|
1. Literature Review文献综述
1.1Research question研究问题
本文主要研究基于市场的文化智力与企业绩效。从营销学的角度看，跨文化营销首先要理解和满足文化的影响，体现企业应对多元文化市场的意愿。跨国营销公司将在两个或更多不同的国家进行营销。因此，为了应对文化的多样性和不同的市场需求，全球化和国际化使他们越来越重视文化智能的研究和应用。
In this paper, it focused on market-based cultural intelligence and firm performance. From the perspective of marketing, cross-cultural marketing reflects the willingness of enterprises to cope with the multicultural market by firstly understanding and meeting the influence of culture. Multinational marketing company will make marketing in two or more different countries. So, in order to cope with cultural diversity and different market demands, the globalization and internationalization make them pay more and more attention to research and application of cultural intelligence.
由于跨国公司所面临的市场环境是跨文化的，涉及市场、消费者、供应商、政府官员和其他利益相关者，他们基于不同的文化传统和背景，表现出不同的信仰，世界EWS、价值观和偏好、仇恨、商业规则等，对跨国公司的跨文化营销提出了巨大挑战。它要求跨国公司在不同的文化背景下迅速了解消费者的需求和市场规则，从而熟练地在不同文化背景的市场之间进行转换。
因此，面对多元文化的市场，相信这些公司必须发展跨文化的营销能力或基于市场的文化智能。文化智力是一个全新的概念。本文旨在探讨文化智力对表演的影响。本文旨在对文化智力的概念和运作进行初步的探讨，从而帮助企业有效地经营不同的市场。
Because the market environment faced by multinational corporations is cross-cultural, involving markets, consumers, suppliers, government officials and other stakeholders in different cultural backgrounds, based on different cultural traditions and backgrounds, they show different beliefs, world views, values and preferences, hatreds, business rules, etc., which poses a huge challenge for multinational companies in cross-cultural marketing. It requires multinational companies to quickly understand demands of consumers and market rules in different cultural contexts, so as to be skilled in switching between markets with different cultural backgrounds.
本文探讨了跨文化环境下跨国公司文化智力与企业绩效的关系。特别是，本研究探讨了文化智能在跨国公司国际营销决策过程中的现实意义。此外，本研究的样本主要集中在法国和中国的跨国公司。在法郎和中国，他们将面临不同的营销问题，如不同的文化背景和消费习惯。
Therefore, in the face of multicultural markets, it is believed that these companies must develop cross-cultural marketing capabilities or market-based cultural intelligence. The concept of cultural intelligence is a novel concept. The purpose of this paper is to find out the influence of cultural intelligence on performance. The purpose of this paper is to give a preliminary insight into the conceptualization and operation of cultural intelligence, thereby helping enterprises to effectively operate different market.
本研究主要问题：
在跨文化环境中，市场文化智力与企业绩效之间的关系是什么？
基本问题：This paper discusses the relationship between cultural intelligence and firm performance of multinational companies in a cross-cultural environment. In particular, this study explores the practical significance of cultural intelligence in the decision-making process of international marketing operations of multinational companies. In addition, the sample of this study mainly focuses on multinational companies in France and China. In Franc and China, they would face different marketing problems, such as different cultural backgrounds and consumption habits.
Main questions of this research:
What is the relationship between market-based cultural intelligence and the firm performance in a cross-cultural environment?
Basic questions:
1: How to measure market-based cultural intelligence?
2: What are the antecedents of market-based cultural intelligence?
3: What are the consequences of market-based cultural intelligence?
1.2 Cultural intelligence
1.2.1 Definition of cultural intelligence
In 2003, Earley and Ang (2003) gave a definition of cultural intelligence: the ability of a person or an organization to adapt effectively to a new environment, it is an adaptation of intelligence which is manifested as a series of adaptive intelligent behaviors tied to new cultures and social beliefs, values. Through a survey of 2,000 managers in 60 countries, Earley, and Mosakowski (2004) portrayed the problems that low-cultural intellectuals are likely to encounter, and the opportunities that high-cultural intellectuals may have. The results showed that when people with low cultural intelligence enter a new cultural environment, they are relatively slow and lack insight to the changes of the new culture, making them have a resistance and be timid to communicate with people of different cultures around them, leading to their inability to integrate into the new cultural environment; while people with high cultural intelligence have higher sensitivity and adaptability to new cultures, when they enter new environment, face new teams and new colleagues, they can sensitively identify the differences between new cultures and their own culture, and actively seek their own changes and adapting to actively coordinate cultural conflicts and quickly integrate with new cultures to become a part of the new cultural environment.
