, such as self-rated family adjustment and job performance. For ex-
ample, although the relationship between expatriate and family adjustment
was fairly robust, the high correlation must be interpreted with caution.
Although spousal adjustment was measured by obtaining ratings from
spouses, two studies that measured family adjustment relied on the expatri-
ates themselves to report their family’s level of adjustment (Cathcart, 1996;
Black, 1988). Thus, some of the average correlations may have be over-
estimated and influenced by response set bias.
The studies focused on a variety of outcomes; however, there are still
outcomes salient to expatriates that have not been thoroughly researched
such as commitment to the local organisation. Commitment in these studies
was measured as commitment to the parent organisation rather than to the
expatriate’s local unit. This may account for its weak relationship with the
intention to leave the local unit. Although commitment to the parent organ-
isation is an important outcome, Boxberger (1997) notes that expatriates
often feel as though they are just passing through their country of assignment
rather than viewing themselves as part of the local operation’s long-
term development. Given that the level of commitment to the local organ-
isation may influence the success of the expatriate, it is important that more
research focus on commitment to the local organisation. In addition,
although the findings on turnover intent are useful, an important piece of
the puzzle is missing—actual turnover. This is important, given findings
that turnover intent is only a moderate predictor of turnover behavior
(Kirschenbaum & Weisberg, 1990). Unfortunately, only one of the studies
reviewed sought to obtain data on actual turnover (Guzzo, Noonan, &
Elron, 1994). However, only three of the 131 initial sample were unambigu-
ous cases of retention, and therefore, turnover data were excluded from
their analysis. Black and Gregersen (1990) had earlier reported difficulty in
obtaining hard data because most American multinational firms’ reports of
expatriate turnover are very inadequate.
There are also many questions that remain unanswered with regard to
expatriation and its outcomes. How do the individual, family, organisa-
tional, and environmental factors identified fit into the model of expatriate
outcomes that was developed and tested? Are the relationships between the
predictors and expatriate outcomes moderated by variables such as nation-
ality of the expatriate or nature of assignment? Are there significant differ-
ences in predictors of expatriate vs. domestic job-changer success? Clearly,
finding the answers to these questions will require more studies with sound
research designs.

Implications for Practice
An often-cited application of expatriate research has been in the area of
expatriate selection. Ironically, one-half of multinational companies don’t
have structured procedures for selecting expatriates, 92 per cent rely on
manager recommendations, and fewer than 10 per cent of companies use
any type of testing or screening (Human Resource Institute, 1998). Perhaps
one reason for the lack of structure in the selection process is the lack of
empirical evidence of what predictors should be used. There appears to be
a heavy reliance on technical skills as the basis for choosing expatriates
(Schell & Solomon, 1996). Although technical skills may be important when
the goal of the assignment is to transfer skills, this review also underscores
the importance of factors other than technical abilities such as individual
and family factors.
Given the importance of the family adjustment on the different outcomes,
it is important to provide adequate assistance and support to expatriates
and their families. A recent Berlitz/PHH International Relocation study
found that three-quarters of respondents rated spouse counseling and
spouse career support as important resources. However, 79 per cent of the
firms surveyed did not provide these services. As a result, many expatriates
said they felt their spouses and children were generally forgotten (Martinez,
1997). It is important for organisations to treat the expatriate’s spouse as
part of a team and provide families with adequate support in relocation
issues such as relocation, spouse’s job search, housing, and health care.
Expatriate spouses also often have extensive contact with host nationals.
Companies can assist them by providing them with language training and
arranging company-sponsored socials to facilitate their interaction with
host nationals. Just as it is important for expatriates to maintain communica-
tions with their home office, it is also important for the expatriate’s family
to keep in touch with family and friends back home. This can be facilitated
if organisations provide family members with e-mail, long distance access,
or home visits.
Job design, particularly characteristics such as role conflict, ambiguity,
and discretion all emerged as important predictors of work adjustment.
Expatriate assignments are often marred by policy and procedural conflicts
that occur between the parent company and its foreign operations (Black
& Gregersen, 1990). Allowing expatriates to harness their discretionary
powers and providing them the opportunity to clarify expectations to
reduce conflicting job demands are some ways that organisations can facil-
itate expatriates’ adjustment to their work assignment.
The results also highlight the importance of frequent interactions with
host nationals in facilitating adjustment. Many expatriates have the prop-
ensity to interact only with other expatriates rather than with host nationals.

