Cultural Intelligence for Dynamic Inclusive Leadership in Executive Education

• In Event: Research Studies on Executive Leadership Education

Short Description

Today’s executive education programs require thoughtfully designed curricula that will be effective in preparing leaders for the complexity of interacting with people from diverse backgrounds whether at home or abroad. The presenter will share research findings assessing one such program for Executive MBA students highlighting the curricular design and outcomes concerning cultural intelligence.

Detailed Abstract

PROBLEM. A large-scale survey of international business executives by The Economist Intelligence Unit tells us that we are not ready for the cultural and communication challenges that come with doing business globally. In this survey, 50% of respondents said that communication misunderstandings have impeded their international business dealings and the greatest threat to smooth operations is caused by differences in cultural norms. A staggering 90% said that understanding cross-border communication would improve the firm’s profit, revenue, and market share, and actions should be taken to educate employees and key leaders regarding cross-cultural differences. Yet only 47% said that their companies did something to help with preparedness or had an appropriate system in place for selecting people who were suited for cross-cultural dealings. Clearly we have a conundrum when it comes to knowing what to teach and how. Today’s Executive Education programs require thoughtfully designed curricula that will be effective in preparing leaders for the complexity of interacting with people from diverse backgrounds whether at home or abroad. We have a cultural imperative before us.

FRAMEWORK. Research demonstrates that simply experiencing intercultural contact—no matter the length of that contact—does not necessarily mean a person will become culturally competent. A recent study analyzing the learning outcomes of students’ academic pursuits abroad showed that it was not the amount of time spent in-country or the simple act of being abroad that predicted change. Rather, it was the active and conscious effort of the students to reflect on what was happening—in real time—and then actively adjust their behaviors accordingly that made a difference. Students were able to develop this skill-set through the intervention of educators (cultural mentors) who pushed them to think about what was happening and why it was happening (Vande Berg, Connor-Linton, & Paige, 2009).

Developing such cultural competence is called Cultural Intelligence (CQ). This is a person’s ability to function skillfully in a cultural context different than one’s own (Earley & Ang, 2003; Ng et al., 2009a, 2009b). This means that a culturally intelligent person is someone who is able to empathize and work well with others and who can acknowledge differing values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors in order to anticipate, act, and react in appropriate ways to produce the most effective results, and then to reevaluate and try acting or reacting in a different way (Alon& Higgins, 2005; Rockstuhl, Seiler, Ang, Van Dyne, & Annen, 2011).

Early and Ang’s (2003) seminal theory of CQ comprises three critical elements necessary for effective intercultural interaction: cognitive, motivational, and behavioral. The cognitive aspect is needed to conceptualize and process new information. This is more than simply having knowledge about a culture, but the ability to transfer learning to differing cultural contexts. The motivational aspect is needed for adapting to differing cultural norms and values. However, it is more than just adapting to an unfamiliar environment; rather, it means that a person possesses the interest and curiosity—the drive—to respond to ambiguity. The behavioral aspect is needed in order to engage effectively and appropriately in intercultural interactions (Earley & Ang, 2003; Earley & Peterson, 2004).

The work of Van Dyne and colleagues (Ng et al., 2009a, 209b) extends the original CQ theory and focuses on the process of cultural intelligence, which takes into consideration the experiential aspect of what one learns and re-learns after reflecting on the experience. Van Dyne has identified four factors of CQ which include CQ strategy, knowledge, motivation, and behavior.

•CQ strategy involves how a person acquires and then uses knowledge of other cultures—which includes contemplating assumptions, deciphering actions, and adjusting perspectives about the situation.

•CQ knowledge means that a person knows what she knows, but also knows what she doesn’t know. Knowledge includes understanding about specific norms and behaviors, worldviews, values; and even historical, political, and governmental aspects of people and their culture.

•CQ motivation is a person’s interest in engagement with people and the culture itself—the CQ motivated person enjoys learning and applying what she has learned with interest and confidence—she is comfort- able with herself and with the ambiguity that comes when crossing cultures.

•CQ behavior is the person’s ability to engage with others through language and nonverbal behavior that is developed through trial and error.

QUESTION/CONTENT. A question embedded in the conference theme, the Dynamics of Inclusive Leadership, is “How can we teach about leadership that manifests inclusivity and creates real change in individuals, groups, organizations, societies, and nations?” My answer is by focusing on Cultural Intelligence, which is a person’s capability to function and manage effectively in culturally diverse settings. This presentation will discuss the research findings based upon a group of 60 Executive MBA students at a university in the Mid-Western United States and highlights the successful curricular design and implementation that get results regarding inclusive leadership. THE RESEARCH SEEKS TO DETERMINE: How does cultural mentoring increase CQ Motivation and CQ Behavior based upon an intervention prior to Executive MBA students engaging in an international immersion program?

DESIGN. This research project analyzes the Pre-departure executive education course that delivers a Pre-Assessment tool to gauge a person’s cultural competence. All students are presented with the opportunity to have an individual coaching session regarding their tool but not all students take advantage of this opportunity. Then, all students write an Individual Development Plan based upon their pre-assessment; are required to take a ten hour academic course on Intercultural Management; then engage in an international immersion project. Upon return, students complete a post-assessment. The students who opt for the coaching session are the control group and this personalized attention to guide them towards deeper reflection is the independent variable. Control group and Experiment group pre-and post-assessments are compared.

IMPLICATIONS. Results of this study will contribute to the development of research concerning executive education teaching and learning as it relates to developing inclusive leadership skills via cultural competence (strategy, knowledge, motivation, behavior). There is a lack of research focused on the executive education student and the use of cross-cultural assessment tools in the development of cultural intelligence.

Participant

• Elizabeth A Tuleja, University of Notre Dame