Applying Cultural Capabilities Report

10.1177/1059601105275262GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENTBrislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR

Cultural Intelligence

UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIORS THAT SERVE PEOPLE’S GOALS

RICHARD BRISLIN

REGINALD WORTHLEY University of Hawaii at Manoa

BRENT MACNAB University of Sydney

Cultural intelligence has various meanings that can be looked on as complementary. On one hand, it refers to behaviors that are considered intelligent from the point of view of people in spe- cific cultures. Such behaviors can include quick application of previously learned information in some cultures, getting along with kin in other cultures, and slow and deliberate consideration of alternative courses of action in still other cultures. On the other hand, cultural intelligence can also refer to the traits and skills of people who adjust quickly, with minimal stress, when they interact extensively in cultures other than the ones where they were socialized. The two uses of the term are related because people who want to be sensitive to others can examine intelligence as it is defined and demonstrated in other cultures and can make adjustments in their own behaviors during their cross-cultural experiences.

Keywords: culture adjustment; differing views of intelligence; cross-cultural training; higher order skills; disconfirmed expectations; suspension of judgment

As insightfully analyzed by Earley (2002; Earley & Ang, 2003), cultural intelligence has different meanings depending on various contexts in which the term is used. One of the most common uses refers to people’s success (or lack thereof) when adjusting to another culture, for example, on an overseas business assignment. The other use of cultural intelligence deals with behav- iors that are considered “intelligent” in different cultures. Some higher order skills may be able to enhance cultural intelligence. Considering this latter view of intelligence, researchers look at behaviors that elders pass on to younger members of a culture so that the latter become respected and valued contributors to society. The two views, at first glance seemingly different, have important connecting points that give insights into cross-cultural

Group & Organization Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, February 2006 40-55 DOI: 10.1177/1059601105275262 © 2006 Sage Publications

40

adjustment and to the study of intelligence in schools, careers, and other are- nas of life. There are also connecting points between cultural intelligence and other types of interactive intelligence such as social intelligence or emotional intelligence. These connections may enable the enhancement of those forms of intelligence in a cross-cultural setting. In addition to examining these con- nections, we discuss other topics that we feel are central to an understanding of cultural intelligence. These include adjustment to other cultures, cross- cultural training, disconfirmed expectations, and the ability to deal with confusion when interacting with people from cultures other than one’s own.

ADJUSTMENT TO OTHER CULTURES

People are assigned, or volunteer, for various types of overseas experi- ences, and they often encounter stressful situations that challenge their cop- ing processes (Brislin, 2000; Hall, 1959; Hofstede, 2001). For example, businesspeople want to establish joint trade agreements but cannot identify the principle decision makers and cannot figure out how decisions are made. International students want to attain college degrees but find that they have to engage in unfamiliar behaviors, such as speaking up in class, to earn good grades. Technical assistance advisers want to introduce projects that will improve the quality of life in a less-developed country; however, they find that residents don’t think into the future in the same way. Some people, how- ever, overcome adjustment difficulties and recall their overseas experiences as some of the most important and affecting in their personal and profes- sional lives. What separates these people from those who have to leave their overseas assignment or from those that “stick it out” but look back on their experiences as wasted years?

One answer to the question is captured by a major use of the term cultural intelligence. Some people are skillful at recognizing behaviors that are influ- enced by culture. People in different cultures have goals, and cultural norms develop that identify and guide people toward achievement of those goals. These norms, and behaviors consistent with the norms, are not the same in all cultures. For example, people have the goal of marrying and starting a fam- ily. In some cultures, people choose their own mate by meeting different peo- ple in schools, at workplaces, and in churches. They choose to keep company with some potential romantic partners and reject the overtures of others. They engage in behaviors summarized by the terms dating and courtship and later, they become engaged and marry. In other cultures, adults think that it is totally ridiculous to allow people in their 20s, still in the throes of passionate fantasies, to choose a mate for life. Adults from two families meet and decide

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 41

on a good match. Our colleague, D. P. S. Bhawuk from Nepal, did not meet his parents’ selection until the day of the wedding. Many participants in an arranged marriage defend the practice. “My parents know me and good fami- lies in my country. They know what it takes to make a marriage work after the honeymoon. They want happiness for me. They will make a good choice.” People who are culturally intelligent realize that they will encounter differ- ences such as this. They will not enter a socially unskilled stony silence when, during their overseas assignment, they discover their lunch compan- ion is getting married next Saturday to someone she has not yet met.

