The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1536-5433.htm

The role of EI
Do emotions matter? competences
The role of emotional intelligence competences
in cross-cultural adjustment for
international assignment 207
Rachel Gabel-Shemueli
ESAN University, Lima, Peru, and
Simon Dolan
ESADE Business School, Barcelona, Spain

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose emotional intelligence (hereinafter EI)
competences as a key predictor for overall cross-cultural adjustment of managers and professionals in
its three respective dimensions: work, interaction and non-work adjustment. This explorative study
contributes to the assessment and selection of potential professionals for international assignments by
identifying the combination of soft competences and selected pre-existing personal factors that can
predict cross cultural adjustment beyond traditional technical or functional skills.
Design/methodology/approach – Data were gathered via a pre-validated multi-item
questionnaire. The latter was administered in two languages: English and Spanish and two steps
of multiple hierarchical regression analyses were conducted, in addition to the main variables (i.e. main
effect). A total of 16 individual, organisational and context-related control variables were used in this
study.
Findings – The main findings indicate that EI is related to overall cross-cultural adjustment
measured in its three dimensions. However, EI was most strongly related to interaction adjustment
following overall cross-cultural adjustment. Furthermore, by isolating some important variables, the
predictive role of EI on cross-cultural adjustment above and beyond these control variables was
shown.
Research limitations/implications – EI is still a new and debatable construct. Researchers are
continuing to explore this construct from different angles. Moreover, there is keen interest in
ascertaining whether the findings reported herein are sustainable. With the exception of one external
source (culture distance), all data for the current study were collected via a self-reported questionnaire
and although additional effort was made to reduce some potential method-variance problems, they
cannot be entirely ruled out. The authors encourage future studies to improve the design by gathering
data from multiple sources and from diverse settings.
Practical implications – The paper reviews the possible advantages of including EI assessment in
international postings selection process.
Originality/value – This paper fills the need to study the predictive role of key soft skills in
understanding cross-cultural adjustment of international assignees. This study analysed the role of
emotions in cross-cultural settings by specifically examining a set of competences stemming from the
EI construct. Although EI has been extensively used in the organisational behaviour literature, to the
best of the authors’ knowledge, there is still a need to empirically explore the relationships of this
construct within the context of overseas postings and cross cultural encounters.
Management Research: The Journal
Keywords Employee behaviour, Individual psychology, Expatriates, Adaptability, of the Iberoamerican Academy of
International organizations, Emotional intelligence, Cross-cultural adjustment, International posting, Management
Vol. 9 No. 3, 2011
Assessment, Selection pp. 207-229
Paper type Research paper q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1536-5433
DOI 10.1108/1536-541111181912
MRJIAM Resumen
EI Propósito – Este articulo propone la Inteligencia Emocional (en adelante, I.E.) como indicador
9,3 clave para la adaptación intercultural, de ejecutivos y profesionales, en sus tres dimensiones: trabajo,
interacción y ajuste fuera de lugar de trabajo. Este estudio contribuye a la evaluación y a la selección
de profesionales para asignaciones internacionales, identificando la combinación de competencias
humanas (soft comptences) y ciertos factores personales pre-existentes que pueden prever una
adaptación intercultural más allá de las habilidades técnicas y funcionales tomadas en cuenta
208 tradicionalmente.
La Metodologı́a – La información fue recogida por medio de un cuestionario de multi-item
previamente validado. Fue aplicado en dos idiomas, inglés y español. Además de analizar las variables
principales (léase, el efecto principal), se realizó dos pasos de análisis de regresión jerárquica múltiple.
En total, para este estudio se utilizaron 16 variables individuales, organizacionales y contextuales.
Los Resultados – Los principales resultados indican que la I.E. guarda relación con la adaptación
intercultural en general, en sus tres dimensiones. Sin embargo, es mayor en relación con la adaptación
en la interacción, seguida de la adaptación intercultural en general. Además, al aislar algunas de las
variables importantes, el rol predictivo de la I.E. sobre la adaptación se puso de manifiesto, más allá de
las variables de control.
Las Limitaciones e implicancias del estudio – La I.E. es aún un concepto nuevo y en debate, que
los investigadores siguen explotando desde diferentes ángulos. Hay gran interés, además, en
determinar si los hallazgos de esta investigación son sostenibles. Con excepción de una fuente externa
(distancia cultural), toda la información utilizada en este estudio fue recolectada vı́a un cuestionario
auto-aplicado y, si bien se hizo un esfuerzo adicional para reducir algunos de los problemas
relacionados con la varianza del método, éstos no pueden ser descartados del todo. Consideramos
importante promover estudios futuros que mejoren el diseño de este estudio a partir de información de
fuentes y ámbitos diversos.
Las Implicaciones prácticas – El documento explora las posibles ventajas de incluir evaluaciones
de I.E. en los procesos de selección para puestos internacionales.
El valor/Originalidad – Este documento responde a la necesidad de estudiar el rol pronosticador
de las capacidades humanas (soft competences), clave para entender la adaptación intercultural
de profesionales asignados a puestos internacionales. Este estudio analizó el rol de las emociones en
escenarios interculturales, de manera especı́fica, examinó un grupo de competencias que derivan del
concepto de la I.E. Si bien es cierto que la I.E. ha sido tratada de forma exhaustiva en la literatura sobre
comportamiento organizacional, creemos que queda aún por explorar de manera empı́rica las
relaciones de este concepto dentro del contexto de los nombramientos internacionales y encuentros
interculturales.
Palabras clave Inteligencia Emocional, ajuste intercultural, asignación internacional, evaluación,
selección
Tipo de artı́culo Artı́culo de investigación

Resumo
Propósito/Objectivo – O artigo propõe as competências de Inteligência Emocional (a seguir EI)
como um preditor-chave para o ajustamento transcultural de gestores e profissionais, nas suas três
dimensões respectivas: trabalho, interacção e ajustamento não trabalho. Este estudo exploratório
contribui para a avaliação e seleção de potenciais profissionais para cargos internacionais,
identificando a combinação de competências soft e fatores pessoais especı́ficos pré-existentes que
podem predizer o ajuste transcultural além das tradicionais capacidades técnicas ou funcionais.
Metodologia – Os dados foram recolhidos através de um questionário multi-item previamente
validado. Foi aplicado em Inglês e Espanhol. Além de analisar as principais variáveis (ou seja, o efeito
principal), foi realizada uma análise de regressão hierárquica em dois passos. No total, foram utilizadas
para este estudo 16 variáveis de controlo, individuais, organizacionais e contextuais.
Resultados – Os principais resultados indicam que a EI se relaciona com o ajustamento
transcultural, medido nas suas três dimensões. Contudo a IE está mais fortemente relacionada com
o ajustamento de interacção, seguida da adaptação transcultural em geral. Além disso, isolando The role of EI
algumas variáveis importantes, o papel preditivo da IE no ajustamento transcultural foi manifestado,
para além das variáveis de controlo. competences
Limitações/Implicações da investigação – A IE é ainda um construto novo e em debate. Os
investigadores continuam a explorar este construto sob diversos ángulos. Além disso, há grande
interesse em determinar se os resultados aquı́ reportados são sustentáveis. Exceptuando uma fonte
externa (distancia cultural), todos os dados para este estudo foram recolhidos através de questionário
auto-aplicado e, apesar dos esforços para reducir alguns potenciais problemas realcionados com a 209
variancia de método, estes não podem totalmente descartados. Encorajamos estudos futuros a
melhorar o design de investigação, recolhendo dados de fontes e âmbitos múltiplos.
Limitações/Implicações práticas – O artigo explora as possı́veis vantagens de incluir a avaliação
da IE nos procesos de selecção para posições internacionais.
Originalidade/Valor – Este artigo responde à necessidade de estudar o papel preditivo das
capacidades humanas (soft skills) na compreensão do ajustamento transcultural dos profissionais em
cargos internacionais. Este estudo analisou o papel das emoções em cenários interculturais,
examinando especı́ficamente um grupo de competências que derivam do construto IE. Embora a IE
tenha sido tratada de forma exaustiva na literatura de comportamento organizacional, cremos que
ainda falta explorar de forma empı́rica, as relações deste conceito dentro do contexto das nomeações
internacionais e encontros interculturais.
Palavras-chave Inteligência Emocional, ajustamento transcultural, nomeação internacional, avaliação,
selecção
Tipo de artigo Artigo de investigação

