Search results

Participation in cross-national assessment is becoming a global phenomenon. While there were only 43 countries that participated in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2000, the number of participating countries/economies has increased to 65 in 2009. To understand this global trend, this chapter seeks to answer the following research questions: What are the real incentives for developing countries to participate in cross-national assessments? What do they gain from actual participation in cross-national assessments, given that there are many constraints and barriers associated with test participation? It employs country-level fixed effects to test the hypothesis that there is a positive association between participation in cross-national assessments and foreign aid to education. This study shows that countries that participate in major cross-national assessments receive, on average, 37 percent more foreign aid to education than countries that do not participate in major cross-national assessments, while holding all other variables constant. Although further research is necessary to make a causal warrant of the association between participation in cross-national assessment and education aid, the results of this study have great implications for developing countries that are considering participating in cross-national assessments.

Purpose – A considerable body of literature has evolved on the topic of appropriate research methodology for cross-national data collection. Additionally, prior commentaries on cross-national research in the marketing have cited significant deficiencies in this body of research in terms of the theoretical foundations, methods, and analytical techniques used. The purpose of this chapter is to summarize guidelines for conducting cross-national research in marketing and assess the degree to which these rules are being followed.

Design/methodology/approach – The literature on cross-national research methods in marketing studies is first reviewed to identify key issues and methodological guidelines. A content analysis of cross-national studies appearing in 10 major journals in the marketing and advertising field for the period from 2005 to 2010 is conducted to assess whether the guidelines for researchers are being followed. The chapter also explores whether recent research is addressing key deficiencies identified by prior commentaries on this body of research.

Findings –Results are indicative of some promising trends. A wider range of theory bases, methodological techniques, and analytical techniques are being used in cross-national marketing studies. Additionally, methodological guidelines for conceptualizing studies, including following appropriate procedures to ensure equivalence and verifying the existence of cultural differences, are being followed at a higher rate than in the past. Still, some studies do not follow accepted guidelines, and there is a need for a wider range of theory bases and methods to be used.

Research limitations/implications – The study examines only cross-national studies published in 10 journals over a recent six years (2005–2010). As a result, no direct comparison to earlier periods is made.

Originality/value of paper – This chapter outlines key guidelines for conducting cross-national studies in marketing. It also calls attention to the need to follow these guidelines based on the trend toward a majority of studies complying with them. Finally, the chapter calls attention to the need for certain theory bases and methods to be used more frequently.

Different forms of inter-organisational encounters, including joint ventures, alliances, mergers and acquisitions, have over the last decades become fashionable and much-sought means of globalisation. A continuous concern shared by managers involved in these different forms of inter-organisational encounters is the challenge of making them work in practice – their successful implementation and management. The cultural dimensions of these different kinds of inter-organisational encounters, particularly in cross-border contexts, have been deplored as being particularly difficult. This paper builds on prior research and aims to understand how the cultural dimensions of inter-organisational encounters have been approached by researchers on mergers and acquisitions on the one hand and researchers on alliances and joint ventures on the other hand. Based on a comparative literature review, the findings suggest that the two fields, despite their valuable contributions and the similarities in the phenomena they study, have remained surprisingly isolated from one another and would offer opportunities for cross-fertilisation. Through its theoretical contribution, the paper intends to offer insights to researchers in both streams of research.

This research was undertaken to further understand a “values” based taxonomy designed to assess the “cultural and business suitability” of managers for appointment to cross‐border business and management roles. In particular, this paper aims to explore the extrapolative and interrelated nature of a two‐dimensional bipolar taxonomy of value orientations; as well as the nature and strength of the relationship between the model's predictors.

A sample of 262 cross‐border managers working for a large transnational American owned logistics firm responded to this study. The group completed a questionnaire based on a two‐dimensional taxonomy of value orientations. The dimensions tested were first a manager's values viz., their potential “National Identity”. Secondly, a manager's values vis., their potential “Cross‐Border Business Focus”. Factor analysis and canonical correlations were employed to identify key factor constructs and then to evaluate the measurement fit between the constructs; also to examine any significant relationship between the identified constructs.