This knowledge and acceptance of cultural differences are not qualities that are limited to only a few people. People’s cultural intelligence can be increased with experience, practice, and a positive attitude toward lifelong learning.

BEHAVIORS, COGNITIONS, EMOTIONS, AND AWARENESS

In efforts to prepare people for life in other cultures (Brislin & Yoshida, 1994; Triandis, 2005), a good way to encourage the development of cultural intelligence is to engage in a four-step procedure characterized by the follow- ing list.

• consider behaviors in which people will likely engage in during their overseas assignment

• introduce reasons for these behaviors as seen by people in the other culture • consider the emotional implications and emotional associations that accom-

pany the behavior • Now that understanding has improved, use the new knowledge as a jumping-

off point for learning about other behaviors and broader concepts that will increase cultural intelligence.

Business card exchange in Asia is a good example for illustrating this four-step procedure. In America, some businesspeople use and distribute business cards and some do not; however, not using business cards is impos- sible in Japan, Korea, and other Asian countries. Before a first lecture tour in Japan, a colleague told one of the authors to have business cards made and to emphasize his position in the organization where he worked. The colleague added, “If you don’t have a business card, you will not exist!” At the time (early 1970s), the author did not know the reasons why it was necessary but respected the colleague and behaved according to his suggestion. Now, this

42 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

same recommendation is made to others; however, they are also advised to follow the four-step procedure.

The behaviors involve the preparation of business cards and practice in exchanging them with others. In Japan, the cards are presented with two hands. If people then sit down at a table, they can place the cards in front of them so that the names and affiliations of others at the meeting can be easily read.

Treatment of cognitions centers on why business card exchange is impor- tant and why it has become a standard part of everyday business practice. One reason is that there are differing language levels in Japan that are dependent on peoples’ status. The levels include voice tone, vocabulary choice, and body posture. There is a level for people who are equal in status, people who are lower in status, and people who are higher in status. The demand that these different levels be mastered is one reason why nonnatives find that Japanese is a difficult language to learn. If Japanese counterparts cannot ascertain people’s status from their business cards, they cannot speak to them without fear of making a mistake. Other languages do not have the same emphasis on levels. In American English, for instance, there is what might be called a one-level-fits-all approach. Managers can talk to their sec- retaries using the same voice tone and vocabulary as they would with the company president.

For this example, emotions are not usually a major problem. It is irritating to interrupt trip preparations to have new business cards made, especially when they are two sided, one in each language. It can be frustrating to remember to use both hands when handing a card to someone rather than the more familiar use of one hand. Most people, however, adjust to the greater use of business cards with graciousness, especially when told why their use is necessary.

In the fourth step, awareness, people can use one example of a cultural dif- ference to take a broader view. Often, this step is served by linking specific behaviors to broader cultural themes (Hofstede, 2001; Osland & Bird, 2000). A broader theme stimulated by discussion of the business card example is that Japan is a power-distant culture. Status distinctions are prominent, and people take them very seriously. People do not disagree with their superiors in public settings. People lose status, or face, if they feel that they are not being given respect consistent with their position in society. Americans on overseas assignments are well advised to identify Japanese who are high sta- tus and to treat them with more respect and deference than they would to counterparts in their own country.