The three-dimensional structures of the cultural intelligence proposed by Earley and Ang (2003) include: cognitive cultural intelligence, motivational cultural intelligence and behavioral cultural intelligence. Cognitive cultural intelligence refers to an individual's familiarity with the special norms, customs and practices of different social cultures. People with high cognitive cultural intelligence can often understand the economic, legal, and social systems of old and new cultures, and understand the similarities and differences between people of different cultural backgrounds. Motivational cultural intelligence refers to the enthusiasm and initiative of individuals to adapt to different cultures. People with high motivational cultural intelligence often have a strong interest in a new culture, driving their own initiative to pay attention to cross-cultural situations, and they are more confident to adapt to a new culture. Behavioral cultural intelligence refers to the adaptability of linguistic and non-verbal behaviors when individuals interact with people from different cultural backgrounds. People with high behavioral cultural intelligence can demonstrate appropriate behaviors in a new cultural environment based on their cultural cognitive abilities, the appropriate behaviors include proper speech, moderate tones, elegant manners, and natural expressions. In 2007, Ang et al. (2007) added the three-dimensional structures of cultural intelligence to a four-dimensional structure, adding metacognitive cultural intelligence. Metacognitive cultural intelligence means that individuals show sensitivity and perception when dealing with people from different cultural backgrounds. People with high-level cognitive cultural intelligence tend to be highly educated and have strategic thinking skills. They can quickly perceive, summarize the underlying rules when dealing with people from different cultural backgrounds, and make seemingly vague cross-cultural interactions clear and organized.
Thomas (Thomas, 2006) figured that cultural intelligence is constituted by the capability to adapt to a cross-cultural interaction context. In order to shape the context of a cross-cultural interaction, individuals should first have the ability of adaptation. Then, individuals can decide on, then construct appropriate behavior. He believes that cultural intelligence should include three dimensions: behavior, mindfulness, and knowledge. Knowledge refers to mastering culturally relevant knowledge and the basic principles that should be followed in intercultural communication, understanding what culture is and how culture affects people's behavior. In addition, he divided knowledge into content knowledge and process knowledge. Content knowledge mainly refers to the deep understanding and decoding of the essence of culture. Process knowledge mainly refers to knowledge that has a concern with the process of how cultural change affects behavior. Fundamentally, mindfulness is a heightened awareness of current experience or present reality. Brooks Peterson (2008) emphasized the importance of mindfulness in cultural intelligence and emphasized that mindfulness is the key to connecting knowledge and behavior. Behavior is based on knowledge and mindfulness, it means that people culturally intelligent cultivate a behavioral capability that helps them to become competent across different cultural situations.
Tan (2004) pointed out that cultural intelligence refers to the ability that people have to mitigate and manage the pressure brought by cultural shocks, as well as the ability to deal with discouraged and confused feelings arising from cultural differences, it is also people’s ability to quickly adjust and adapt to cross-cultural environments. He divided cultural intelligence into three dimensions: being full of vitality and persistence, cultural strategic thinking, and action in a certain way. Being full of vitality and persistence is consistent with the motivational cultural intelligence that Earley and Ang (2003) proposed, it mainly refers to the enthusiasm and initiative of people to adapt to different cultures. Action in a certain way is similar to the behavioral cultural intelligence mentioned by Earley and Ang (2003), that is, the adaptability of language and non-verbal behavior that individuals show when they interact with people from different cultural backgrounds. Cultural strategic thinking is similar to the cognitive cultural intelligence mentioned by Earley and Ang (2003). Cultural strategic thinking refers partly to an individual’s general thinking skills that he uses to understand how or why people in a culture new to that individual act. The three-dimensional model developed by Tan (2004) is generally similar to the three-dimensional model designed by Earley and Ang (2003). The slightly different is that Tan (2004) particularly emphasizes the important role of action in a certain way in cultural intelligence. The author believes that these three factors are mutually influential and to distinguish which is more important does not have much academic value.#p#分页标题#e#
1.2.2 Measurement of cultural intelligence
Ang and Earley (2003) believe that there are two ways to measure cultural intelligence: psychological measurement and non-psychological measurement.
(1) The psychological measurement method is generally implemented in the form of questionnaire. Earley and Mosakowski proposed the diagnostic method of individual cultural intelligence, and developed a diagnostic scale based on the three components of cultural intelligence, including 12 questions, each of which has 4 questions. But this classification determined by Earley and Mosakowski is more of a qualitative, empirical hypothesis without systematic analysis.
After perfecting the theoretical basis of the three-dimensional cultural intelligence proposed by them, Ang et al. (2007) proposed the four-dimensional cultural intelligence scale. This is the four-dimensional measuring tool used so far to use the most extensive cultural intelligence. The scale consists of 20 questions, which measure the four dimensions of metacognition, cognition, motivational and behavioral cultural intelligence, including 4 topics of metacognitive dimension; 6 topics of cognitive dimension; 5 topics of motivational dimension and 5 topics in behavioral dimensions. The questionnaire was scored by using the Likert scale of 7 levels. Participants reported themselves according to their actual situation.
(2) Non-psychological measurement methods include Assessment center and Clinical Assessment. The use of assessment centers to measure cultural intelligence can make use of a variety of assessment techniques, and put the interviewees into a series of simulated intercultural work situations, so that they can perform certain specified activities, so as to observe whether the interviewees are qualified for a task to be commissioned, and predict their abilities or potential. The successful measurement of cultural intelligence using clinical assessment requires not only comprehensive and reliable information, but also professional knowledge and psychological quality of the assessment experts. Therefore, due to the high complexity and technicality in the implementation of non-psychological measurement, and the high requirements for the evaluation experts, the current measurement of cultural intelligence is mainly in the form of questionnaire.