Although the social support received from other expatriates will certainly
be helpful, host nationals are best equipped to provide information that
will reduce uncertainty and facilitate adjustment to the host culture. Organ-
isations can facilitate such interaction by encouraging expatriates to live
outside expatriate communities or through job designs that require regular
interaction with host nationals. There are other ways that organisations can
foster such interaction. Companies may, for example, provide expatriates
with a sponsor who is a host national. Not unlike the mentoring described
earlier, local sponsors can help the expatriate network with host country
nationals.
CONCLUSION
This review and meta-analysis sought to determine the individual, job, envir-
onmental, and family-related variables that predict expatriate adjustment.
Although the number of high quality empirical studies using expatriate
samples makes it difficult to make robust conclusions, this study makes sev-
eral significant contributions to current knowledge. First, it provides strong
empirical support for the importance of factors such as interpersonal skills,
self-efficacy, role discretion, role ambiguity, role conflict, frequency of inter-
action with host nationals, culture novelty, and family adjustment for the
development of expatriate adjustment. The use of meta-analytic results in
structural modeling of relationships among the expatriate outcomes also
captures the expatriation processes that are not shown in the individual
studies.

230
HECHANOVA
ET
AL.
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003.
APPENDIX: Study Characteristics
Author n Nationality Location Job level % Male
Ave.
Age Methodology Timing
1. Black & Gregersen (1990) 77 American Japan managers 100 46 survey on assignment
2. Black & Gregersen (1991) 220 American Asia managers 94 44 survey on assignment
3. Black & Stephens (1989) 220 American Asia managers 94 42 survey on assignment
4. Black (1990) 67 Japanese USA managers 100 43 survey on assignment
5. Stening & Hammer (1992)a 123 Japanese Thailand managers 100 41 survey on assignment
6. Stening & Hammer (1992)b 62 American Japan managers 100 46 survey on assignment
7. Stening & Hammer (1992)c 36 American Thailand managers 100 46 survey on assignment
8. Stening & Hammer (1992)d 70 Japanese USA managers 100 42 survey on assignment
9. Li (1995) 104 Mixed Asia managers 83 survey on assignment
10. Black (1988) 67 Japanese USA managers 100 46 survey on assignment
11. Dunbar (1992) 149 managers survey on assignment
12. Cathcart (1996) 31 American Mexico managers 95 interview on assignment
13. Caligiuri, Hyland, Joshi,
& Bross (1998)
110 Mixed Mixed managers 95 38 interview pre-departure &
6–9 mos on assignment
14. Rehany (1994) 123 Canadian Japan managers 92 41 survey on assignment
15. Shaffer & Harrison (1998) 452 Mixed Mixed managers 89 43 survey on assignment
16. Parker & McEvoy (1993) 169 Mixed Mixed 57 36 survey on assignment
17. Hawes & Kealey (1981) 160 Canadian Mixed survey on assignment
18. Naumann (1993) 152 American Asia managers 88 38 survey on assignment
19. Armes & Ward (1988) 61 Mixed Singapore 41 39 survey on assignment
20. Gregersen & Black (1996) 173 Japanese Mixed managers 99 38 survey 1 yr. after assignment
21. Ruben & Kealey (1979) 14 Canadian Kenya technical survey 1–3 and 8–10 months
on assignment

ANTECEDENTS
AND
CONSEQUENCES
OF
EMPLOYEES’
ADJUSTMENT
231
©
International
Association
for
Applied
Psychology,
2003.
22. Bhuian & Al-Jabri (1996) 504 Mixed Saudi Arabia mixed survey on assignment
23. Birdseye & Hill (1995) 115 Mixed Mixed managers 87 survey on assignment
24. Feldman & Thomas (1992) 110 Mixed Mixed managers 98 45 survey on assignment
25. Schneider (1997) 90 Mixed China mixed 85 interview on assignment
26. Fisher & Shaw (1994) 99 American Mixed mixed Pre-departure & after
3mos on assignment
27. Gregersen & Black (1992) 321 American Asia managers 95 45 survey on assignment
28. Gregersen & Black (1990) 220 American Asia managers 95 45 survey on assignment
29. Guzzo, Nooman,
& Elron (1994)
148 Mixed Mixed 93 43 survey on assignment
30. Harrison, Chadwick,
& Scales (1996)
99 Europe 83% managers 62 45 survey on assignment
31. Kealey (1989) 277 Canadian Mixed interview
& survey
on assignment
32. Naumann (1991) 157 American Asia 92% managers 92 survey on assignment
33. Turcotte (1996) 104 Canadian Mixed mixed 88 43 survey on assignment
34. Downes (1997) 230 American Mixed 75% managers 92 survey on assignment
35. Lovingood (1995) 205 Mixed USA managers 84 survey on assignment
36. Nieves (1997) 181 American CA, Chile
& Mexico
mixed 64 44 survey on assignment
37. Caligiuri (1995) 143 Mixed Mixed 83 40 survey on assignment
38. Sinangil & Ones (1997) 220 Mixed Turkey mixed 41 33 survey on assignment
39. Deller (1997) 36 German
& Austrian
Korea managers 100 43 survey on assignment
40. Caligiuri (1997) 115 Mixed Mixed managers 82 40 survey on assignment
41. Caligiuri (2000) 143 American Mixed 83 40 survey on assignment
42. Garonzik, Brockner,
& Siegel (2000)
128 Mixed Mixed managers 95 37 survey on assignment
Author n Nationality Location Job level % Male
Ave.
Age Methodology Timing