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 43

VIEWS OF INTELLIGENCE IN DIFFERENT CULTURES

Another use of the term cultural intelligence deals with what adults in dif- ferent cultures consider to be behaviors that mark the sharp, clever, and smart people (Berry, 1976; Mishra, 1997; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2005). In some rural African cultures, for instance, young people who are cooperative and who can assist adults on important tasks are considered the most intelligent. Children who read and write and who can do arithmetic may do well in school (Serpell & Hatano, 1997) and are respected; however, if these chil- dren cannot also cooperate with fellow villagers, they do not achieve the status as “our most intelligent young men and women.” The importance of harmony, cooperation, and good relations with others is one of the most actively investigated topics in cross-cultural research (Triandis, 1995). Espe- cially in less developed countries where resources are scarce, people must share food, water, and money to survive. Having cooperative relations with members of one’s collective is an aid to survival. It is no accident, then, that cooperation becomes part of adults’ definition of intelligence in these countries.

Teachers who accept overseas assignments in collective cultures, where group loyalty is highly valued, frequently report incidents such as the follow- ing. People chat with each other in class and don’t seem to be paying attention to the teacher. When it comes time for students to take tests, their eyes wan- der to the efforts of others. Teachers become tempted to label their students’ behavior as lazy and as indicators of cheating. As they grow more inter- culturally sophisticated, the teachers make more sophisticated and intelligent attributions. When students talk to each other in class, they are often sharing their understanding of the teachers’ presentations. The students are helping each other, following through on their obligations to be cooperative and har- monious with in-group members. When they look to each other during test taking sessions, they are again helping each other out and also are preparing themselves for their adulthood. There will not be many times in their family and career futures that they will be expected to demonstrate knowledge and to solve problems by themselves. So cooperative test taking may fit their cul- tural expectations better than the individualized style that is extremely com- mon in North America and Western Europe. Researchers in the United States have examined the benefits of cooperative test taking and have found that students demonstrate acquisition of more knowledge (Zimbardo, Butler, & Wolfe, 2003).

44 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

ENRICHING THE OVERSEAS ADJUSTMENT CONNOTATIONS OF CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE

If people know what is considered intelligent everyday behavior in other cultures, and how it contrasts with intelligent behavior in the cultures of their own socialization, they will have a greater understanding of what they must do to adjust effectively during overseas assignments. If cultures emphasize group affiliations, cooperation, and harmony, they are most likely collec- tivistic in nature (Hofstede, 2001; Triandis, 1995). In collectivist cultures, people are more likely to view themselves as members of groups rather than as individuals with personal attitudes, ambitions, and skills. These latter indi- vidualistic concepts are not unknown; however, they are more likely to be integrated into the obligations and expectations that accompany group mem- bership. The following incident could well occur during an overseas assign- ment. An American has achieved a managerial position at an international bank’s office in Katmandu, Nepal. He is asked to be on the selection commit- tee for a new hire. The bank president is a Nepalese citizen, and one of the job applicants is his nephew. The American does not place much weight on this fact and, instead, is impressed by the education and previous job experience of another applicant. However, everyone else on the selection committee prefers the boss’s nephew, despite his rather modest career accomplishments to date. The term nepotism goes through the American’s mind.

Returning to the four-step recommendation for increasing cultural intelli- gence, the recommended behavior is that the American should be gracious in accepting the decision and should make efforts to understand the reasons for it. Cognitions include the fact that Nepal is a collectivist culture. People are expected to look after the members of their in-group. If they have a resource, they are expected to share it with their in-group. If they do not, they will acquire the reputation of disloyal people who are not to be trusted. The Amer- ican is well advised to imagine the phone calls or drop-in visits that relatives will make if the company president chooses a nonfamily member for the job. Family elders will say,

So the great company president wouldn’t help his nephew. Maybe our es- teemed and high status relative forgets where he came from? And does he remember that we took care of his family when he was off acquiring his MBA degree?

The emotions are harder to deal with than in the business card example. Americans know what nepotism is and have learned to consider it unethical.

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 45

They will have to swallow hard when they go along with the hiring commit- tee’s decision. There is no easy way to deal with the negative emotions that such a behavior entails. Knowing the reasons, such as those relatives are expected to be reliable workers over a long time period because of their own collective obligations, offers some assistance in dealing with emotional upheaval.