Table 1 The cultural intelligence scale (CQS)
1.2.3 Pre-variable of cultural intelligence
1.2.3.1 Personality
When Ang et al. (2006) studied the relationship between personality traits and cultural intelligence in the first time, they found that cultural intelligence is significantly different from the five personality traits, but closely related. The research shows that cultural intelligence is affected by conscientious, emotional stability, agreeableness, extraversion and other personality traits.
MacNab and Worthley (2012) mainly discussed the relationship between personal traits including personal attributes and experience, cultural wisdom, so that they could find factors of influencing development of cultural intelligence and suitable ways to improve cultural intelligence. MacNab and Worthley’s (2012) research examined a multicultural team of more than 370 executives and management students, MacNab and Worthley (2012) tested personal traits (ie general self-efficacy, international travel experience, management and work experience) and cultural intelligence development (meta-cognition, motivation and behavioral aspects), so as to summarize the empirical methods of cultural intelligence education. The results show that general self-efficacy is closely related to the successful development of predicting cultural intellectual ability, while international travel experience, management and work experience are relatively low in relation to cultural intelligence development, indicating that improving general self-efficacy of employees may be one of the most effective ways to improve employees’ cultural intelligence.
Traditional research suggests that open personality traits can affect an individual's cultural intelligence, which is an ability to effectively deal with people from different cultural backgrounds. Researchers such as Li, Mobley and Kelly (2016) challenged this view. Their research examined whether the relationship between the two depended on an individual's degree of agreeableness, which was an important personality trait for establishing interpersonal relationships. The data collected by Li, Mobley and Kelly (2016) from 244 international professionals showed that when agreeableness was high, open personality traits were positively related to three aspects of cultural intelligence, but when agreeableness was low, there was no significant correlation between open personality traits and the three aspects of cultural intelligence. The survey results showed that the influence of personality on cultural intelligence depended on interactive method. The assessment, selection and development of international talents should comprehensively examine individual traits, cultural intelligence and interaction methods, etc., rather than examining a single aspect.
Bernardo and Presbitero (2018) discussed the factors that influenced cultural intelligence. They suggested that cognitive flexibility was a research hypothesis that might be closely related to cultural intelligence. Through a questionnaire survey on 694 respondents, the survey results confirmed that the increase in cultural intelligence of respondents was closely related to cognitive flexibility, which was reflected in that respondents were willing to consider issues in many aspects and were willing to adopt a variety of methods to solve a problem, and they also pointed out that this cognitive flexibility was influenced by personal preferences and tendencies. The results of this study provided some new perspectives on how companies could cultivate their employees' cultural intelligence.
1.2.3.2 Experience
Moody (2007) found that the most significant predictor of CQ was openness to experience, followed by awareness of responsibility. Different from general intelligence, cultural intelligence can be improved through training, so cross-cultural communication experience and training will also affect cultural intelligence. According to the situational learning theory, Fischer (2011) argue that international exchange experience can provide individuals with social background and actual activities to learn how to manage cross-cultural differences, so individuals, who have more international exchange experience, can obtain higher cultural intelligence, and these times that communicate with people of other cultures may also affect the development of cultural intelligence.
Considering the exposure of emotional intelligence and cultural intelligence, Crowne (2013) found that compared with the cultural less exposure, more cultural exposure individuals have higher levels of cultural intelligence, at the same time as his cultural exposure (been to the number of countries) and the width of the depth of visits (a country), with their profound cultural intelligence are also rising. This finding provides a new perspective for the research on the predictive source of cultural intelligence and a reference for the study on the localization of cultural intelligence.
1.2.3.3 Education
Putranto, Gustomo and Ghazali (2015) commented that it was one of the responsibilities of business schools to enable students to face the impact of globalization and multiculturalism when entering the business world, an effective way was to improve their cultural intelligence (CQ), so that they could effectively adapt and work in a multicultural environment. They developed a teaching plan to test how to improve students' CQ. The study was done by measuring the CQ of students who took the intercultural management course at the beginning and end of the course. In this course, students receive four teaching methods to improve their CQ (lecturing, reading literature, sharing session, and field trip). Among these four teaching methods, field trip was the most effective way to learn and understand different cultures, and the lecturing played the worst role. They finally put forward suggestions on how to improve and integrate these four methods into teaching to improve students' CQ.
Nguyen, Jefferies and Rojas’ (2018) investigated the impact of studying abroad on students' cross-cultural adaptability. Through a survey of 79 people and an interview with 15 people, They found that from a vertical comparison, for students who have never traveled abroad, their cultural intelligence was significantly higher than before going abroad. Judging from a horizontal comparison, people with a background of studying abroad have higher cultural intelligence than those who did not have the same experience. It showed that studying abroad could promote the improvement of students' cultural intelligence. Its research shows that cultural intelligence can be cultivated and improved in a short time.
1.2.4 Outcome of cultural intelligence
An important outcome in the study of cultural intelligence is cultural judgment and decision making, which refers to "gathering information and making decisions when communicating between different cultures, involving the quality of decisions". Ang et al. (2007) found that the dimensions of metacognitive and cognitive CQ can significantly affect cultural judgment and decision making when studying the impact of CQ on decision making, acculturation and task performance. Another cognitive result of cultural intelligence is the perception of uncertainty about the transnational environment. Prado (2006) found that cognitive and metacognitive cultural intelligence had significant positive effects on manager's perception of uncertainty in the transnational environment, and could effectively help managers evaluate the risk of transnational tasks.#p#分页标题#e#
Elenkov and Manev (2009) believed that cultural intelligence can help people to better understand the behaviors that other people have to achieve their goals. They can look at these behaviors from the perspective of people in a specific cultural environment. This is confirmed by empirical research. The results show that metacognitive cultural intelligence and cognitive cultural intelligence can significantly improve the accuracy of people's predictions, judgments, and decision-making.
