Evaluation Studies of Cross-Cultural Training Program


Published on

Evaluation Studies of Cross-Cultural Training Program: A Review of the Literature From 1988 to 2000. An Executive Summary.

Published in: Education, Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evaluation Studies of Cross-Cultural Training Program

  1. 1. EVALUATION STUDIES OF CROSS-CULTURAL TRAINING PROGRAMS A Review of the Literature From 1988 to 2000 Mu Tong & Dr. Hora Tjitra www.SinauOnline.com Based on: LISA N. LITTRELL, EDUARDO SALAS: A Review of Cross-Cultural Training: Best Practices, Guidelines, and Research Needs. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 2005. p305-334
  2. 2. Contents 1. Past Reviews 2. The Purpose of This Review 3. The Efforts 4. Findings 5. Dependent Variables 6. The Rigor of the Studies 7. Conclusions and Implications
  3. 3. Past Reviews Black and Mendenhall (1990) Deshpande and Viswesvaran (1992) Bhagat and Prien (1996) Kealey and Protheroe (1996) Bhawuk and Brislin (2000)
  4. 4. Past Reviews Some evaluation Others have doubts Don’t establish a “link” confirms the effect of regarding the quality of between training and the CCT on trainees’ these studies whether measured effect on a cross-cultural skill, CCT effectiveness has dependent variable. adjustment, and been demonstrated. performance. In general, it remains The result for the same The effectiveness of CCT unclear which method of studies does not always in these studies was CCT is overall most correspond in different regarded as too positive effective and which reviews due to the different in previous reviews. methods are most perspectives taken by the effective in specific reviewers. contingencies.
  5. 5. Purpose of This Review
  6. 6. The Efforts English language vs. Multiple languages: Eglish,French,German, Italian,and Spanish. Specific domains vs. Wide varietay of disciplines: Management, military studies, human resource management, cross-cultural psychology, intercultural relation, immigrant studies, education, anthropology, political science and diplomacy,.
  7. 7. Findings Participants ✓ U.S. trainees were evaluated most. ✓ Over half of the treatment groups were students. ✓ Lack of manager subjects. Methods ✓ Lectures, culture assimilators and class discussions were the most often used. ✓ Training was composed of three or more methods .
  8. 8. Training Methods Used in the Evaluation Studies
  9. 9. Findings Timing ✓ The training took place either prior to, during, or independently of a sojourn in another country. ✓ The duration of the training varied from1/2 to 50 hours over a period of time ranging from 1 day to 8 months. Focus ✓ Most training focus on a specific culture. ✓ Others were culture general or a combination. ✓ Japanese, U.S. and Canadian cultures were the most common focus.
  10. 10. Dependent Variables The ability to make isomorphic attributions Knowledge awareness of cultural differences Problem-solving ability, the ability to deal with cross-culture Behavior misunderstandings, display of cultural sensitivity Cultural interest, positive attitude toward members of other Attitude cultures, trainee ethnocentrism. Perceived well-being, health and safety concerns, adjusted to Adjustment a foreign culture, perceived control of the environment. Academic achievement, Performance contribution to company goal. Satisfaction Trainee satisfaction
  11. 11. Cross-Cultural Training Effectiveness
  12. 12. The Rigor of the Studies 1. Control groups 2. Pre- and post-test 3. Randomly assign 4. Long-term effects 5. Different measurement method 6. Placebo and Hawthorne Effect
  13. 13. Conclusions and Implications Quantitative and Qualitative Time Span Wintry Doctrine Low Motivation Moderators The Paucity of theory Cooperation and Resistance
  14. 14. Thanks You An y co m m e n ts & q u e s ti o n s are welcome Contact me at hora_t@sianuonline.com www.SinauOnline.com @ Tjitra, 2010 14