Introduction
There is compelling evidence to show that multinational companies continue to rely on
international assignment (IA) practices in implementing their international business
strategies (Brookfield Global Relocation Services, 2009; CARTUS, 2010). One of the
main challenges in finding staff for these international postings (IP) is to cut the rising
failure rate of those sent abroad. The selection process is complex and involves a host
of variables. The problem is finding factors that accurately predict which candidates
will rise to the challenge of varied lifestyles and workplaces and thus both live and
work well in a cross-cultural setting (Caligiuri et al., 2009).
While a great deal of research has been done on defining and assessing what
determines IA/IP success or failure, our understanding of the key factors remains
unclear and hence the need for further exploration (McKenna and Richardson, 2007;
Shaffer et al., 2006).
Recently, Caligiuri et al. (2009) reviewed the main factors linked to successful IA/IP
selection. Their review highlighted the complexity of the whole IA process, embracing
as it does both:
.
functional and technical skills and knowledge; and
.
the individual’s abilities and competencies to meet the needs of a given cultural
setting.

Recent research reveals growing recognition of the role played by an individual’s

emotional responses to cross-cultural encounters. Hence the need to use emotional
intelligence (EI) for predicting success in making the cross-cultural adjustment needed
in a given overseas posting (Arvil and Magnini, 2007; Jassawalla et al., 2004; Lii and
Wong, 2008; Tan et al., 2005).
MRJIAM EI has been widely studied in the national organisational context for predicting
9,3 success in both work and life in general (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002). However, there is
only limited research on such links in the context of IP (Moon, 2009).
In light of the above, the purpose of this study is to explore the EI construct as a
predictor of cross-cultural adjustment for IP.
In this study, we use the terms “international posting” and “international
210 assignment” interchangeably to mean sending staff abroad to live and work in a
foreign country.

Conceptual framework and hypotheses

IP: a brief review from the selection angle
Many human resources (HR) scholars emphasise the importance of good selection
practices as the best way of ensuring success in overseas postings (Cogin and Fish,
2010; Claus et al., 2011). Optimising and enhancing the effectiveness of the selection
process is of great importance for companies given that it minimises the very high
direct and indirect costs incurred when international assignees fail (Graf and Harland,
2005; Van de Vijver, 2008).
In practical terms, the selection process aims to identify highly qualified
professionals who can manage businesses in varied, complex settings, effectively
conveying the know-how that is unique to their corporations (Stahl and Cerdin, 2004;
Harrison and Shaffer, 2005).
Caligiuri et al. (2009, p. 252) argue that selection is one of the most complicated
processes as:
In essence, international assignment selection attempts to take a group of “qualified
individuals” and determine who can effectively deal with the challenges inherent in working
with individuals, groups, and organisations that may approach work in a very different way.
Not everyone with a proven record of professional success in a domestic context for a given
job title will have what it takes to be successful in an international context – even doing the
same job with the same job title.
In this regard, past research has suggested that the assessment factors for overseas
postings should include two main areas. The first covers “hard” competencies – technical
and post requirements, technical and tactical knowledge, bio data-type factors such as
language skills and international experience. The second covers “soft” elements –
personality traits, knowledge skills and abilities to adjust to living and working in an
international, inter-cultural context (Caligiuri, 2000; Cheng and Yeh Yun Lin, 2009;
Downes et al., 2010). However, selection practices have often been criticised for
emphasising “hard” technical skills and neglecting critical “soft” and tactical success
factors (Toh and DeNisi, 2005).
Recently, researchers have been paying more attention to cross-cultural
management competencies (defined as personal traits, behaviours, skills, value and
knowledge). The main reason for this is the complexity of contemporary international
business and the crucial role played by such competencies in adjusting to and
succeeding in overseas postings (Arvil and Magnini, 2007; Morley and Cerdin, 2010).
There is growing recognition of EI as one of the core competences in adjusting to IAs
(Den and Gibson, 2009; Tan et al., 2005).
In an attempt to provide a conceptual framework for IA selection through emotions
management, the EI construct is assessed as a preceding factor in successfully facing
a new culture and organisational environment context (Alon and Higgins, 2005; Arvil The role of EI
and Magnini, 2007; Jordan and Troth, 2004). competences
EI for IP selection
Some authors have suggested that the expression, experience and management of
emotions are shaped by one’s cultural values, beliefs and norms. Accordingly, the
process of emotional registration, evaluation, regulation and responses to events and 211
situations may give rise to wide variations in individual behaviour and hence
consequences (Elfenbein et al., 2007).
In broad terms, EI recognises the non-cognitive psychological aspects intervening
in human behaviour (Matthews et al., 2002). EI is viewed as an important construct to
understand and predict behaviour and:
[. . .] involves, at least in part, a person’s abilities to effectively identify and to perceive
emotion (in self and others), as well as possession of the skills to understand and to manage
those emotions successfully (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002, p. 83).
EI has been broadly conceptualised to embrace the “ability and trait” approaches,
many studies, however, steadfastly support the general claim that EI is a key
component to understand the role of emotions in organisational settings and critical to
personal success (Qualter et al., 2007).
Three main streams and associated measures were reported in the literature
(Ashkanasy and Daus, 2005). The first stream, defined EI as a set of four-branch
inter-related emotional abilities and employs the ability-based test that captures
individuals’ performance in solving emotional problems (Mayer et al., 2004); the second
stream is also based on Mayer and Salovey’s (1997) definition but employs various self-
and peer-report measures of EI behaviour (Jordan et al., 2002) and, lastly, the third
stream called the “mixed models” of personal factors and include approaches defining
EI in a broader sense, involving a mixture of trait, competencies and behavioural
preferences (Bar-On, 1997; Goleman, 1995) and typically using self-assessments or
other reporting measures (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002).
Despite much criticism against such popularising concepts, each stream may
represent differences in EI conceptualisation, measures and psychometric properties
(O’Boyle et al., 2010; Walter et al., 2011; Matthews et al., 2002). However, most authors
agreed that a person’s EI reflects his/her own responses and actions and those arising
in relation to others (Earley and Ang, 2003; Mayer and Salovey, 1997).
There is no single well-validated test for measuring EI. Numerous scales and
measures have been validated and correspond to a particular definition of EI. We have
selected, for this study, to use the Bar-On’s (1997, 2002) EQi “Non-Cognitive
Intelligence” model and measure, because of its relevance to our study objectives. The
Bar-On model interrelates emotional and social non-cognitive competencies, skills and
facilitation that may influence/determine one’s ability to succeed and cope with
environmental demands and pressures. In other words, it deals with how effectively we
understand and express ourselves, understand others and relate with them, and cope
with daily demands (Bar-On, 1997, 2006).
The author classified emotional and social capabilities into two main types. The
first concerns basic capabilities, while the latter refers to facilitating (Bar-On, 1997).
EI is defined as a multidimensional construct based on five factors. These are:
MRJIAM (1) intrapersonal functioning – the ability to recognise, understand and express
9,3 emotions and feelings (self-awareness and self-expression);
(2) interpersonal skills – the ability to recognise, understand and express emotions
and feelings (social awareness and interpersonal relationships);
(3) adaptability – the ability to manage change, adapt and solve problems of a
personal and interpersonal nature (change management);
212
(4) stress management – the ability to manage and control emotions (emotional
management and regulation); and
(5) general mood – the ability to generate positive affect and be self-motivated
(self-motivation) (Bar-On, 1997, 2006).