Cultural intelligence influences the individual's psychological level, including the individual's intercultural adaptation and happiness. Cultural adaptation can be further divided into general adaptation (general living conditions in the new culture), work adaptation (work culture in the new environment) and communication adaptation (socialization and getting along with local people). Ang et al. (2007) found that both motivational and behavioral cultural intelligence had significant effects on acculturation and well-being, among which motivational cultural intelligence could effectively predict work adaptation and general adaptation. When Li Xiaoyan et al. (2012) studied the adaptation problems of overseas students in China, they found that cultural intelligence could significantly predict the cross-cultural adaptation of overseas students, and introduced psychological capital and social support as the moderating variables, which proved that psychological capital was also an important pre-dependent variable of cultural intelligence. Wang Zeyu et al. (2013) focused on the adaptation of expatriate scholars and proposed that there was a significant positive correlation between the three dimensions of motivational cultural intelligence and cross-cultural adaptation. Kyle (2013) studied the relationship between language ability, cultural intelligence and expatriate success, and found that cultural intelligence can effectively predict expats' life and job satisfaction in foreign countries.
Caputo, Ayoko and Amoo (2018) believed that the motivational dimension of cultural intelligence can help individuals to reduce the pressure of interacting with others in a new cultural environment, and bring about cultural adaptation and well-being, while behavioral culture intelligence can help individuals to adjust their behavior according to different environments to achieve cultural adaptation. Their research results show that global professionals with highly motivational cultural intelligence often have higher cross-cultural adaptation to achieve higher work adaptation and interaction adaptation.
In addition, the psychological results related to cultural intelligence include emotional burnout, interpersonal trust and the need for achievement. Tay et al. (2010) found a significant negative correlation between cultural intelligence and emotional burnout. In their study of a multicultural team, Rockstuhl and Ng (2008) found that focus characters were more willing to trust their partners in the following situations: focus characters had higher metacognitive and cognitive cultural intelligence; The partners have high behavioral cultural intelligence; The two sides come from different cultural backgrounds. However, Chua and Morns (2009) found through empirical studies that the impact of cultural intelligence on interpersonal trust was only significant in the case of cultural diversity. Vedadi et al. (2010) found in the research that cultural diversity also has a certain impact on the managers in the organization, and the managers with high cultural intelligence level in the cross-cultural team will have higher achievement needs.
1.3 Organizational cultural intelligence
1.3.1 Definition of organizational culture intelligence
Earley and Ang (2003) defined organizational culture intelligence, which is the ability of an organization’s quick adaptation and matching to adapt to the new environment, the organization's use, management, marketing and other activities, culture, tradition, values, beliefs and other factors in the new environment.
Brooks Peterson (2008) further explained organizational culture intelligence as the ability that people are from all walks of life show to improve communication in different cultural environments by maintaining rapport with clients, partners and colleagues from different cultures, the ability is reflected in language, space, inner (or emotional) aspects, as well as interpersonal relationships. In short, cultural intelligence is the ability of an organization to adapt to new cultures when they deal with other people from different cultures.
Thomas (2006) defined organizational culture intelligence as the ability of an organization to reconfigure its capabilities to operate and manage effectively in a culturally diverse environment.
1.3.2 Measurement of organizational culture intelligence
Moon (2010) decomposed cultural intelligence into three capabilities from an organizational perspective, namely processes capability, positions capability and paths capability. The organization's process capabilities include three tasks: coordination or integration, learning and reconfiguration. Positioning capability refers to the company's special assets, such as technical assets, complementary assets, financial assets, reputation assets, structural assets, institutional assets, market assets and organizational boundaries. Path capability refers to the strategic choices available to the enterprise and the historical experience it has.
Huang (2011) further explained the influence mechanism of cultural intelligence on three abilities based on the study of Moon (2010). First, improving employees' metacognitive intelligence and cognitive culture intelligence can effectively improve a company's processes capability, namely, it improves employees' ability to acquire and recognize information. Second, improving employees’ motivation and cultural intelligence can effectively improve the enterprise's positioning capability, which enables employees to have a clearer understanding of the company's assets and advantages. Third, improving employees’ action culture intelligence can effectively improve the company's path capability, that is, employees can make the most appropriate behavior based on past experience and corporate strategy.
1.3.3 Antecedent of organizational culture intelligence
Because managers generally have more resources in an organization than the average employees, their responsibilities and decisions make more impact on the organization, and their higher status in the organization also makes the managers’ behavior and style have played greater guidance and role model for other members of the organization (Collins & Clark, 2003), so the cultural intelligence of managers in organizations has a more significant impact on organizational culture intelligence than ordinary employees. The cultural IQ of executive team members is one of the important antecedents that affect organizational culture intelligence.