Adding the awareness step moves people from understanding nepotism to other implications of working in a collectivist culture. The key point is that people have an in-group that plays a much stronger role than do people’s group memberships in an individualistic culture such as the United States or Canada. People adjusting to life in a collectivistic culture are wise to con- stantly think about answers to the question, “What implications do peoples’ group memberships have for this behavior I am considering?”

If people who are culturally intelligent understand the implications of col- lectivism, they will not be surprised by requests that take place 20 years after being offered group membership in an overseas country. We have heard anecdotes such as the following from many sojourners. They had a success- ful 3 years in a collectivist culture and developed close relations with several colleagues. Back in their own country for 15 years, they received a phone call. The person on the other end of the line said something like,

Remember me? I was in elementary school when you worked with my father. I was the one who served tea when you came to visit our house. I’m at the airport in your city, now, and I was hoping to obtain an internship at your company.

The successful sojourners were offered collective membership during their overseas assignments. They now have obligations to look after members of the collective, such as the children of their colleagues.

There are three types of behaviors that can be covered in a cross-cultural training program (Brislin & Yoshida, 1994; Triandis, 2005), and they vary along a dimension ranging from specific to general. The first deals with very specific behaviors a person has to know to adjust successfully to another cul- ture, and examples have been given here: business card exchange, coopera- tive test taking, and telephone calls from the airport. The second type in- creases the level of generalization of behaviors. With an awareness of this type, people will know that certain cultural emphases will lead to guidance for their behavior. Specific behaviors cannot be predicted; however, more general advice can still be helpful. For example, people can be told that one sign of success during their overseas assignments will be the offer of collec- tive membership; however, this special status includes benefits from and obligations to the group. The third type is highly general. With an awareness

46 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

of this type, people will know that there will be challenges during their over- seas assignment that cannot be predicted. Such challenges are always found during long sojourns, and the stress people feel when dealing with difficul- ties should not be taken as a sign of failure. People should not entertain the empty feeling that “I am the only person who has difficulties of this sort.” Cultural intelligence includes the knowledge that unfamiliar and sometimes unpredictable challenges are inevitable. The idea of unfamiliar and un- predictable challenges, in part, helps to lead us into a discussion about representative, but not exhaustive, higher order skills related to cultural intelligence.

HIGHER ORDER SKILLS AND CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE

Cultural intelligence is to be distinguished from other types of interactive intelligence such as emotional intelligence and social intelligence. Emo- tional intelligence (Goleman, 1996) involves a set of abilities and skills that allow, among other things, self-awareness, impulse control, self-efficacy, empathy, and social deftness. Social intelligence (Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987) refers to the individual’s fund of knowledge about the social world. Social intelligence involves a set of abilities and skills that allow us to “get along with” and relate to the people around us. Often times, in Western man- agement literature and popular self-improvement texts, highly effective peo- ple are described as possessing a combination of cognitive and emotional intelligence; sometimes with an emphasis on the latter. The business profes- sional that is capable of deft and comprehensive analysis in project develop- ment while at the same time presenting her ideas in a manner that makes col- leagues feel included instead of alienated would be an example. However, a key element of emotional intelligence becomes exposed and can potentially break down during cross-cultural interaction.

It is easily argued that many of the important elements of emotional or social intelligence are not culture free. For example, empathy (e.g., the abil- ity to read other people’s emotions) and social deftness (e.g., knowing how to respond to other people’s emotions in an appropriate manner) are culturally influenced. In relation to the self-efficacy and/or motivation aspect of emo- tional intelligence, a wide body of management research exists that demon- strates the cultural sensitivity in this area (Aycan et al., 2000; Schwalb, 1992; Super & Sverko, 1995; Yu & Yang, 1994). Indeed, Osteraker’s (1999) dynamic triangle of motivation places culture in an influential position for determination of a participant’s motivational disposition. The perspective

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 47

that emotional or social intelligence is culturally charged raises some impor- tant nuances in relation to cultural intelligence.