REFERENCES
Adler, P.S. (1975). The transitional experience: An alternative view of culture shock.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15(4), 13–23.
Allerton, H. (1997). Expatriate gaps. Training & Development, July, 7–8.
Anderson, J.C., & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
Armes, K., & Ward, C. (1988). Cross-cultural transitions and sojourner adjustment
in Singapore. Journal of Social Psychology, 129(2), 273–275.
Arthur, W. Jr., & Bennett, W. (1995). The international assignee: The relative import-
ance of factors perceived to contribute to success. Personnel Psychology, 48(1),
99–114.
Aycan, Z. (1997). Acculturation of expatriate managers: A process model of adjustment
and performance. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management,
Vol. 4 (pp. 1–40). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Beehr, T.A. (1995). Basic organizational psychology. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Beehr, T.A., & Newman, J.E. (1978). Job stress, employee health and organizational
effectiveness: A facet analysis, model and literature review. Personnel Psychology,
31, 665–699.
Berry, J.W., & Kim, U. (1988). Acculturation and mental health. In P. Daasen &
J.W. Berry (Eds.), Health and cross-cultural psychology (pp. 62–89). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Bhuian, S.N., & Ibrahim, A.M. (1996). Expatriate turnover tendencies in Saudi
Arabia: An empirical examination. International Journal of Organizational Ana-
lysis, 4(4), 393–407.
Birdseye, M.G., & Hill, J.S. (1995). Individual, organizational/work and environ-
mental influences on expatriate turnover tendencies: An empirical study. Journal
of International Business Studies, 26(4), 787–813.
Black, J.S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriates in Japan.
Journal of International Business Studies, (27)9, 277–293.
Black, J.S. (1990). The relationship of personal characteristics with the adjustment
of Japanese expatriate managers. Management International Review, 30, 119–134.
Black, J.S., & Gregersen, H.B. (1990). Expectations, satisfaction and intention to
leave of American expatriate managers in Japan. International Journal of Inter-
cultural Relations, 14(4), 485–506.
Black, J.S., & Gregersen, H.B. (1991). The other half of the picture: Antecedents of
spouse cross-cultural adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,
22(3), 461–477.
Black, J.S., Gregersen, H.B., & Mendenhall, M. (1992). Toward a theoretical frame-
work of repatriation adjustment. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4),
737–760.
Black, J.S., & Mendenhall, M. (1991). The U-curve adjustment hypothesis revisited:
A review and theoretical framework. Journal of International Business Studies,
22(2), 225–247.
Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a comprehensive model
of international adjustment: An integration of multiple perspectives. Academy of
Management Review, 16(2), 291–317.