Brickson (2000) proposed that team-based work forms are increasingly common in multinational workplaces. In this context, cross-cultural team members in an organization agree that their degree of membership in the team affects their behavior at work, which further influences the cultural adaptability and smooth operation of the organization as a whole. If a member of an intercultural team clearly feels that he or she is different from other members of different cultural backgrounds, he may have a lower team identity in the work coordination. On the contrary, if team members from different cultural backgrounds agree with each other, the cultural intelligence of the organization may reach a higher level, because people will feel more comfortable and natural when working with people they identify with, and they are more willing to cooperate with each other (Eckela & Grossman, 2005). It can be seen that team identity is antecedent that affects organizational culture intelligence.
In the global operation, an organization will develop a suitable cross-cultural management strategy, adopts an inclusive management approach to the culture of the country in which the subsidiary is located, overcomes any conflicts of heterogeneous culture under cross-cultural conditions, and creates unique corporate culture, thus forming a fruitful management process. Its purpose is to design a practical organizational structure and management mechanism in different forms of cultural atmosphere, to cultivate and shape the various capabilities of the enterprise to adapt to the challenges brought about by cultural differences, and thus have a direct impact on the cultural intelligence of enterprises. Therefore, the organization's cross-cultural management strategy is one of the important antecedents that affect organizational culture intelligence.
Corporate culture is the sum of business philosophy, business purpose, business policy, values, business behavior, social responsibility, and business image formed by a company in its business activities. Franco (2016) pointed out that an inclusive and people-oriented corporate culture enables companies to pay more attention to and respect other cultures, and is willing to provide targeted products and services to consumers of different cultural backgrounds. Franco (2016) figured that companies with corporate culture that are good at communicating and respecting their employees are more capable of cross-cultural management. These companies are often able to more quickly and accurately understand the needs of consumers from different cultural backgrounds. Franco (2016) found that companies with a sense of social responsibility will actively avoid culturally discriminatory behaviors and are more likely to be loved by consumers of different cultural backgrounds. All in all, corporate culture is one of the important antecedents that affect organizational culture intelligence.#p#分页标题#e#
Moody (2007) found that the most significant predictor of CQ was openness to experience, followed by awareness of responsibility. Different from general intelligence, cultural intelligence can be improved through training, so cross-cultural communication experience and training will also affect cultural intelligence.
According to the situational learning theory, Crowne’s (2008) study produced some opinions about the impact of cultural exposure on CQ. The results of the survey indicated that certain types of exposure to other cultures (such as foreign education and foreign employment) and the extent of exposure to these experiences can enhance cultural intelligence. These findings are critical for multinational companies because managers need to hire, promote, and train employees in a cross-cultural environment. Cultural intelligence has become a key skill for global business leaders, and as in the future, there will be more employees with different cultural backgrounds working together, CQ seems to be becoming more and more important for leaders.
1.3.4 Outcome of organizational culture intelligence
Outcome of organizational culture intelligence is mainly concerned with the influence of cultural intelligence on personal psychology, cognition and other factors. It also involves the influences of organizational culture intelligence on organize information communication and sharing, organizational behavior, organizational decision-making, organizational innovation, and organizational cross-cultural management, and so on.
Outcome of organizational culture IQ are mainly concerned with the influence of cultural IQ on personal psychology, cognition and other factors. It also involves organizational culture IQ to organize information communication and sharing, organizational behavior, organizational decision-making, organizational innovation, and organizational cross-cultural management. And so on.
Chua and Morns (2009) proposed that the cultural intelligence of executives indirectly affects the frequency of idea sharing in intercultural relationships by increasing emotional trust, but it has no influence on the idea sharing behavior in intercultural relationships. Chen and Lin (2013) evaluated the effect of cultural intelligence on team knowledge sharing from the perspective of social cognition, and found that knowledge sharing was directly influenced by metacognitive, cognitive and motivational cultural intelligence. At the same time, it was also indirectly influenced by metacognitive and behavioral cultural intelligence under the intermediary of team perception efficiency. Other more direct behavioral outcomes of cultural intelligence include cross-cultural negotiation and conflict resolution. Imai and Gelfand (2010) found that negotiators with high cultural intelligence were able to integrate more information and establish friendly cooperative relations in cross-cultural negotiations, which in turn had a positive impact on the common interests of both parties. Ramirez(2010) proposed that cultural intelligence can effectively predict the strategies and ability of individuals to resolve conflicts.
Prado (2006) found that cognitive and metacognitive cultural intelligence had significant positive effects on manager's perception of uncertainty in the transnational environment, and could effectively help managers evaluate the risk of transnational tasks.
Crowne (2008) studied the influence of cultural intelligence on the negotiating parties in cross-border negotiations. Negotiators with higher cultural intelligence show more information integration behavior and cooperative relationship management behavior, concept sharing behavior, and high cultural intelligence negotiators can better convince the opponent to accept their own point of view and ultimately lead to the successful conclusion of the negotiation.