EXPECTATION FOR DISCONFIRMED EXPECTANCY AND MISUNDERSTANDING

In the previous section of this article, a four-part process to cultural aware- ness and understanding was presented: (a) identification of new behaviors, (b) identification of reason(s) for behaviors, (c) consideration of emotional implications of behavior, and (d) using this new understanding and aware- ness for inductive reasoning for larger cultural implications. Other authors have suggested alternative but related step processes, such as Trompenaars and Woolliams (2000) three-part process of recognition, respect, and recon- ciliation (the “three R’s”). Regardless of the process specified, there are two critically important aspects directly related to emotional and cultural intelligence.

In relation to emotional or social intelligence, it was previously discussed that these skills and abilities may not (and often do not) translate into a for- eign culture. This sets up the sojourner who is emotionally intelligent for pos- sibly heightened disconfirmed expectancy—a state whereby the expected result or response to an interaction is not what is actually experienced. This could potentially be more difficult to navigate, in a new cultural environ- ment, for a person who is used to normally being highly effective in social settings. An example is the young executive who travels to Germany on busi- ness and joins counterparts for an after-hours beer. Normally, this person has been able to easily and naturally navigate such after-work conversations at home, making small talk about sports and other light topics. Unexpectedly, with his new German counterparts, the conversation is more serious and involves talk and fairly heated debates about current affairs and politics. Although the person might be socially intelligent at home, his lack of cultural intelligence sets him up for a cultural disconfirmed expectancy and the un- expected experience of not being socially effective in the new environment. In fact, one argument would be that cultural intelligence is a type of higher level social intelligence, allowing one to be socially effective in multiple and varied cultural settings with different norms.

One important and critical skill of people who are culturally intelligent is the expectation for misunderstanding. Different from disconfirmed expec- tancy, the sojourner who is culturally intelligent begins to expect that she or he will encounter specific events and behaviors in the new cultural context

48 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

that will not immediately be understood. This is related, but slightly differ- ent, from what Triandis (2005) calls “suspending judgment.” In this manner, people who are culturally intelligent not only delay judging the situation (e.g., as right or wrong) until more understanding is gained but also allow themselves the normally uncomfortable state of not knowing. Confusion acceptance, accommodating the not knowing, allows one to lower dis- confirmed expectancy and thus reduces levels of stress during cross-cultural interactions; it may also assist in one’s propensity to suspend judgment. Lowering levels of stress during the interaction can allow one to calmly and more fully take in and evaluate the situation to help move toward recognition, respect, and reconciliation or in making isomorphic attributions (understand- ing new stimuli from the perspective of the other culture, Brislin, 2002). So from this perspective, cultural intelligence is facilitated by a Zen-like will- ingness to accept not knowing (confusion acceptance) that will then allow the sojourner to better evaluate the situation leading to eventual, and more accurate, understanding.

IMPORTANT NUANCES FOR CONFUSION ACCEPTANCE

A few important caveats are in order when examining this perspective of cultural intelligence. One is that some level of depersonalization from the sit- uation and experience can be helpful. It is important to realize that, in the pre- vious example, the German colleagues are not attempting to put the newly arrived American “on the spot” by testing his understanding of current affairs. In the German context, it is common for people to be aware and con- versant on basic political and current affairs and/or issues. For our young American to take the situation personally would potentially block his ability to understand and interact effectively with the hosts.

Another important consideration is that not knowing (confusion accep- tance) is uncomfortable and might be particularly uncomfortable for people who are accustomed to being highly effective in their own cultural setting (i.e., people who normally have high emotional and social intelligence skills). In fact, confusion acceptance, along with Triandis’s (2005) suspend- ing judgment, might be two of the more important skills differentiating cul- turally intelligence from other forms of social intelligence.