Black, J.S., & Stephens, G.K. (1989). The influence of the spouse on American
expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments.
Journal of Management, 15(4), 529–544.
Bochner, S., McLeod, B.M., & Lin, A. (1977). Friendship patterns of overseas stu-
dents: A functional model. International Journal of Psychology, 12(4), 277–294.
Boxberger, M. (1997). Finders, keepers. International Business, Sept./October, 10–12.
Brett, J.M., & Webel, J.D. (1980). The effect of job transfer on employees and their
families. Final report. Washington, DC: Employee Relocation Council.
Brislin, R. (1981). Cross-cultural encounters. New York: Pergamon Press.
Caligiuri, P. (1995). Individual characteristics related to effective performance in cross-
cultural work settings. Unpublished dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.
Caligiuri, P. (1997). Assessing expatriate success: Beyond just being there. In Z. Aycan
(Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4, pp. 117–140). Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press.
Caligiuri, P. (2000). The big five personality characterstics as predictors of ex-
patriate’s desire to terminate the assignment and supervisor-rated performance.
Personnel Psychology, 53(1), 67–88.
Caligiuri, P.M., Hyland, M.A., Joshi, A., & Bross, A. (1998). Testing a theoretical
model for examining the relationship of family adjustment and expatriate’s work
adjustment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(4), 598–614.
Campbell, J.P. (1990). Modeling the performance pediction problem in industrial
and organizational psychology. In M.D. Dunnette & L.M. Hough (Eds.), Hand-
book of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd edn, Vol. 1, pp. 687–732).
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Cathcart, S.J. (1996). Adjustment variables, factors and outcomes in the lives of US
managers of Maquiladoras: An exploratory study. Unpublished thesis, Texas A
& M University, TX.
Church, A.T. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 540–572.
Cook, J. (1997). Special treatment. Human Resource Executive, November, 43–46.
Cooper, C.L., & Marshall, J. (1976). Occupational sources of stress. A review of the
literature relating to coronary heart disease and mental health. Journal of Occu-
pational Psychology, 49(1), 11–28.
Cotton, J.I., & Tuttle, J.M. (1986). Employee turnover: A meta-analysis and review
with implications for research. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 55–70.
Dawis, R.V., & Lofquist, L.H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment.
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
DeCotiis, T.A., & Summers, T.P. (1987). A path analysis of a model of the anteced-
ents and consequences of organization commitment. Human Relations, 40(7),
445–470.
Deller, J. (1997). Expatriate selection: Possibilities and limitations of using person-
ality scales. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4,
pp. 93–116). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Dolins, I. (1999). 1998 Global Relocation Survey: Current trends regarding expatri-
ate activity. Employment Relations Today, Winter, 1–11.
Downes, M. (1997). An organizational learning approach to expatriate cross-
cultural adjustment, organizational commitment and satisfaction. Unpublished
dissertation, Florida International University, FL.

Dunbar, E. (1992). Adjustment and satisfaction of expatriate US personnel. Interna-
tional Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16(1), 1–16.
Feldman, D.C., & Thomas, D.C. (1992). Career management issues facing expatri-
ates. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(2), 271–294.
Feldman, D.C., & Tompson, H.B. (1993). Expatriation, repatriation, and domestic
geographical relocation: An empirical investigation of adjustment to new job
assignments. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(3), 507–529.
Fisher, C.D., & Shaw, J.B. (1994). Relocation attitudes and adjustment. A longitu-
dinal study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(3), 209–224.
Gail, R.C. (1996). Repatriation adjustment training and its effect on turnover of
repatriate executives: An empirical study. Unpublished thesis, Nova Southeastern
University.
Garonzik, R., Brockner, J., & Siegel, P. (2000). Identifying international assignees
at risk for premature departure: The interactive effect of outcome favorability
and procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(1), 13–20.
Gregersen, H.B., & Black, J.S. (1990). A multi-faceted approach to expatriate
retention in international assignments. Group and Organization Studies, 15(4),
461–485.
Gregersen, H.B., & Black, J.S. (1992). Antecedents to commitment to a parent
company and a foreign operation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(6), 65–
90.
Gregersen, H.B., & Black, J.S. (1996). Multiple commitments upon repatriation: The
Japanese experience. Journal of Management, 22(2), 209–229.
Guzzo, R.A., Noonan, K.A., & Elron, E. (1994). Expatriate managers and the psy-
chological contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 617–626.
Harris, M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self–supervisor, self–peer
and peer–supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 43–62.
Harrison, J.K., Chadwick, M., & Scales, M. (1996). The relationship between cross-
cultural adjustment and the personality variables of self-efficacy and self-monitoring.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20(2), 167–188.
Hawes, F., & Kealey, D.J. (1981). An empirical study of Canadian technical assist-
ance. Adaptation and effectiveness in overseas assignment. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 5, 239–255.
Hulinger, H. (1982). Antecedents of intercultural adjustment of American expatriates
in the People’s Republic of China. Unpublished dissertation, College of William
and Mary, VA.
Human Resource Institute (1998). Comprehensive personnel management report:
Global staffing (Research Report). St Petersburg, FL.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis. Correcting error and
bias in research findings. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
International Herald Tribune (13 October 1997). How many US citizens live else-
where? London.
Kealey, D.J. (1989). A study of cross-cultural effectiveness. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 13(3), 387–428.
Kealey, D.J., & Protheroe, D.R. (1996). The effectiveness of cross-cultural training
for expatriates: An assessment of the literature on the issue. International Journal
of Intercultural Relations, 20(2), 141–165.