This definition may be the most appropriate to IA context, as it involves a set of

emotional and social attributes that influence our general ability to face and
successfully manage pressures and demands in both personal and social spheres and
to deal with environmental change. Given that an international assignee needs to cope
with the special challenges and complexity posed by new cross-cultural encounters,
having social and emotional skills is an essential prerequisite (Tan et al., 2005;
Black et al., 1991).
While many authors argue that EI should be conceptualised as an ability model
rather than as personal factors models (Côtè and Miners, 2006; Daus and Ashkanasy,
2005; McEnrue and Groves, 2006; Rosete and Ciarrochi, 2005), others, such as Dries and
Pepermans (2007, p. 756), suggest that “the rationale behind the EI ability models is not
irrefutable”; that is, EI may also focus on emotional behaviour or fit rather than on
ability as per se (Freudenthaler and Neubauer, 2005; Matthews et al., 2002).
Yet other stream of authors suggest that both “ability and trait streams” are useful
depending on the context in which they are used (Van Rooy et al., 2005). Bearing in
mind the broad conceptualisation of EI, the authors posit that the personal or mixed
factors model is valuable mainly in selection contexts. Elfenbien et al. (2007) argue that
one’s dominant emotional response is acceptable when one’s EI behaviour consists of
finding and shaping an environment. Therefore, both arguments are advocated in this
paper.
It should be noted that reasonable levels of internal consistency, test-retest
reliability and predictive, convergent and discriminate validity of the instrument has
been reported (Dries and Pepermans, 2007).
In any case, defining the “correct” model of EI is well beyond the scope of this paper.
Nonetheless, the potential and relevance of EI as a predictor of cross-cultural
adjustment deserves further empirical exploration.

EI and cross-cultural adjustment for success in an IA

Considerable research in the IA field suggests that the cross-cultural adjustment
construct is one of the most critical key dependent variables to be considered when
examining selection for adjustment and success in overseas assignments. Well-adjusted
international assignees will be most effective and successful in their overseas postings
(Begley et al., 2008; Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005).
Adjustment in this study follows the definition of Haslberger and Brewster (2009,
p. 386) and refers to:
 [. . .] any change in a person’s life entails a requirement to adjust [. . .] it is the outcome of a The role of EI
learning process that enables the individual to be more effective and content in the new
circumstances. competences
This view is distinguished from the concepts of “adaptation” or “acculturations” which
indicate major and large-scale change in cultural identity and realignment to the new
environment over time (Patterson, 2002).
In this regard, two main streams of research on international assignees relate to 213
cross-cultural adjustment. The first focuses on the psychological degree of which
international assignees are comfortable with the characteristics of the new host culture
(Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). The second stream focuses on the process of change to
fit-in and to meet the role requirement of a new environment (Black, 1988).
This study draws on the first stream of research and represents the psychological
“comfort level” regarding the different characteristics of the host culture. It is argued
that an individual’s psychological make-up will determine how well he or she adjusts
to the overseas posting (Lee and Sukoco, 2008).
The theoretical foundation of IA adjustment (or maladjustment) can be traced to
assumptions used in stress-coping theories (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Lee and
Sukoco, 2008). The IA is subject to changes in social, family and work life, which take
place in a foreign environment and are thus connected to several stress factors
(or “stressors”), such as uncertainties, ambiguity and demands (Black, 1988; Hutchings
and Ratnasari, 2006). When international assignees fail to cope with these stressors, they
may feel confused and suffer “culture shock”, which in turn leads to stress reactions
under conditions of uncertainty, information overload, and loss of control. This is
because they no longer have the personal resources needed to handle the situation
(Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005).
This experience of stress follows a strain response pattern expressed in adjustment
or maladjustment to IA. Therefore, stress management (i.e. coping strategies) might be
necessary for the posted individual in order to engage in required behaviours
(Zimmerman and Sparrow, 2007).
Research in the domestic sphere on EI has shown that people’s ability to understand
and manage their emotions during stressful and entirely new events is related to
greater adaptability and flexibility that is beneficial to the person in the process of
coping with new environments ( Jordan et al., 2002).
In the case of international assignees, the problem is more complicated. Those
posted abroad need to manage their emotions effectively when facing stress arising
from the need to adjust to the new setting. Here, assignees have to make personal and
behavioural changes whilst forging and maintaining social and work relations with the
natives. Furthermore, all this has to be accomplished while coping with tough work
demands (Lii and Wong, 2008).
In this context, one can see how EI can play a key role in enhancing an international
assignee’s awareness and management of his/her emotions and thus enable him/her to
face new, challenging situations more effectively (Arvil and Magnini, 2007; Jordan et al.,
2002).
Extrapolating from the above, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1. EI is positively related to overall cross-cultural adjustment of international
assignees.
MRJIAM EI and dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment
9,3 A large number of studies on cross-cultural adjustment are based on the model
developed by Black et al. (1991). They consider the cross-cultural construct to be
multifaceted and to encompass three distinct dimensions of adjustment:
(1) Work situation adjustment is the comfort of fitting in with local work culture,
policies, procedures and work requirements (Takeuchi et al., 2007).
214 (2) Interaction with the host country nationals means engaging comfortably in
interpersonal relations and interacting harmoniously with the natives and is
essential for success in overseas assignments (Bell and Harrison, 1996).
(3) Adjustment to general living conditions is the extent to which an individual is
familiar and comfortable with said conditions and the culture of the host society
(Shaffer and Harrison, 2001).

These three dimensions are amply supported and evidenced by empirical studies
(Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Puck et al., 2008).
Selmer (1999, p. 42) points out that those who adjust effectively to a foreign posting
“[. . .] feel that they can manage work demands, interact effectively with HCNs; manage
demands of non-work environment and general well-being”.
However, scholars have argued that although they are similar and form part of the
same construct, the three adjustment dimensions act in different ways and degrees
(Kraimer et al., 2001). This implies that international assignees may be well adjusted to
one dimension (e.g. their new work situation) but may be poorly adjusted to another
(e.g. feeling uncomfortable in interacting with the locals) (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al.,
2005; Morley and Flynn, 2003; Puck et al., 2008).
It has already been shown that different sources of stress and antecedents such as
individual, job, organisational and non-work variables are differently affected by and
linked to adjustment dimensions. At the same time, researchers emphasise the need for
a more comprehensive understanding of the related criteria predicting each of the three
adjustment dimensions (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005).
Thus, although adjustment is considered a three-dimensional construct, our study
focuses separately on the relationships between EI and work, social interaction and
non-work adjustment dimensions.
Extrapolating from the above, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2. EI is positively related to the three dimensions of cross-cultural adjustment:
work, interaction and non-work adjustment of those sent on overseas
assignments.

Control variables
Over the years, multiple factors were identified as linked to international assignees’
cross-cultural adjustment. In an attempt to avoid model misspecification and any
potential confounding effects, a series of key individual, organisational and non-work
variables identified in the literature were proposed as control variables in this study.
These included: individual demographic features (such as age, gender, marital status,
fluency in the target foreign language and previous IP), all of which may have an
impact and influence the assignee’s attitude, behaviour and adjustment (Caligiuri et al.,
2009; Takeuchi et al., 2005).
 It also includes job and organisational factors such as: type of company, type of The role of EI
foreign post, time in the assignment and organisational tenure. Organisational social competences
and logistic support and cross-cultural training can play important roles in facilitating
overseas adjustment (Caligiuri et al., 2001).
Last and based on the literature review, two non-work variables were also included:
spouse adjustment and cultural distance. The spouse cross-cultural adjustment was
added because of the strong central role played by the family in an overseas 215
assignment success. Many studies have shown that the adjustment of the manager’s
spouse is one of the most important factors for success in an overseas assignment
(Kupka and Cathro, 2007).
Cultural distance is contextual and is the most salient factor reflecting the
differences between host and home cultures and may or may not foster adjustment to
the new setting. These two non-work variables were considered as sources of non-job
stress in an overseas assignment and have been the subject of much research on IA
adjustment and success (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Tan et al., 2005).