Cultural intelligence, specifically in relation to confusion acceptance, requires a motivation for eventual understanding. The motivation for even- tual understanding is important because it pushes toward not only under-

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 49

standing of the specific events but also to more inductive understanding of the larger picture. It is clearly not enough for our American visiting Germany to walk around for weeks in blissful, naive uncertainty about why the Ger- mans seem to engage in higher level conversations without adjusting his per- spective or behavior at all. Confusion acceptance, as part of the cultural intel- ligence skills set, must be accompanied by a desire to eventually understand so that the sojourner can become more effective.

There are potentially negative implications to confusion acceptance also. One is that the host might detect a hesitation that could be incorrectly inter- preted. Confusion acceptance, and the related willingness to suspend judg- ment, might produce a better result than incorrectly drawing rash, incorrect analysis of the situation and thus an inappropriate response. However, again, the hesitation, which might be a very natural part of the process, can create unintended results and send incorrect, implicit messages. If our American visiting Germany hesitates too much, up to the point of not participating in any of the after-work conversation, it could send the incorrect message that he is not interested in socializing with his hosts.

In relation to the previous paragraph, it is sometimes acceptable for peo- ple who are culturally intelligent to carefully, and selectively, communicate their state of not knowing to the host(s). This communication can help stave off any potentially negative, implicit messages a host might otherwise make in relation to hesitation. Our American visiting Germany would be alleviat- ing his awkwardness by explaining to his after-work, German hosts how interesting he finds the different type of conversation. He might explain that he is used to conversations about sports and light topics; however, that the more political topics they are talking about are insightful and allow him to learn more about their country. In this manner, our sojourner has subtly put his hosts “on notice” that this is new behavior to him (and therefore the impli- cation is that he might be more hesitant or awkward); however, that he also is interested and engaged. This might also allow him to contribute to the con- versation if anyone asks more about the explained differences. In short, it is sometimes an acceptable strategy (e.g., in a noncompetitive, friendly con- text) for the sojourner who is culturally intelligent not only to accept con- fusion, or not knowing, but also to communicate this to the host(s).

Finally, the combination of confusion acceptance and suspension of judg- ment is functionally important when the sojourner who is culturally intelli- gent has had only a very limited contact and/or experience and understanding of the culture. Keeping in mind that the people who are culturally intelligent are seeking to understand not only the current situation at hand (i.e., the inter- esting political conversation with German colleagues over beer) but also

50 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

potentially larger, inductive implications (i.e., Do Germans, in general, nor- mally engage in this activity and why?). In short, the people who are cultur- ally intelligent are in search of patterns that can be helpful in a broader per- spective. They also remain aware that individuals, and only limited contact with people from a specific culture, may not necessarily be representative of the larger sociocultural reality. Inductive conclusions can only be drawn, with any confidence, when patterns have been observed (see Triandis’s dis- cussion of idiocentrism, 2005).

MANIPULATION AWARENESS, AN ADVANCED CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE SKILL

Tacitly, international business interactions set up the potential for cross- cultural contact in a variety of cooperative, quasi-cooperative, and some- times highly competitive contexts. Business interactions, whether inter- national or not, are often fostered and founded on relations. In the United States, one’s network of relations can prove to be a catalyst in setting up important deals. In China, a person’s guanxi, or intricate network of social relations and favors (Au & Wong, 2000), can mean the difference between success and failure in business. In cooperative settings, such as in interest- based negotiations, parties and relations work to seek mutually beneficial outcomes and the process is not viewed as a zero-sum game (Senger, 2002). This is the normal context from which discussions about cultural understand- ing take place. There is a stated intention to not only recognize cultural differ- ences but to also respect and compromise (Trompenaars & Woolliams, 2000). As cross-cultural researchers and sojourners, this is the ideal but is not always the reality. For people who are culturally intelligent the reality of competitive, or even hostile settings, can pose an entirely new condition. Ear- lier in this article, the idea of disclosure of one’s cultural uncertainty as a tac- tic was suggested within certain contexts. However, what if one is operating in a competitive, cross-cultural circumstance whereby advantages from one party over the other are actively being sought?