Elenkov and Manev (2009) examined whether forward-looking transformational leadership of senior foreign managers could influence the rate of innovation adoption of the organizations or units they led and explored the role that cultural intelligence played in it. Elenkov and Manev (2009) studied 153 senior foreign managers and 695 subordinates from all 27 countries in the European Union and found that visionary transformational leadership of high-level expatriates had a direct impact on the rate of innovation adoption. Cultural intelligence regulated the impact of advanced foreign leaders on organizational innovation. The study showed that foreign managers with high cultural intelligence have a good understanding of local culture, have higher cross-cultural leadership, and they were often better able to lead cross-cultural organizations to innovate and change.
Frías-Jamilena et al. (2018) are scholars from Department of Marketing and Market Research at the University of Granada, they pointed out that achieving destination attraction and competitiveness is a major priority for tourism destination managers. They must implement new strategies that are different from their competitors’, but the success of these strategies depends on whether visitors can like and understand the local culture, and whether the services and products offered by travel companies can meet the needs of tourists. In this context, they found that cultural intelligence is very important for tourism. They conducted a questionnaire survey on 503 British tourists visiting Spain. The survey found that the passengers’ previous travel experience would affect the cultural intelligence of the tourists, and the cultural intelligence of the tourists would affect their understanding and love of the local culture; their travel experience in turn affected the satisfaction of visitors. He further proposed that cultural intelligence has great application value for tourism, because tourism workers with high cultural intelligence can more accurately predict the behavior of tourists, can better communicate with tourists to provide quality services, and thus improve tourists’ satisfaction.
Caputo, Ayoko and Amoo (2018) studied the positive role of cultural intelligence in cross-cultural management from the perspective of resolving cultural conflicts. He conducted a questionnaire survey on 403 employees and found that managers and employees with high cultural intelligence helped to avoid escaping problems from intercultural communication., forcing others to accept their own views, and using radical ways to solve problems and other problems, and thus played a role in regulating the interpersonal relationship between the parties in the process of intercultural communication, avoiding the occurrence of cultural conflicts, and ultimately improving the organization’s overall performance and satisfaction. The study provided new empirical evidence for the important role of cultural intelligence in managing conflicts, suggesting that cross-cultural organizations can use cultural intelligence to improve work efficiency and performance.
Young, Haffejee, Corsun (2017) analyzed that with the increase of refugees and immigrants in various countries, ethnocentrism seemed to be rising in various countries, which brought challenges to cross-cultural management and also provided opportunities for the application of cultural intelligence in cross-cultural management. They designed an experiment in which whites, wealthy, and college students guided refugees with different backgrounds to resettle in the United States, and used multiple regression analysis methods to investigate the data and analyze the relationship between cultural intelligence and ethnocentrism. The results showed that the improvement of cultural intelligence has a positive effect on relieving cultural conflicts and reducing the inappropriate speech and behavior of ethnocentrists. Their results indicated that cultural intelligence has a positive effect on mitigating conflicts between cultures. In addition, it should be noted that the intensity of cultural conflicts in refugee management is usually higher than that in a commercial field, so although the research is aimed at the field of sociology, the results should be equally adapted to the research in a commercial field.
1.4 Market-based CQ
1.4.1 Definition of market-based CQ
Driel and Gabrenya (2013) defined market-based CQ as an organization’s capacity of functioning and managing in an effective manner across different markets based on its knowledge, as well as implementing actions on the basis of market specificities. Referring to Driel and Gabrenya’s (2013) literatures, Franco (2016) summarized market-based CQ as two components, namely, cross-cultural knowledge and cross-cultural actions. Cross-cultural knowledge is defined as an antecedent / a resource of cross-cultural actions.
Cross-cultural actions are defined as marketing dynamic capabilities which change a company’s resource of creating and delivering superior customer value to deal with market changes” (Fang and Zou, 2009).
According to relevant researches, Franco (2016) divided cross-cultural knowledge into three parts. First part is general knowledge. General knowledge refers to knowledge and awareness of cultural differences (Hofstede, 2001). It is important because it is the base used to get knowledge of other types to prepare for learning, culture-general approaches are used for preparing for learning of how to learn, provide broader experience, as well as ease the movement of culturing specific knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). Second part is specific knowledge, specific knowledge includes: factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, as well as attributional knowledge (Bird et al., 1993). Factual knowledge refers to clarifies aspects of a country’s politics, economy, history, institutions, as well as social conditions. Conceptual knowledge is to understand how particular country views and values central concerns: individual rights, appropriate forms of group membership, behavior, as well as its associated obligations, and obligations to a state. Attributional knowledge refers to an increased awareness of contextually appropriate behavior (Bird et al., 1993). Culture, language, society, economy and politics are reflected in knowledge (Inkpen and Beamish, 1997). Third part is market knowledge, the last subcomponent add compared to the literatures is market knowledge. Market knowledge refers to knowledge relates to market information on competitors, suppliers, customers, distributors and so on, as well as internal knowledge, such as management (Kohlbacher, 2007). #p#分页标题#e#
Cross-cultural actions refer to actions of organizations used to obtain, manage or use cultural knowledge (Van Driel and Gabrenya, 2013). The literature believes that cross-cultural actions are made up of motivational CQ, metacognitive CQ and behavioral CQ.
Metacognitive market-based CQ indicates strategies undertaken by an organization to remain aware of market changes to acquire, develop its cross-cultural knowledge.