Results support both the extrapolative and interrelated nature of the taxonomy with significant results (p<0.05) confirming the strength of the relationships between the identified constructs as potential predictors of “cultural and business impact” and hence “individual suitability” for cross‐border assignments.

Whilst the research is limited to one large US‐owned transnational logistics firm, the diversity of respondents with respect to cultural background; age, gender and amount of experience has not impacted results. Results suggest that awareness of both a manager's “National Identity” and “Cross‐Border Business Focus”, may provide useful additional information vis., a manager's cultural and business impact and hence assist in the selection of managers for cross‐border assignments.

Results appear to provide useful insights into the potential “cultural and business suitability” of managers; as well as the early identification of managers, for important cross‐border business and management assignments.

Given the increasing global focus of many aspects of our society, researchers have taken significant steps in understanding the impact of culture on various psychological states. This review focuses on the stressor–strain relationships within the context of cross-cultural and cross-national studies. Using research findings from the United States as a baseline, we identify common and unique themes concerning the stressor–strain relationships between different countries, and clarify the differences between cross-national and cross-cultural studies. Furthermore, we consider cross-cultural and cross-national occupational stress research from an individual differences perspective. We encourage future studies to adopt this perspective and carefully consider the implications of cultural values on occupational stress research at the individual, group, and country levels.

In business and management, cross-national and cross-cultural comparisons between countries have been a topic of interest for many decades. Not only do firms engage in business in different countries around the world but also within countries. The population has become more diversified over time, making cross-cultural comparisons within country boundaries increasingly relevant. In comparisons across cultural groups, measurement invariance (MI) is a prerequisite; however, in practice, MI is not always attained or even tested. Our study consists of three parts. First, we provide a bibliometric analysis of articles on cross-cultural and cross-national topics in marketing to provide insight into the connections between the articles and the main themes. Second, we code articles to assess whether researchers follow the recommended steps as outlined in the multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) approach. The results indicate that MI testing is incorporated in the toolbox of many empirical researchers in marketing and that articles often report the level of invariance. Yet, most studies find partial invariance, meaning that some items are not comparable across the cultural groups studied. Researchers understand that MI is required, but they often ignore noninvariant items, which may decrease the validity of cross-cultural comparisons made. Third, we analyze the dissemination of MI in the broader literature based on co-citations with Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998), a widely cited article on MI in the field of marketing. We conclude by noting methodological developments in cross-cultural research to enable addressing noninvariance and providing suggestions to further advance our insight into cross-cultural differences and similarities.

Traditional multinational team (MNT) research has concentrated on negative phenomena such as in-group/out-group distinctions, social loafing, and pressures for convergence. In contrast, we examine instances where MNT members exhibit cross-national inclusive behavior, cross-national responsiveness, and cross-national divergence of ideas, which in turn result in positive outcomes such as cohesion, trust, and innovation. Furthermore, we identify important catalyzing mechanisms that effectively encourage these functional behaviors. For example, we highlight the importance of social categorization based on common group membership, social comparisons to referent others outside the team from other nations, and suspension of attributions based on national stereotypes – all of which will help turn the tide of the current research on MNTs.

Within the last two decades there has been an increased interest in the issue of work and emotion within work and organizational psychology and related fields. Although the cross-cultural perspective has a long tradition in research on emotions, organizational behavior researches on the dynamic of emotions at work have devoted surprisingly little attention to cross-cultural issues. In this paper, an attempt is made to show how important and useful a cross-cultural perspective is for understanding the role of emotion in the workplace. First, a review of recent publications of cross-national cross-cultural research of emotion at work is presented. In this, the focus is exclusively on cross-national organizational behavior studies of specific emotions with national culture as an explanatory variable. The aim of this is to identify core findings of cross-cultural research on emotion in organizational behavior and some gaps in this burgeoning literature. Second, a review is presented of findings on cross-cultural similarities and differences in emotion, culture-specific norms, and values and their effect on emotion. The aim of this is to identify the implications of these findings for future research on emotion at work. Third, a review of methodological issues in cross-cultural research is presented followed by some recommendations to further advance this area of research.