For better or worse, business and cross-cultural interactions are not al- ways of a cooperative nature. In fact, sometimes a highly competitive format of interaction is engaged. The reality of limited resources can sometimes dis- courage cooperative behavior and actually promote contentious and hard tactics (Deutsch, 1990) up to and including deliberate deception and omis- sion during interactions and negotiation (Lewicki, 1983; Trevino, 1986). Shapiro, Lewicki, and Devine (1995) found that Machiavellianism (an emo-

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 51

tionally unattached, ends justify the means approach) can increase the pro- pensity to engage in noncooperative tactics in business.

The implication for people who are culturally intelligent is important— that not all cross-cultural encounters are cooperative and that certain tactics such as deception can be used by savvy operatives to gain an advantage—not an uncommon story of negotiators visiting a foreign country to finalize a con- tract. The hosts have purposefully scheduled the meeting during a time just before an important holiday for their visitor. The hosts also know that people from this particular culture prefer to finalize negotiations in a prompt man- ner. A simple negotiation seems to drag on and on, delayed from one day to the next. In addition, the holiday is coming up and the visitor wishes to return home to his or her family. Confused and frustrated, the visiting negotiator makes unnecessary concessions, and the hosts receive highly favorable terms. Their strategy paid off.

People who are culturally intelligent must be aware of these realities and know how to recognize a natural, cultural nuance from a contrived circum- stance designed for other purposes. The authors of this article live in Hawaii, which attracts world tourists with beautiful tropical weather and beaches. Most tourists are greeted with honestly and respect; however, as in any tour- ist destination, there are always a few bad apples. Sometimes people sell tourists photographs, taken with instant cameras, with beautiful parrots owned by the photographer, placed on the tourists’ shoulders, arms, or even heads making for a festive and fun picture. However, some unscrupulous photographers tell Asian tourists that a picture costs US$5.00, and after the picture is taken, and the picture shown to the tourists, the photographer asks for $20—$5 for each person in the picture! Sometimes the photographer gets quite vocal and mentions that he can get the police to help resolve the situa- tion. All too often, the tourists, wishing to avoid conflict, decide to pay up. This is an example of a Machiavellian approach to cultural knowledge. An advanced cultural intelligence skill, be it recognition of a casual tourist scam to a competitive business negotiation tactic, is to realize when your own cul- ture and/or the cultural context setting are being used competitively or even in a malicious manner. This cultural intelligence skill, manipulation aware- ness, requires deft acumen and is therefore considered an advanced nuance of the topic.

CONCLUSION

It has become recognized that effective people tend to possess multiple types of intelligence. Cognitive intelligence normally needs to be combined

52 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

with more socially oriented skills (e.g., social intelligence, emotional intelli- gence) for the most meaningful outcome and personal development. How- ever, these less traditional types of intelligence are not etic and are exposed to a high degree of potential contextual influence such as culture. Specifically, cultural intelligence addresses a set of skills, from basic to advanced, that allow an individual to become effective at eventually transferring social skills from one cultural context to another. When well developed, the cultural intelligence set of skills allows for better cross-cultural respect, recognition, and reconciliation or adaptation.

REFERENCES

Au, A. & Wong, D. (2000). The impact of guanxi on the ethical decision-making process of audi- tors: An exploratory study on Chinese CPAs in Hong Kong. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 87-93.

Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R., Mendonca, M., Yu, K., Deller, J., Stahl, G., et al. (2000). Impact of cul- ture on human resource management practices: A ten-country comparison. Applied Psychol- ogy: An International Review, 49(1), 192-220.

Berry, J. (1976). Human ecology and cultural style: Comparative studies in cultural and psycho- logical adaptation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage/Wiley-Halsted.

Brislin, R. (2000). Understanding culture’s influence on behavior (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Brislin, R. (2002). Encouraging depth rather than surface processing about cultural differences through critical incidents and role plays. In W. Lonner, D. Dinnel, S. Hayes, & D. Sattler (Eds.), Online readings in psychology and culture (Unit 16, chap. 2). Bellingham: Western Washington University. Available at www.wwu.edu/~culture

Brislin, R., & Yoshida, T. (1994). Intercultural communication training: An introduction. Thou- sand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cantor, N., & Kihlstrom, J. F. (1987). Personality and social intelligence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Deutsch, M. (1990). Sixty years of conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 1, 237-263.