Sample, methods and procedures

Sample
Using professional association contacts and other personal networks, 172 individuals
who were currently assigned abroad and had spent at least three months in their
present assignment agreed to participate in this study. There is no claim of random
sampling given that finding people who meet the criteria for this research was already
very complicated. Nonetheless, international assignees participation within the
selected companies was random, in that the facilitator within each company invited
its entire international assignees population to participate. Additionally, a visual
analysis of the data did not reveal any systematic discrepancies. The average age was
38 (SD ¼ 7) and 85.5 per cent were male. Of all international assignee participants,
75.8 per cent were accompanied by their spouses on the assignment. The average term
of their assignment was 27.2 months, and on average, participants had been on the
assignment for an average of 23.46 months and been posted abroad twice before.
Participants were drawn from three main types of companies; 52.3 per cent were from
finance and service companies, 26.7 per cent from production and manufacturing
companies and 19.8 per cent from other types of companies. Regarding the type of
assignment, 32.6 per cent reported being on a technical assignment, 32.1 per cent on a
functional assignment and 33.3 per cent on a strategic and development assignment.
Participating international assignees were predominantly from The New World, with
53.2 per cent from South America and 22.2 per cent from North America. Most of them
were on assignment in South America (80.7 per cent). English was the mother tongue of
29.7 per cent of participants, while 70.3 per cent were Spanish speakers. Of all the
participants 86 per cent reported speaking Spanish in their present position.

Procedures
The participant international assignees’ database was obtained from the HR
departments of the international companies and personal direct contact. Data collection
was conducted mainly by the HR representative, who sent the survey questionnaire
with introductory information on the proposed survey to all potential participants.
Responses were voluntary. Confidentiality was assured as the complete survey was
MRJIAM sent to the researcher’s direct e-mail address. In other cases, and in order to increase the
9,3 response set, the HR representative arranged a meeting between the researcher and the
international assignee, where the researcher explained the study’s purpose and asked
the individual to complete the questionnaires.

Measures
216 Because participants were Spanish or English speaking, all tools used both languages.
A traditional translation/back-translation technique was employed to ensure reliability
(Behling and Law, 2000). The measures and their psychometric characteristics are
detailed hereafter. All scales had acceptable levels of reliability. Values between the
English and Spanish versions of the questionnaires were almost identical.
Main variables.
Emotional intelligence. The EQ-i: Short version in Spanish (Ugarriza, 2001) and
English (Bar-On, 2002) was employed. The EQ-i: Short version (i.e. 60 items) of the
original longer scale (i.e. 133 items) was structured around five factors subdivided into
15 sub-components. The five factors are: intrapersonal abilities, interpersonal abilities,
adaptability, stress management and general state of mind. The score included an
EQ-i: total score and five substantive sub-scale scores. The respondents were asked to
rank the statement that best described them, on a five-point Likert scale, anchored at 1
(it is rarely or never my case) and 5 (it is always/very frequently my case). Cronbach’s a
were 0.92 for the English version 0.82 for the Spanish version and 0.90 for both.
Cross-cultural adjustment. Black and Stephens’ (1989) adjustment scale for
expatriates was used. This 14-item measurement scale evaluated the three dimensions
of adjustment: general-culture, interaction and work. The respondents were ranked on
a seven-point Likert scale, anchored at 1 (completely unadjusted) and 7 (completely
adjusted) to show how well they had adapted to aspects of living abroad. Cronbach’s a
of overall cross-cultural adjustment, general-cultural, interaction and work adjustment
for the English version were 0.84, 0.84, 0.78 and 0.79, respectively, for the Spanish
version 0.86, 0.77, 0.90 and 0.89, respectively, and for both 0.85, 0.79, 0.86 and 0.86,
respectively.
Control variables.
Cultural distance. Schwartz’s (1992, 1994) scale of basic values index score was used.
The index scores consisted of ten value scales, which were captured further in four
higher order value dimensions: openness to change, conservation, self-enhancement
and self-transcendence. The cultural distance was calculated through the differences
between the home and host country for each participant and derived from the cultural
value scores obtained by Schwartz (1992, 1994).
Perceived organisational support. The Hutchison (1997) short version eight-item
measure for perceived organisational support (POS) drawn from Eisenberger et al.
(1986) scale was used. The instrument assesses two main aspects of organisational
support:
(1) in the current assignment (in-company setting); and
(2) off-the-job life (such as logistical support).

The respondents were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert-type scale the extent to
which several statements were either true or false. Cronbach’s a were 0.91 for the
English version, 0.91 for the Spanish version and 0.92 for both.
 Cross-cultural training. Three measures of cross-cultural training were used. The The role of EI
first measure was adapted from Ford and Noe’s (1987) Attitudes Toward Training competences
Utility Scale. The second measurement came from Early’s (1987) two-item measure
specifically geared towards inter-cultural training for expatriates. Both items were
assessed on a five-point Likert-type scale anchored at “very little/a large amount”.
Cronbach’s a were 0.97 for the English version, 0.93 for the Spanish version and 0.96
for both. 217
Spouse cross-cultural adjustment. This component was measured in a similar
fashion to assignee adjustment. Specifically, international assignees were asked to
respond to nine of the 14 Black and Stephens’ (1989) expatriate adjustment items
(work-related items were excluded) and the questions were reworded to ask about the
spouse. Black and Gregersen (1991) duplicated this procedure. Cronbach’s a were 0.83
for the English version, 0.95 for the Spanish version and 0.93 for both.
Demographics. Age, gender, mother tongue, marital status, educational level,
fluency in the target foreign language and previous experiences of IAs, were
ascertained by the questionnaire.
Job and assignment categories. The survey comprised questions about type of
company, time in the organisation, time in the assignment, type of assignment position,
assignment language.

Results
Analysis was undertaken in several stages. First, to examine and verify the underlying
factor structure of Bar-OnÇs EQ-i and Black and Stephen’s cross-cultural adjustment
scales, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS 16 was conducted. In the
other stages, the hypotheses were tested.
The one-factor model’s fit for the EI scale and for the cross-cultural adjustment scale
were both evaluated using sample variance-covariance matrix as input and a
maximum likelihood solution. The results indicated that for the EI scale, the overall x 2
was not statistically significant (x 2 ¼ 9.495; df ¼ 5; p ¼ 0.091). The GFI was 0.98, the
CFI was 0.98, the IFI was 0.98 and RMSR was 0.03. The results for the cross-cultural
adjustment scale also indicated that the overall x 2 was not statistically significant
(x 2 ¼ 82.64; df ¼ 69; p ¼ 0.125). The GFI was 0.94, the CFI was 0.99, the IFI was 0.99
and RMSR was 0.03.
All these fit indices support the factors structure of both scales. The findings are in
the conventionally accepted value range (Bollen, 1989) and therefore the measures used
in this study were acceptable.
Table I displays the means, standard deviations and correlation coefficients among
the variables. The correlation shows that international assignee’s EI is significantly
and positively related to overall cross-cultural adjustment and its three dimensions.
Accordingly, some preliminary support was found for the proposed hypotheses at the
bivariate level.
H1 and H2 state that EI will be positively related to overall cross-cultural
adjustment and to its three dimensions: work, interaction and non-work adjustment.
Each adjustment measure was regressed on EI, after controlling the demographics,
job, organisation and contextual variables (Table II).
Table II shows that H1 and H2 are supported. Overall cross-cultural adjustment
and its three dimensions: work, interaction and non-work cross-cultural adjustment
MRJIAM were significantly and positively predicted by EI (b ¼ 0.30, DR 2 ¼ 0.08,
9,3 p , 0.001; b ¼ 0.17, DR 2 ¼ 0.02, p , 0.05; b ¼ 0.42, DR 2 ¼ 0.15, p , 0.05;
b ¼ 0.15, DR 2 ¼ 0.02, p , 0.05, respectively).