Kirschenbaum, A., & Weisberg, J. (1990). Predicting worker turnover: An assess-
ment of intent on actual separation. Human Relations, 43(9), 829–847.
Li, L. (1995). Antecedents and consequences of expatriate satisfaction. An empirical
investigation of hotel managers in Pacific Asian countries. Unpublished disserta-
tion, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, VA.
Locke, E.A. (1976). Nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.),
Handbook of industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Palo Alto,
CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Lovingood, D.F. (1995). A study of the reported relationship between adjustment
problems and job relocation to America for foreign expatriates. Unpublished
dissertation, Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, TN.
McEvoy, G.H., & Cascio, W.F. (1987). Do good or poor performers leave? A meta-
analysis of the relationship between performance and turnover. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 30(4), 744–762.
McGoldrick, F. (1997). Expatriate compensation and benefit practices of US and
Canadian firms: Survey results. International HR Journal, Summer, 13–17.
Martinez, M.N. (1997). Study targets expatriates’ extensive assistance needs. HR
News, February, B4–B5.
Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturation:
A review. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 39–47.
Micco, L. (1998). Study: Homesickness of foreign-born executives too often is over-
looked. HR News, February, 12.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W., & Steers, R.M. (1982). Employee organization linkages.
The psychology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York: Academic
Press.
Naumann, E. (1991). Organizational predictors of expatriate job satisfaction.
Journal of International Business Studies, 1, 61–80.
Naumann, E. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment
among expatriate managers. Group and Organization Management, 18(2), 153–
187.
Nicholson, N. (1984). A theory of work-role transitions. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 29(2), 172–191.
Nieves, L.S. (1997). Correlates of cross-cultural adjustment: A study of American
diplomatic expatriates assigned to NAFTA countries. Unpublished dissertation,
The California School of Professional Psychology, Alameda, CA.
O’Driscoll, M.P., & Beehr, T.A. (1994). Supervisor behaviors, role stressors and
uncertainty as predictors of personal outcomes for subordinates. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 15(2), 141–155.
Ones, D.S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1997). Personality determinants and the predictors
of aspects of expatriate job success. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to
employee management (Vol. 4, pp. 63–92). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes and performance:
An organizational level analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 963–974.
Parker, B., & McEvoy, G.M. (1993). Initial examination of a model of intercultural
adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17, 355–379.
Rehany, G.S. (1994). Cross-cultural training and expatriate adjustment: A social
cognitive theory perspective. Unpublished thesis, Concordia University, CA.

Reichers, A. (1985). A review and reconceptualization of organization commitment.
Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 465–476.
Ritchie, N.K. (1993). Perceived cultural barriers to the adjustment of American
managers in German subsidiaries of American companies. Unpublished disserta-
tion, Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, TN.
Ruben, B.D., & Kealey, D.J. (1979). Behavioral assessment of communication com-
petency and the prediction of cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 3, 15–47.
Schell, M.S., & Solomon, C.M. (1996). Capitalizing on the global marketplace: A
strategic guide for expatriate management. Chicago: Irwin Professional Publishing.
Shaffer, M.A., & Harrison, D.A. (1998). Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from
international assignments: Work, nonwork and family influences. Personnel Psy-
chology, 51, 87–115.
Shore, L.M., & Martin, H.J. (1989). Job satisfaction and organization commitment
in relation to work performance and turnover intent. Human Relations, 42, 625–
638.
Schneider, K. (1997). Transpatriate success factors: A concurrent validation study in
China. Unpublished dissertation, University of Houston, TX.
Sinangil, H.K., & Ones, D.S. (1997). Empirical investigation of the host country per-
spective in expatriate management. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee
management (Vol. 4, pp. 449–464). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Stening, B.W., & Hammer, M.R. (1992). Cultural baggage and the adaption of
expatriate American and Japanese managers. Management International Review,
32, 77–89.
Tett, R.P., & Meyer, J.P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organization commitment, turnover
intention and turnover: Path analysis based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel
Psychology, 46, 259–291.
Turcotte, C. (1996). Determinants of success in international assignments for Quebec
expatriates and their spouses. Unpublished thesis, Concordia University, CA.
Williams, C.R., & Livingstone, L.P. (1994). Another look at the relationship
between performance and voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal,
37(2), 269–298.

Antecedents And Consequences Of Employees Adjustment To Overseas Assignment A Meta-Analytic Review

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Antecedents And Consequences Of Employees Adjustment To Overseas Assignment A Meta-Analytic Review

Similar to Antecedents And Consequences Of Employees Adjustment To Overseas Assignment A Meta-Analytic Review (20)

More from Kelly Lipiec

More from Kelly Lipiec (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Antecedents And Consequences Of Employees Adjustment To Overseas Assignment A Meta-Analytic Review