Motivational market-based CQ shows the capability of an organization towards direct attention, as well as energy to learning, and functioning effectively in differently cultural markets. Behavioral market-based CQ refers to the capability of organizations used to conduct cultural knowledge through a flexible manner to manage effectively across different markets, as adaptation needs different approaches in different market (Ang and Massingham, 2007).
1.4.2 Measurement of market-based CQ
There are many differences between the definition and characteristics of market-based CQ and cultural IQ, organizational culture IQ. Therefore, there are different dimensions and indicators for market-based CQ strategies. The author enumerates the corresponding indicators for measuring market-based CQ based on relevant literatures.
Jaworski and Kohli (1993) pointed out that whether companies are aware of the importance of understanding customer needs is an important indicator of judging whether a company has a high market-based CQ.
O'Cass, Ngo and Siahtiri (2015) pointed out that the higher the market-based CQ that an enterprise has, the more emphasis is placed on collecting information about customers, suppliers and competitors. Zhou (2007) commented that the higher the market-based CQ is, the more information and materials that an enterprise can fully grasp on foreign consumers, competitors, and market channels. This shows that enterprises attach importance to the collection of relevant knowledge and lay the foundation for the targeted marketing strategy.
Llonch, Rialp and Rialp (2011) thought that whether the information of customer needs can communicate freely within a company is related to whether the company can effectively use this information to develop a marketing strategy that meets market needs, therefore, it is an important indicator to judge whether the company has high market-based CQ.
Magnusson et al. (2013) found that the ability of companies to correctly apply the knowledge of marketing mix to develop marketing strategies for consumers of other cultural backgrounds is an important indicator of whether a company has a high market-based CQ. (Example: 4p marketing mix). Because this requires companies to have corresponding general knowledge, special knowledge and marketing knowledge, it also requires a company to use and apply this knowledge. A company with a higher market-based CQ has more knowledge and it has more powerful to use it.
1.4.3 Antecedent
There are many differences between the definition and characteristics of market-based CQ and cultural intelligence, organizational culture intelligence. Therefore, there are different dimensions and indicators for the antecedents affecting market-based CQ. The following contents are the author’s listed corresponding antecedents affecting market-based CQ based on relevant literature.
Franco (2016) pointed out that the motive of internationalization is based on the antecedents of the cross-cultural IQ of a market. Because an enterprise has the motive of internationalization, it will have the motivation to seriously understand the foreign market, culture and competitors, consumers and other information, and formulates corresponding strategies and measures to promote the establishment of subsidiaries abroad and participate in competition in foreign markets.
Llonch, Rialp and Rialp (2011) analyzed that mastering its core business is a antecedent for market-based cross-cultural IQ, it means that an enterpris should have enough experience, expertise, as well as a strong concept to function and manage effectively across markets. To master its core business is also about having a global strategy well defined: what are the objectives, the vision, what is the ‘raison d’être’ and the value added of the company, etc. Only when an enterprise masters its core business, then, it is easier to implement local actions.
Llonch, Rialp and Rialp (2011) believed that adaptability is antecedent of market-based cross-cultural IQ. Adaptability is reflected in two aspects. First, it can adapt to the special culture of a local market and make reasonable adjustments to the marketing and management of the enterprise, so that the enterprise can meet the needs of local consumers. Second, an enterprise keeps making adjustments while maintaining the company's core and special culture, which will enable the company to maintain its advantage in the local market competition. Therefore, how to find a balance in adjustment and maintenance to improve the adaptability of enterprises is antecedent that affects the market-based cross-cultural IQ.
Jaworski and Kohli (1993) mentioned that treating information in a way to be culturally appropriate is an antecedent of market-based cross-cultural IQ. This means that a company recognizes the importance of the cultural background of the target market and is willing to incorporate local cultural factors in the development of marketing strategies for the target market, so that the marketing and management activities of the company show a high market-based cross cultural IQ.
1.4.4 Outcome
The outcome of market-based cultural intelligence is mainly focused on evaluating and discussing its negative effects on corporate profits, market share, and consumer satisfaction.
Chen and Liu (2012) studied the influence of market-based CQ on cultural sales through the sample of employees of real estate companies in the United States. They found that market-based CQ had a significant positive effect on increasing market shares, profits.
Frías-Jamilena, Sabiote-Ortiz, Martín-Santana, Beerli-Palacio (2018) affirmed that market-based cultural intelligence has a direct positive impact on team performance and employee satisfaction, while they also studied the short-circuit effect of market-based CQ on performance and satisfaction. They surveyed 218 global project team members and their research showed that market-based CQ significantly regulates role clarity, communication norms, and interpersonal trust, helping companies to provide better services and products to local consumers, which has indirectly increased customer satisfaction, as well as market share and sales revenue.
Nunes, Felix, Prates (2017) pointed out that cultivating internationally competitive talents has a very important impact on the performance of multinational organizations, Nunes, Felix, Prates (2017) investigated 217 foreigners in Brazil and found that market-based cultural intelligence can improve the performance of foreigners by improving cultural adaptability. It helps companies to better understand local culture and market demand to increase their sales revenue and market share.
Ngo and O'Cass (2012) found that companies have a high market-based cultural intelligence enables them to have the knowledge and ability to use their resources to enable them to quickly understand the needs of a local market and develop appropriate strategy to market. Market-based cultural intelligence has an important positive effect on a company's sales revenue, profit and market share.