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between EI and the
218 cross-cultural adjustment construct and how the three dimensions of cross-cultural
adjustment are influenced by EI. As predicted, EI was related overall to work,
interaction and non-work cross-cultural adjustment, even after demographics, job and
organisational and contextual variables had been controlled for. The results are
consistent with those in the research literature on the critical contribution of emotions
to feeling more at ease in cross-cultural contexts, which, in turn may lead to an effective
and positive adjustment (Kayes et al., 2005; Lii and Wong, 2008).
The results also indicate that EI explains between 2 and 15 per cent of the variance
of the cross-cultural adjustment construct. In particular, of the four types of
adjustment, EI explains 15 per cent of the variance of adjustment to interacting with
host country nationals (DR 2 ¼ 0.15, p , 0.001), after controlling for assignment
language, fluency in the assignment language and spouse adjustment, and 8 per cent of
the variance of overall adjustment (DR 2 ¼ 0.08, p , 0.001), after controlling for time
in the assignment and spouse adjustment. In addition, our results suggest that EI has
relatively little impact (2 per cent) on work adjustment (DR 2 ¼ 0.02, p , 0.05),
after controlling for the organisational support variable and non-work adjustment
(DR 2 ¼ 0.02, p , 0.05), after controlling for time in the organisation and
organisational support.
Several issues can be drawn from the empirical findings. The first relates to the
cross-cultural adjustment construct. The study supports the findings reported earlier
to the extent that the cross-cultural adjustment construct is multidimensional and
encompasses three dimensions which are distinct as to the mode and degree of
adjustment and are affected by and linked to different factors and variables
(Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005).
The second issue refers to the role of EI in cross-culture encounters. The findings
suggested that EI may be considered one of the important antecedent factors facilitating
overall cross-cultural adjustment and interaction adjustment (Lii and Wong, 2008). In
this respect, some scholars in the domestic research field have already suggested that
emotions play a critical role in developing and maintaining social and interpersonal
relationships (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2005). A person with a high EI quotient is better at
regulating his/her emotions and will be able to interact more effectively with others

Main variable M SD 1 2 3 4

1. Emotional intelligence 247.77 19.13

2. Work cross-cultural adjustment 38.57 6.49 0.22 * *
3. Non-work cross-cultural adjustment 22.71 4.29 0.19 * 0.24 * *
4. Interaction cross-cultural adjustment 18.43 2.57 0.44 * * * 0.21 * * 0.54 * * *
Table I. 5. Overall cross-cultural adjustment 79.72 10.46 0.35 * * * 0.47 * * * 0.90 * * * 0.79 * * *
Descriptive statistics
and correlations Notes: *p , 0.05, * *p , 0.01 and * * * p , 0.001; n ¼ 172
 Overall cross-cultural Work cross-cultural Interaction cross- Non-work cross-
adjustment adjustment cultural adjustment cultural adjustment
b D R2 b D R2 b D R2 b D R2

Step 1: control variables 0.41 * * * 0.21 * * 0.31 * * * 0.39 * * *

Demographics
1. Age 0.02 0.03 0.10 2 0.04
2. Gender 20.07 0.13 20.08 2 0.09
3. Mother tonguea 20.01 2 0.18 0.04 0.03
4. Marital statusb 0.07 0.17 0.01 0.04
5. Educational levelc 20.03 2 0.03 20.03 2 0.02
6. Fluency in the assignment languaged 20.02 2 0.03 0.17 * 2 0.09
7. Previous assignments 20.07 0.04 20.10 2 0.07
Job and organisation
8. Type of companye 0.08 0.05 0.09 0.06
9. Time in the organization 0.09 2 0.01 0.01 0.15 *
10. Time in the assignment 0.15 * 0.12 0.08 0.14
11. Type of assignmentf 20.09 0.07 20.05 2 0.14
12. Assignment languageg 0.06 2 0.04 0.16 * 0.01
13. Cross-cultural training 0.10 2 0.02 0.13 0.08
14. Organisational support 0.20 * * 0.19 * 0.12 0.18 *
Contextual
15. Spouse cross-cultural adjustment 0.52 * * * 0.10 0.42 * * * 0.52 * * *
16. Cultural distance 0.01 2 0.27 * * 0.06 0.08
Step 2 0.08 * * * 0.02 * 0.15 * * * 0.02 *
EI 0.30 * * * 0.17 * 0.42 * * * 0.15 *
Total R 2 0.49 * * * 0.23 * * 0.46 * * * 0.41 * * *
Notes: *p ,0.05, * *p ,0.01 and * * *p ,0.001; the reported statistics are standardised regression coefficients and are for the equations in step 2,
including EI independent variable; n ¼ 172; a“Spanish,” 1; “others,” 0; b“relative,” 1; “no relative,” 0; c“graduate degree and up” 1; “undergraduate and
less,” 0; d“good-very good,” 1; “regular or less,” 2; e“production-industry,” 1; “service-finance,” 0; f“technical-funcional”, 1; “strategic-development”, 2;
g
“Spanish”, 1; “others”, 0
competences

dimensions
cross-cultural adjustment
regression analysis
Multiple hierarchical

for effects of EI on
219
The role of EI

Table II.
MRJIAM and their emotions (Lii and Wong, 2008). These findings may therefore shed further light
9,3 on the possible role of emotions in the particular context of IA.
The relationship between EI and cross-cultural adjustment seems to apply to
overseas assignment context in the following manner:
.
EI assists in coping more effectively with cross-border demands and helps one
both grasp and manage one’s own and others’ emotions better.
220 .
EI leads individuals to modify their self-presentation in the light of specific,
challenging situations, particularly where they experience environmental
changes.
.
EI is related to interpersonal social relationships and it has been acknowledged
that emotions play a critical role in developing and maintaining social
relationships, connections and interaction skills (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2005;
Bar-On, 1997, 2006; Gardner and Stough, 2002).
The fact that the 3 £ 3 matrix (Table I) is related, shows the model’s complexity.
While they are all inter-related, some have relatively more impact on the outcome
variables than others. Significance is one way to show relationships and magnitude is
another.
Control variables of the potential 16 control variables analysed in this study
to isolate the relationship between EI and cross-cultural adjustment beyond the
influence of these variables, only seven were found to be related differently to the cross-
cultural adjustment construct and its dimensions. They were: spouse, cross-cultural
adjustment, cultural distance, organisational support, time in the organisation, time in
the assignment, fluency in the assignment language, assignment language. Owing to
the exploratory nature of this study, the possible interpretations of the main control
variables that were found to have the most impact on the cross-cultural adjustment
construct are not explored further here but they nevertheless merit brief discussion.
Spouse cross-cultural adjustment was shown to be the most significant variable
impacting the cross-cultural adjustment construct. In particular, spouse cross-cultural
adjustment was the most significant variable, explaining between 52 and 42 per cent of
the variance of adjustment. More specifically, overall cross-cultural adjustment
(b ¼ 0.52, p , 0.001), interaction adjustment (b ¼ 0.42, p , 0.001) and non-work
adjustment (b ¼ 0.52, p , 0.001) but not work adjustment.
This is in line with other research findings, which stress the great importance of
family-related issues as a major source of stress and for predicting overseas
adjustment for married international assignees (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005;
Takeuchi et al., 2007). A possible explanation for the non-relation between spouse
adjustment and international assignees’ work adjustment may be the fact that spouse
and family adjustment is a factor that emerges outside the workplace and can have
indirect effects on the reported level of work adjustment (Breiden et al., 2005; Shaffer
and Harrison, 2001).
Owing to the complexity of the adjustment process, we call for further conceptual
and empirical research, which will expand our knowledge on the potential nature, role,
contribution level and type of relationship between family and spouse adjustment and
international assignee adjustment. Lazarova et al. (2010), for example, provide a
promising conceptual model for grasping and examining the relationship between
work and family roles and forms of adjustment fostering effective IA performance.
 Cultural distance was the second important contextual variable and explained The role of EI
27 per cent of the variance of the work cross-cultural adjustment dimension. In this competences
case, the finding demonstrated that high cultural distance lead to less work adjustment
in IA (b ¼ -0.27, p , 0.001).
In this regard, previous research reported that when the international assignee
perceives major culture discrepancies, he/she is likely to experience more difficulties,
such as maladjustment, during his/her cross-cultural assignment (Van Vianen et al., 221
2004). However, our results indicated only negative relations between work adjustment
and cultural distance.
Recently, Zimmerman and Sparrow (2007), in their research on international team
members, found out that the differences in work practices were attributed to a large
extent to reasons other than cultural ones. They suggested that cultural differences did
not always seem to be the most important ones causing difficulties. They argued that
work practices and interaction styles such as know-how and approach in dealing with
customers are important differences that may make adjustment difficult.
Selmer (2007) reports that international assignees who are posted to a host country
with culture traits similar to those in their home country culture may fail to detect any
cultural differences simply because they are not aware of them. This notwithstanding,
the results of the additional demographic data analyses showed that in the group
identifying less cultural distance (62 per cent), all respondents were from the same
geographical area (Latin America). That is, in this study a similarity between the home
and host cultures may be present and difficulties in the adjustment process may not be
detected by this measure (Shimoni et al., 2005).
It should also be noted that there are some advantages of using the Schwartz (1992,
1994) cultural differences instrument over Hofstede or other models. Schwartz
measures value dimensions that are meaningful at both the individual and the national
levels. Extensive research by him and his colleagues in over 70 countries yielded a set
of values that are recognised across cultures, have similar meanings among different
groups, and are structured in meaningful ways at the individual and national levels
(Schwartz and Sagie, 2000).
A host of authors has suggested that Schwartz’s framework is based on strong
theoretical foundations, developed carefully with systematic sampling, and that its
normative data are recent (collected between 1988 and 1992 with two matched samples
(student and teacher samples). Furthermore, Schwartz sample was obtained from more
diverse regions, including Socialist countries (Drogendijk and Slangen, 2006; Ng et al.,
2007).
The third factor organisational support was also significant, explaining between
19 and 20 per cent of the variance of adjustment. In particular, overall cross-cultural
adjustment (b ¼ 0.20, p , 0.001), work adjustment (b ¼ 0.19, p , 0.05) and non-work
adjustment (b ¼ 0.18, p , 0.05) but not interaction adjustment. These findings support
previous research results that showed POS facilitates international assignees’ work
and non-work adjustment (Puck et al., 2008; Shaffer et al., 2001). Thus, our finding may
add additional support for the linkage between a particular type of POS (in this case
logistic and current assignment support) and work and non-work adjustment
(Takeuchi et al., 2009).
The non-significant relationship between POS and interaction adjustment
dimensions may be explained by the fact that two types of organisational support
MRJIAM perception were examined in this study and did not include interaction adjustment and
9,3 therefore could not capture relations between the two variables.
The fourth variable was fluency in the assignment language: this demographic
variable explains 17 per cent of the variance of interaction cross-cultural adjustment
(b ¼ 0.17, p , 0.05) but was not found to be related to other adjustment dimensions.
This is consistent with other research findings showing that local language fluency is
222 important in IA because it provides assignees opportunities to develop affective
communications and interpersonal relationships, thereby facilitating better interaction
adjustment (Kim and Slocum, 2008). However, it should be noted that other research
findings have suggested that the relationship between fluency in the assignment
language and the cross-cultural adjustment construct is not clear and that further
studies are needed to explore the effect of skill in the target foreign language on
international assignees adjustment as well as other outcomes (Puck et al., 2008;
Takeuchi et al., 2002).