Earley, P. C. (2002). Redefining interactions across cultures and organizations: Moving forward with cultural intelligence. Research in Organizational Behavior, 24, 271-299.

Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: An analysis of individual interactions across cultures. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence. London: Bloomsbury. Hall, E. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lewicki, R. J. (1983). Lying and deception: A behavioral model. In M. H. Bazerman & R. J.

Lewicki (Eds.), Negotiating in organizations (pp. 68-90). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mishra, R. (1997). Cognition and cognitive development. In J. Berry, P. Dasen, & T. Saraswathi

(Eds.). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 143-175). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 53

Osland, J., & Bird, A. (2000). Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: Cultural sensemaking in con- text. Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 65-79.

Osteraker, M. (1999). Measuring motivation in a learning organization. Journal of Workplace Learning, 11(2), 73-77.

Schwalb, D. (1992). Personal investment in Japan and USA: A study of worker motivation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 107-124.

Senger, J. (2002). Tales of the bazaar: Interest-based negotiation across cultures. Negotiation Journal, 18(4), 351-369.

Serpell, R., & Hatano, G. (1997). Education, schooling, and literacy. In J. Berry, P. Dasen, & T. Saraswathi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 339-376). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Shapiro, D., Lewicki, R., & Devine, P. (1995). When do employees choose deceptive tactics to stop unwanted change? A rational perspective. In R. Lewicki, B. Sheppard, & R. Bies (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (Vol. 5, pp. 155-184). Greenwood, CT: JAI.

Sternberg, R., & Grigorenko, E. (2005). Cultural intelligence and successful intelligence. Group & Organization Management, 31(1), 27-39.

Super, D. & Sverko, B. (1995). Life roles, values and careers: International findings of the Work Importance Study. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interaction- ist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601-617.

Triandis, H. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview. Triandis, H. (2005). Cultural intelligence in organizations. Group & Organization Management,

31(1), 20-26. Trompenaars, F. & Woolliams, P. (2000). When two worlds collide. Amsterdam: THT, Inter-

cultural Management Consulting. Yu, A. & Yang, K. (1994). The nature of achievement motivation in collectivist societies. In

U. Kim, H. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectiv- ism: Theory, method and applications (pp. 239-250). London: Sage.

Zimbardo, P., Butler, L., & Wolfe, V. (2003). Cooperative college examinations: More gain, less pain when students share information and grades. Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 101-125.

Richard W. Brislin is a professor of management and industrial relations in the College of Business Administration, University of Hawaii. He is the codeveloper of materials used in cross-cultural training programs (e.g. Intercultural Interactions: A Practical Guide (2nd ed., 1996) and is the author of a text in cross-cultural psychology (Under- standing Culture’s Influence on Behavior, 2nd ed., 2000). One of his books, The Art of Getting Things Done: A Practical Guide to the Use of Power, was a Book-of-the-Month Club Selection in 1992. He is frequently asked to give workshops for American and Asian managers working on international assignments, and the training materials he has pre- pared are widely used in various international organizations. He writes a weekly newspa- per column on understanding psychological issues in the workplace for the Honolulu Star Bulletin.

Reginald G. Worthley is a professor of information technology management in the Col- lege of Business Administration, University of Hawaii. He is the author of more than 30 refereed journal articles including publications in the Academy of Management Journal,

54 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of the American Statistical Associa- tion, and Annals of Statistics. He was a 1997 Journal of International Business Studies Decade Award Nominee.

Brent MacNab is in the faculty of economics and business with the University of Sydney’s program in international business. He has been awarded two Fulbright awards for his work in examination of cross-cultural ethics management and has more than 10 years of corporate management experience.

Brislin et al / UNDERSTANDING BEHAVIOR 55