Search results

The continuing globalization of business and recent world events underscore the importance of educating students to develop a broad world view. Internationalizing the undergraduate curriculum has moved to the forefront of higher education in business. And international travel and study has become a core part in the curriculum. However, creating and coordinating a meaningful study abroad experience is perhaps the most challenging issue faced by academics and administrators involved in international business education. While the concept of incorporating a practical or “real world” component into a university degree program is not unique, particularly in business education, the structural obstacles and other difficulties associated with bringing about truly international learning experiences tend to be very different. On the one hand, the student(s) involved generally are highly motivated for such an experience. The challenge on the student side is one of channeling this excitement through the proper process in order to ensure they receive maximum transfer credit. This means, from the institutional side, it is necessary to fit the experience, whose characteristics sometimes fall outside the conventional institutional structure, into an individual’s degree program and still meet administrative criteria as they relate to content, rigor, accreditation requirements, etc.

People believe that they know who they are and that who they are matters for what they do. These core beliefs seem so inherent to conceptualizations of what it means to have a self as to require no empirical support. After all, what is the point of a concept of self if there is no stable thing to have a concept about and who would care if that concept was stable if it was not useful in making it through the day? Yet the evidence for action-relevance and stability are surprisingly sparse.

This paper outlines the identity-based motivation theory, a theoretical approach that takes a new look at these assumptions and makes three core predictions as to when an accessible self-concept influences behavior. These are termed “dynamic construction”, “action-readiness”, and “interpretation of difficulty”. That is, rather than being stable, which identities come to mind and what they mean are dynamically constructed in context.

People interpret situations and difficulties in ways that are congruent with the currently active identities and prefer identity-congruent to identity-incongruent actions. When action feels identity-congruent, experienced difficulty highlights that the behavior is important and meaningful. When action feels identity-incongruent, the same difficulty suggests that the behavior is pointless and “not for people like me.”