Limitations
The construct of cross-cultural adjustment has been the subject of debate. Some
research has suggested that although Black et al.’s (1991) model has advanced our
understanding considerably, the cross-cultural adjustment construct appears to have
reached a stage of maturity and there is a need to develop more theoretical and
methodological rigour (Hippler and Caligiuri, 2009; Thomas and Lazarova, 2006;
Zimmermann and Sparrow, 2007).
A broader conceptualisation can include additional domains and facets of
adjustment as well as multidimensional scales and multidirectional process that can
capture the behavioural, cognitive and affective dimensions as well as the dynamic
character of the adjustment processes (Helsberger and Brewster, 2009).
Second, we are also aware of the debate on the EI construct itself, its dimensions and
definition. While some authors have questioned the existing theoretical underpinnings
and terminological scientific appropriateness of EI (Locke, 2005), others, including
emotions research scholars, agree with the overall theoretical basis of EI, which is based
on theories of emotion and in particular the important role of emotion in behavioural
organisational dynamics. However, their criticism of the EI concept concerns the
diversity in conceptualisation and definitions embraced by several approaches and have
been operationalised in several testing instruments and tools. Our results and CFA
support the construct validity of EI as defined by Bar-On (1997, 2002) in the IA context.
Nevertheless, further studies are necessary to gain a full understanding of the nature and
effects of EI as well as its possible applications in organisations and in overseas
encounters (Zeinder et al., 2004).
Third, with the exception of one external source (culture distance), all data for the
current study were collected via a self-report questionnaire, thus, any observed
relations might be due in part to common source method effects (Crampton and
Wagner, 1994). We tried to reduce this bias by following some classical procedures,
such as the one suggested by Podsakoff (Podsakoff et al., 2003) of ensuring the
anonymity of both respondents and their answers. Apart from reassuring respondents
on this point, we also made sure that they understood that there were no right or wrong
answers, and that they should answer questions as honestly as possible. Given that the
greatest prediction was between the self-reported dependent variable and EI,
future studies should gather data from multiple sources to ensure that these results are The role of EI
not solely due to shared methods variance. competences
Future studies also need to be conducted in more diverse settings to include further
organisational factors such as the impacts of the industry, type of assignment and
assignees, as well as simultaneously assessing additional variables – individuals’
skills, traits and competencies (such as EI skills), cognitive mental ability and
personality traits in order to make the findings more generally applicable. 223
Fourth, the cross-sectional nature and the fact that only professionals who were
currently on IA participated in this study may result in another limitation. Although
longitudinal studies of global managers in overseas assignment may prove very
difficult to conduct, they are most necessary (Holopainen and Björkman, 2005).
Last, our model is limited by the present status of and recent work on cultural
intelligence, which offers a promising framework for understanding antecedent
competencies and skills for inter-cultural interaction and adjustment (Thomas et al.,
2008). In this respect, conceptual tightening and construct validation of this variable
would enable further examination of this construct in the future and pave the way
to introduce modifications to the study’s model as new theories come to light
(Bhaskar-Shirnivas et al., 2005; Kumar et al., 2008).

Practical implications
Based on the evidence emerging from this study and assuming that future studies
confirm the same results, several practical implications for IA selection arise. First,
companies may feel encouraged to introduce individual EI skills in their staffing
strategies as part of a broader approach integrating both “hard” (technical) and “soft”
(non-technical) skills for assessment in the selection process.
Therefore, a strong ability among international assignees to manage their emotions
in cross-cultural encounters may be predicted by introducing EI as a criterion for
assessing IA candidates in the selection process. Better still, a thorough assessment can
be conducted through a variety of valid formal EI evaluation methods such as EI tests,
structured interviews, dynamic exercises and behavioural observations. The method to
be used should be carefully defined (Avril and Magnini, 2007; Tan et al., 2005).