Chart 1 Conceptual model of market-based cultural IQ
References
Ang, Z., and Massingham, P. (2007), National culture and the standardization versus adaptation of knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11, 5-21.
Bernardo, A. B. I. and Presbitero, A. (2018). Cognitive flexibility and cultural intelligence: Exploring the cognitive aspects of effective functioning in culturally diverse contexts. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 66(9), 12-21.
Bird, A., Heinbuch, S., Dunbar, R. and McNulty, M. (1993). A conceptual model of the effects of area studies training programs and a preliminary investigation of the model's hypothesized relationships. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 17 (4), 415-435.
Bücker, J., Furrer, O. and Lin, Y. (2015). Measuring cultural intelligence (CQ): a new test of the CQ scale. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence,15, 3.
Caputo, A., Ayoko, O. B. and Amoo, N. (2018). The moderating role of cultural intelligence in the relationship between cultural orientations and conflict management styles. Journal of Business Research, 89(8),10-20.
Chen, A. S., Lin, Y. and Sawangpattanakul, A. (2011). The relationship between cultural intelligence and performance with the mediating effect of culture shock: acase from Philippine laborers in Taiwan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(2), 246-258.
Chen, X-P., Portnoy, R., and Liu D. (2012). A multilevel investigation of motivational cultural intelligence, organizational diversity climate, and cultural sales: evidence from U.S. real estate firms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 93-106.
Collins, C. J. & Clark, K. D. (2003). Strategic human resources practices, top management team social networks and firm performance, the role of human resource practices in creating organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Journal, 46, 740-751.
Crowne, K. A. (2008). What leads to cultural intelligence? Business Horizons, 51(5), 391-399.
Driel, M. and Gabrenya, W. K. (2013). Organizational cross-cultural competence: approaches to measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44, 874–99.#p#分页标题#e#
Elenkov, D. S. and Manev, I. M. (2009). Senior expatriate leadership's effects on innovation and the role of cultural intelligence. Journal of World Business, 44(4), 357-369.
Fang, E., and Zou S. (2009). Antecedents and consequences of marketing dynamic capabilities in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 40 (5), 742-761.
Franco, J. (2016). Market-based cultural Intelligence: theoretical reflections and conceptual insights. Journal of Marketing, 35, 56-63.
Frías-Jamilena, D. M., Sabiote-Ortiz, C. M., Martín-Santana, J. D. and Beerli-Palacio, A. (2018). Antecedents and consequences of cultural intelligence in tourism. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8(6), 350-358.
Inkpen, A. G. and Beamish, P. (1997). Knowledge, bargaining power, and instability of international joint ventures. Academy of Management Review, 22 (1), 177-202.
Jaworski, B. J., and Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation: antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53-70.
Kohlbacher, F., and Krähe, M. O. B. (2007). Knowledge creation and transfer in a cross-cultural context - empirical evidence from Tyco Flow control. Knowledge & Process Management, 14 (3), 169-181.
Li, M., Mobley, W. H. and Kelly, A. (2016). Linking personality to cultural intelligence: an interactive effect of openness and agreeableness. Personality and Individual Differences, 89(1), 105-110.
Llonch, J., Rialp, A. and Rialp, J. (2011), Marketing capabilities, enterprise optimization programs and performance in early transition economies: the case of Cuban SOEs. Transformations in Business & Economics, 10 (3), 45-71.
MacNab, B. R. and Worthley, R. (2012). Individual characteristics as predictors of cultural intelligence development: The relevance of self-efficacy. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(1), 62-71.
Magnusson, P., Westjohn S. A., Semenov A. V., Randrianasolo A. A., and Zdravkovic S. (2013), The role of cultural intelligence in marketing adaptation and export performance. Journal of International Marketing, 21 (4), 44–61.
Ngo, L.V. and O’Cass, A. (2012), Performance implications of market orientation, marketing resources, and marketing capabilities. Journal of Marketing Management, 28, 173-187.
Nguyen, A. M. T., Jefferies, J. and Rojas, B. (2018). Short term, big impact? Changes in self-efficacy and cultural intelligence, and the adjustment of multicultural and monocultural students abroad. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 66(9), 119-129.
Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nunes, I. M., Felix, B., Prates, L.A. (2017). Cultural intelligence, cross-cultural adaptation and expatriate performance: a study with expatriates living in Brazil. Revista de Administração, 52(3), 219-232.
O'Cass A., Ngo L. V., and Siahtiri V, (2015), Marketing resource-capability complementarity and firm performance in B2B firms. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 30 (2), 194 – 207.
Peterson, B. (2008). Cultural intelligence. Shanghai: Law Publisher.
Presbitero, A. and Attar, H. (2018). Intercultural communication effectiveness, cultural intelligence and knowledge sharing: extending anxiety-uncertainty management theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 67(11), 35-43.
Putranto, N. R., Gustomo, A. and Ghazali, A. (2015). Analysis of cross cultural management course pedagogy methods in developing students’ cultural intelligence. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 169(20), 354-362.
Young, C. A., Haffejee, B. and Corsun, D. L. (2017). The relationship between ethnocentrism and cultural intelligence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 58(5), 31-41.
|
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