Conclusions
IA continues to be an importance practice in international HR management. The
findings of our study support the propositions put forward by numerous scholars, who
emphasise the importance of non-technical “soft” factors in predicting the cross-cultural
adjustment of international assignees. More specifically, our findings suggest that EI
may play a significant role in explaining overall, interaction and non-work cross-cultural
adjustment. They reflect the fact that EI may indeed be an important antecedent factor
for international assignee success. Furthermore, by isolating some important individual
and organisational and contextual variables, we were able to examine the predicting role
of EI on cross-cultural adjustment above and beyond these control variables. As the
global economy expands rapidly, IA management becomes more complex and
challenging. Enhancing the international competencies of those posted abroad is the key
to effective cross-cultural adjustment, which, in turn, may lead to success in performance
in the global arena. Therefore, collaborative research between scientists and
practitioners and additional research on IA success is strongly recommended.
MRJIAM References
9,3 Alon, I. and Higgins, J.M. (2005), “Global leadership success through emotional and cultural
intelligences”, Business Horizons, Vol. 48, pp. 501-12.
Arvil, A.B. and Magnini, V.P. (2007), “A holistic approach to expatriate success”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 53-63.
Ashkanasy, N.M. and Daus, C.S. (2002), “Emotion in the workplace: the new challenge for
224 managers”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 76-86.
Ashkanazy, N.M. and Daus, C.S. (2005), “Rumors of the emotional intelligence in organizational
behavior are vastly exaggerated”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26, pp. 441-52.
Bar-On, R. (1997), Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-I): Technical Manual, Multi-Health
System, Toronto.
Bar-On, R. (2002), Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory: Short Technical Manual, Multi-Health
Systems, Toronto.
Bar-On, R. (2006), “The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI)”, Psicothema, Vol. 8,
pp. 13-25.
Begley, A., Collings, D.G. and Scullion, H. (2008), “The cross-cultural adjustment experiences of
self-initiated repatriates to the Republic of Ireland labour market”, Employee Relations,
Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 264-82.
Behling, O. and Law, K.S. (2000), Translating Questionnaires and Other Research Instruments:
Problems and Solutions, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Bell, M.P. and Harrison, D.A. (1996), “Using intra-national diversity for inter-national
assignments: a model of bicultural life experiences and expatriate adjustment”, Human
Resources Management Review, Vol. 6, pp. 47-74.
Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D.A., Shaffer, M.A. and Luk, D.M. (2005), “Input-based and
time-based models of international adjustment: meta-analytic evidence and theoretical
extensions”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 257-81.
Black, J.S. (1988), “Work role transitions: a study of American expatriate managers in Japan”,
Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 19, pp. 277-94.
Black, J.S. and Gregersen, H.B. (1991), “Antecedents to cross-cultural adjustment for expatriates
in Pacific Rim assignment”, Human Relations, Vol. 44, pp. 497-515.
Black, J.S. and Stephens, G.K. (1989), “The influence of the spouse on American expatriate
adjustment in overseas assignments”, Journal of Management, Vol. 15, pp. 529-44.
Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G. (1991), “Toward a comprehensive model of
international adjustment: an integration of multiple theoretical perspectives”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 291-317.
Bollen, K.A. (1989), Structural Equations with Latent Variables, Wiley, New York, NY.
Breiden, O., Mohr, B. and Mirza, H.R. (2005), “Coping with the job abroad: a correspondence
model of expatriate work adjustment”, International Studies of Management
& Organization, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 5-26.
Brookfield Global Relocation Services (2009), Brookfield Global Relocation Services Global
Relocation Trends, Survey Report, Vol. 2009, BGRS, Toronto.
Caligiuri, P.M. (2000), “Selecting expatriates for personality characteristics: a moderating effect
of personality on the relationship between host international contact and cross-cultural
adjustment”, Management International Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 61-80.
Caligiuri, P.M., Tarique, I. and Jacobs, R. (2009), “Selection for international assignments”,
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 19, pp. 251-62.
Caligiuri, P.M., Phillips, J., Lazarova, M., Tarique, I. and Bürgi, P. (2001), “The theory of met The role of EI
expectations applied to expatriate adjustment: the role of cross-cultural training”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 357-72. competences
CARTUS (2010), Global Mobility Policy and Practices Survey: Navigating a Challenging
Landscape, Cartus Corporation, Danbury, CT.
Cheng, H.-L. and Yeh Yun Lin, C. (2009), “Do as the large enterprises do? Expatriate selection and
overseas performance in emerging markets: the case of Taiwan SMEs”, International 225
Business Review, Vol. 18, pp. 60-75.
Claus, L., Patrasc Lungu, A. and Bhattacharjee, S. (2011), “The effects of individual,
organizational and societal variables on the job performance of expatriate managers”,
International Journal of Management, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 249-394 (Part 2).
Cogin, J. and Fish, A. (2010), “Modelling and predicting the performance of cross border
managers”, Personnel Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 432-47.
Côtè, S. and Miners, C.T.H. (2006), “Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence, and job
performance”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 1-28.
Crampton, S.M. and Wagner, J.A. III (1994), “Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational
research: an investigation of prevalence and effect”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79,
pp. 67-76.
Daus, C.S. and Ashkanasy, J. (2005), “The case for the ability-based model of emotional
intelligence in organizational behaviour”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 3,
pp. 453-66.
Den, L. and Gibson, P. (2009), “Mapping and modeling the capacities that underlie effective
cross-cultural leadership: an interpretive study with practical outcomes”, Cross Cultural
Management: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 347-66.
Downes, M., Varner, I.I. and Hemmasi, M. (2010), “Individual profiles as predictors of expatriate
effectiveness”, Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3,
pp. 235-47.
Dries, N. and Pepermans, R. (2007), “Using emotional intelligence to identify high potential:
a metacompetency perspective”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 28
No. 8, pp. 749-70.
Drogendijk, R. and Slangen, A. (2006), “Hofstede, Schwartz, or managerial perceptions?
The effects of different cultural distance measures on establishment mode choices by
multinational enterprises”, International Business Review, Vol. 15, pp. 361-80.
Earley, P.C. (1987), “Intercultural training for managers: a comparison of documentary and
interpersonal methods”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 685-98.
Earley, P.C. and Ang, S. (2003), Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions across Cultures,
Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.
Eisenberger, R., Hungtington, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986), “Perceived organizational
support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 500-7.
Elfenbein, H.A., Polzer, J.T. and Ambady, N. (2007), “Can teams have emotional skills? The case
of recognizing others’ emotions”, working paper, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Ford, J.K. and Noe, E.A. (1987), “Self-assessed training needs: the effects of attitudes toward
training, managerial level, and function”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 39-53.
Freudenthaler, H.H. and Neubauer, A.C. (2005), “Emotional intelligence: the convergent and
discriminant validities of intra- and interpersonal emotional abilities”, Personality and
Individual Differences, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 569-79.
MRJIAM Gardner, L. and Stough, C. (2002), “Examining the relationship between leadership and emotional
intelligence in senior level managers”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
9,3 Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 68-78.
Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence: Why It can Matter More Than IQ, Bantam Books,
New York, NY.
Graf, A. and Harland, L.K. (2005), “Expatriate selection: evaluating the discriminant convergent,
226 and predictive validity of five measures of interpersonal and intercultural competence”,
Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 46-62.
Harrison, D.A. and Shaffer, M.A. (2005), “Mapping the criterion space for expatriate success:
task- and relationship-based performance, effort and adaptation”, International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 1454-74.
Haslberger, A. and Brewster, C. (2009), “Capital gains: expatriate adjustment and the
psychological contract in international careers”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 48
No. 3, pp. 379-97.
Hippler, T. and Caligiuri, P.M. (2009), “Revisiting the construct of expatriate adjustment:
implications for theory and measurement”, paper presented at 10th International Human
Resource Management Conference, Santa Fe, NM.
Holopainen, J. and Björkman, I. (2005), “The personal characteristics of the successful expatriate:
a critical review of the literature and an empirical investigation”, Personnel Review, Vol. 34
No. 1, pp. 37-50.
Hutchings, K. and Ratnasari, S.W. (2006), “Cross-cultural non-work transition stresses: domestic
transferees in Indonesia”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 114-31.
Hutchison, S. (1997), “Perceived organizational support: further evidence of construct validity”,
Educational and Psychological Measurment, Vol. 57, pp. 1025-34.
Jassawalla, A., Truglia, C. and Garvey, J. (2004), “Cross-cultural conflict and expatriate manager
adjustment: an exploratory study”, Management Decision, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 837-49.
Jordan, P.J. and Troth, A.C. (2004), “Managing emotions during team problem solving: emotional
intelligence and conflict resolution”, Human Performance, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 195-218.
Jordan, P.J., Ashkanasy, N.M., Härtel, C.E.J. and Hooper, G.S. (2002), “Workgroup emotional
intelligence: scale development and relationship to team process effectiveness and goal
focus”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 195-214.
Kayes, D.C., Kayes, A.B. and Yamazaki, Y. (2005), “Essential competencies for cross-cultural
knowledge absorption”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 578-89.
Kim, K. and Slocum, J.W. Jr (2008), “Individual differences and expatriate assignment
effectiveness: the case of US-based Korean expatriates”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 43,
pp. 109-26.
Kraimer, M., Wayne, S. and Jaworski, R. (2001), “Sources of support and expatriate performance:
the mediating role of expatriates”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 71-100.
Kumar, R., Rose, C.R and Subramaniam (2008), “The effects of personality and cultural
intelligence on international assignment effectiveness: a review”, Journal of Social
Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 320-8.
Kupka, B. and Cathro, V. (2007), “Desperate housewives – social and professional isolation of
German expatriated spouses”, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 951-68.
Lazarova, M., Westman, M. and Shaffer, M.A. (2010), “Elucidating the positive side of the The role of EI
work-family interface on international assignments: a model of expatriate work and family
performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 93-117. competences
Lee, L.-Y. and Sukoco, B.D. (2008), “The mediating effect of expatriate adjustment and
operational capability on success of expatriation”, Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 36
No. 9, pp. 1191-204.
Lii, S.-Y. and Wong, S.-Y. (2008), “The antecedents of overseas adjustment and commitment of 227
expatriates”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 296-313.
Locke, E.A. (2005), “Why emotional intelligence is an invalid concept”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 26, pp. 425-31.
McEnrue, M.P. and Groves, K. (2006), “Choosing among tests of emotional intelligence: what is
the evidence?”, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 9-42.
McKenna, S. and Richardson, J. (2007), “The increasing complexity of the internationally mobile
professional”, Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 307-20.
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. and Roberts, R.D. (2002), Emotional Intelligence: Science and Myth,
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Mayer, J.D. and Salovey, P. (1997), “What is emotional intelligence?”, in Salovey, P. and
Sliyter, D.J. (Eds), Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Educational
Implications, Basic Books, New York, NY, pp. 3-31.
Mayer, J.D., Salovey, P. and Caruso, D.R. (2004), “Emotional intelligence: theory, findings,
and implications”, Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 15, pp. 197-215.
Moon, T. (2009), “Emotional intelligence correlates of the four-factor model of cultural
intelligence”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 876-98.
Morley, M.J. and Cerdin, J.L. (2010), “Intercultural competence in the international business
arena”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 805-9.
Morley, M.J. and Flynn, M. (2003), “Personal characteristics and competencies as correlates of
intercultural transitional adjustment among US and Canadian sojourners in Ireland”,
International Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 31-46.
Ng, S.I., Lee, J.A. and Soutar, G.N. (2007), “Are Hofstede’s and Schwartz’s value frameworks
congruent?”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 164-80.
O’Boyle, E., Humphrey, R.H., Pollack, J.M., Hawver, T.H. and Story, P. (2010), “The relation
between emotional intelligence and job performance: a meta-analysis”, Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 788-818.
Patterson, J.M. (2002), “Understanding family resilience”, Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 58,
pp. 233-46.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases
in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, pp. 879-903.
Puck, J.F., Mohr, A.T. and Rygl, D. (2008), “An empirical analysis of managers’ adjustment to
working in multi-national project teams in the pipeline and plant construction sector”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 19 No. 12, pp. 2252-67.
Qualter, P., Gardner, K.J. and Whiteley, H.E. (2007), “Emotional intelligence: review of research
and educational implications”, Pastoral Care in Education, Vol. 25, pp. 11-20.
MRJIAM Rosete, D. and Ciarrochi, J. (2005), “Emotional intelligence and its relationship to workplace
performance outcomes of leadership effectiveness”, Leadership and Organization
9,3 Development Journal, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 388-99.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), “Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances
and empirical tests in 20 countries”, in Zanna, M. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
228 Schwartz, S.H. (1994) in Kim, U., Triandis, H.C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.C. and Yoon, G. (Eds),
Beyond Individualism/Collectivism: New Dimensions of Values: Individualism and
Collectivism: Theory Application and Methods, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 85-119.
Schwartz, S.H. and Sagie, G. (2000), “Value consensus and importance: a cross-national study”,
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 465-97.
Selmer, J. (1999), “Effects of coping strategies on sociocultural and psychological adjustment of
western expatriate managers in the PRC”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 34, pp. 41-51.
Selmer, J. (2007), “Which is easier, adjusting to a similar or to a dissimilar culture? American
business expatriates in Canada and Germany”, International Journal of Cross-Cultural
Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 185-202.
Shaffer, M.A. and Harrison, D.A. (2001), “Forgotten partners of international assignments:
development and test of a model of spouse adjustment”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 238-54.
Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., Gilley, K.M. and Luk, D.M. (2001), “Struggling for balance amid
turbulence: work-family and commitment on international assignments”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 99-122.
Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., Gregersen, H., Black, J.S. and Ferzandi, L.A. (2006), “You can take
it with you: individual differences and expatriate effectiveness”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 1, pp. 109-25.
Shimoni, T., Ronen, S. and Roziner, I. (2005), “Predicting expatriate adjustment: Israel as a host
country”, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 293-312.
Stahl, G.K. and Cerdin, J.L. (2004), “Global careers in French and German multinational
corporations”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 9, pp. 885-902.
Takeuchi, R., Yun, S. and Russell, J.E.A. (2002), “Antecedents and consequences of the perceived
adjustment of Japanese expatriates in the USA”, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 13 No. 8, pp. 1224-44.
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D.P., Marinova, S.V. and Yun, S. (2007), “Nonlinear influences of stressors
on spouse and expatriate cultural adjustment”, Journal of International Business Studies,
Vol. 38, pp. 928-43.
Takeuchi, R., Tesluk, P.E., Yun, S. and Lepak, D.P. (2005), “An integrative view of international
experience”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 85-100.
Takeuchi, R., Wang, M., Marinova, S.V. and Yao, X. (2009), “Role of domain-specific facets of
perceived organizational support during expatriation and implications for performance”,
Organization Science, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 621-34.
Tan, J.A.C., Härtel, C.E.J., Panipucci, D. and Strybosh, V.E. (2005), “The effect of emotions in
cross-cultural expatriate experiences”, Cross Cultural Management: An International
Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 4-15.
Thomas, D.C. and Lazarova, M.B. (2006), “Expatriate adjustment and performance: a critical
review”, in Stahl, G.H. and Björkman, I. (Eds), Handbook of Research in International
Human Resource Management, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 247-64.
Thomas, D.C., Stahl, G., Ravlin, E.C., Poelmans, S., Pekerti, A., Maznevski, M., Lazarova, M.B., The role of EI
Elron, E., Ekelud, B.Z., Cerdin, J.-L., Brislin, R., Aycan, Z. and Au, K. (2008), “Cultural
intelligence: domain and assessment”, International Journal of Cross-Cultural competences
Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 123-43.
Toh, S.M. and DeNisi, A.S. (2005), “A local perspective to expatriate success”, Academy of
Management Executive, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 132-46.
Ugarriza, N. (2001), “La evaluación de la inteligencia emocional a través del inventario de Bar-On 229
(I-CE) en una muestra de lima metropolitana”, Persona, Vol. 4, pp. 129-60.
Van de Vijver, F.J.R. (2008), “Personality assessment of global talent: conceptual and
methodological issues”, International Journal of Testing, Vol. 8, pp. 304-14.
Van Rooy, D.L., Viswesvaran, C. and Pluta, P. (2005), “An evaluation of construct validity: what
is this thing called emotional intelligence?”, Human Performance, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 445-62.
Van Vianen, A.E.M., De Pater, I.E., Kristof-Brown, A.L. and Johnson, E.C. (2004), “Fitting in:
surface- and deep-level cultural differences and expatriates’ adjustment”, Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 697-709.
Walter, F., Cole, M.S. and Humphrey, R.H. (2011), “Emotional intelligence: sine qua non of
leadership or folderol?”, Academy of Management Perspective, Vol. 25, pp. 45-59.
Zeinder, M., Matthews, G. and Roberts, R.D. (2004), “Emotional intelligence in the workplace a
critical review”, Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 371-99.
Zimmerman, A. and Sparrow, P. (2007), “Mutual adjustment processes in international teams:
lessons for the study of expatriation”, International Studies of Management and
Organization, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 65-88.

Further reading
Kraimer, M. and Wayne, S. (2004), “An examination of perceived organizational support as a
multidimensional construct in the context of an expatriate assignment”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 209-37.

About the authors

Rachel Gabel-Shemueli received her PhD in Business Administration from ESADE Business
School in Barcelona, Spain and a Master’s degree in OB from Tel-Aviv University-Israel. At the
present she is Professor of HRM, IHRM & OB at ESAN University in Peru. Her research focuses
on cross-cultural management and global leader development, emotional intelligence, national
and organizational values, leadership and occupational stress. She has authored and co-authored
several articles and book chapters in various academic and professional publications.
Simon Dolan received his PhD from Carlson Graduate School of Management at the
University of Minnesota. He is currently the ESADE “future of Work” – Chair. He is has been
Full Professor of HRM & OB at the University of Montreal and McGill in Canada before joining
ESADE Business School in Barcelona. He is the Editor-in-Chief of Cross Cultural Management –
an International Journal. He has published over 120 scholarly papers and over 50 books,
in multiple languages. Simon Dolan is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: simon.
dolan@esade.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.