A Study of the Relationship between Cross-Cultural
Competencies and Capability in Foreign Language Conversation
Yoshitaka Yamazaki1*, Michiko Toyama1
1 Business Administration, Bunkyo University, Tokyo, Japan
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Accepted: 15 August 2021 | Published: 1 September 2021
________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to explore how cross-cultural competencies relates to the level of foreign language conversation capability in cross-cultural organizations. Using a sample of 38 administrative employees working for an international graduate school in Japan, we analyzed two types of cross-cultural competencies in cross-cultural work settings: goal management and adaptability. We developed a scale for each competency and applied exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to verify discriminant and convergent validity. Cronbach’s alphas of the two competencies were acceptable. Regression analysis revealed that foreign language conversation capability significantly affected goal management and adaptability after controlling for individual demographic characteristics of gender, age, and length of overseas stay. In conclusion, foreign language conversation capability as a communicative tool in global organizations strongly relates to the cross- cultural competencies of goal management and adaptability. This study suggested that it is important for those who work in cross-cultural contexts to enhance foreign language conversation capability with regard to the development of cross-cultural competencies.
Finally, we discussed implications based on the results of this study.
Keywords: cross-cultural competence; foreign language conversation capability; skill development; international context; Japan
___________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
Cross-cultural competencies are critical for the effectiveness of people who work globally (Caligiuri & Tarique, 2012; Draghici, 2014; Johnson, Lenartowicz, & Apud, 2006; Yamazaki
& Kayes, 2004). Scholars as well as practitioners recognize the importance of developing cross-cultural competencies (Caligiuri, Mencin, Jayne, & Traylor, 2019), but the competencies are not acquired or developed in organizations overnight (Black, Morrison, & Gregersen, 1999). To facilitate the acquisition of cross-cultural competencies, it is important to determine what factors promote their development. Past studies demonstrated several influential factors, including global teams (Caligiuri & Lundby, 2015), post-assignment cross-cultural competencies (Caligiuri et al., 2019), and international work experience (Bird & Oddou, 2008).
Although knowledge and skills acquired previously in cross-cultural contexts aid the development of cross-cultural competencies, foreign language capability also seems essential to learn cross-cultural competencies through interaction between international assignees and locals. Without actually communicating with locals, international assignees may not work well because they may encounter difficulties learning and developing those competencies. In the area of foreign language education, Wu (2016) introduced the assertion that there is a connection between foreign language proficiency and intercultural competence development
based on views from Deardorff (2006). Yet, this assertion has been controversial for years, particularly when looking at intercultural sensitivity (Wu, 2016). Also, the study by Grin and Faniko (2012) documented that a significant relationship between foreign language skills and intercultural abilities depended on a type of intercultural abilities. Accordingly, since past studies were indecisive, the present study addressed this issue.
2. Literature Review
Generally speaking, competencies refer to underlying characteristics that involve an effective, high work performance that is different from an ordinary work performance (Boyatzis, 1982).
Competency consists of individual’s knowledge, skills, motive, traits, and self-image (Boyatzis, 1982; Spencer & Spencer, 1993). Cross-cultural competence is described as “a set of knowledge, skills, and personal attributes” for individuals’ success in cross-cultural work settings where one culture encounters another (Johnson et al., 2006, p. 530). The term
‘intercultural competence’ is used interchangeably with ‘cross-cultural competence’ (Draghici, 2014), with both regarded as the same in this study. Over several decades, a large number of cross-cultural competencies have been comprehensively reviewed in the literature (see Benson, 1978; Bird, Mendenhall, Stevens, & Oddou, 2010; David, 1972; Dinges & Baldwin, 1996;
Leiba-O’Sullivan, 1999; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Among a myriad of cross-cultural competencies, this study highlighted two: goal management and adaptability in cross-cultural work settings. Based on international human resource management studies in Asia, goal setting was considered an important demand on managers working among five countries and regions where a global firm operated, including China, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, and Thailand (Yamazaki, 2014). Among 12 competencies, goal setting was the second demanding critical skill next to relationship skills as a whole (Yamazaki, 2014). Also, goal setting skills were the most important skill that Asian managers need to further develop and improve because of the largest gap between a level of the skill demanding and that of the skill acquiring (Yamazaki, 2014). In this study, we applied the term ‘goal management’ in cross-cultural situations since managing goals may be more suitable than setting goals in the context of managerial jobs. A competency of adaptability to cross-cultural contexts was also conceived as a crucial skill or ability. Tung (1981) identified an ability to adapt to a different cultural environment based on her studies of vice presidents of foreign operations in Europe, Canada, Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Also, Stone (1991) investigated expatriates from Western countries who were assigned to South Asia and found that the ability to adapt to a host country was an important cross-cultural competency.
Research on relationships between cross-cultural competence and foreign language abilities has been conducted in the domains of foreign language education and international communications. Generally speaking, foreign language learning allows learners to know a culture and various views (Wu, 2016). Allowood (1990) discussed that learning foreign language and culture is linked with context. Stagich (1995) argued that cultural context is a basis for learning and acquiring competence in a foreign language. These notions may infer that foreign language learning leads to developing competence relevant to cultural contexts through a target language. Congruently, the qualitative and quantitative study conducted by Sarwari and Wahab (2016) indicated that English language proficiency of international students in a Malaysian university relates to intercultural communication competence.
Yet, as stated in the introduction, relationships between cross-cultural competence and foreign language abilities have remained inconclusive, particularly when using intercultural sensitivity (Wu, 2016) as a cross-cultural competency variable. Several empirical studies supported a strong relationship between them (Çiloğlan & Bardakçı, 2019; Olson & Kroeger, 2001). For
example, the study of Çiloğlan and Bardakçı (2019) with 325 university students in Turkey revealed that a higher proficiency level of English resulted in higher scores in intercultural sensitivity. In contrast, some studies did not support the relationship (Jackson, 2011; Wu, 2016). In a study with 292 Taiwanese participants, Wu (2016) illustrated no significant relationship between the two variables. Additionally, a cross-cultural study conducted by Grin and Faniko (2012) revealed that relationships between foreign language skills and intercultural capabilities depended on a type of intercultural capabilities. Their study using 6434 Swiss participants with the Common European Frame of Reference for Languages and the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire illustrated that foreign language skills were significantly correlated with three competencies of open-mindedness, cultural empathy and social initiative, while they were insignificantly related to two intercultural competencies of flexibility and emotional stability. Accordingly, it is unclear how cross-cultural competence is associated with foreign language conversation capability.
3. Methods
Sample and Procedures
The research site of this study was a university in Japan that has a strong international and cross-cultural focus. Most students in the university are not Japanese, and staff are officially required to use English in class as well as in the office. Participants of the study were 38 administrative staff: 30 women and 8 men. The average age of the participants was 44.1 years (SD = 11.6). All administrative staff except one had overseas experiences. Nearly one-third of the staff experienced overseas stays for more than 1 month.
For this study, one of the authors visited the university and gained the agreement of the general manager to participate in this research. The manager distributed a survey packet to administrative staff and collected their completed questionnaires. Participation in this research was voluntary, and questionnaires were anonymous. The study was approved by the Department of Business Administration of the authors’ university concerning research ethics.
Questionnaires
To investigate the two cross-cultural competencies of goal management and adaptability in cross-cultural contexts, we developed a scale with six items for goal management, two of which were modified based on descriptions of goal-setting skills from the Learning Skills Profile (Boyatzis & Kolb, 1993), and seven items for adaptability. Each item was measured with a 7- point Likert scale. The Appendix lists the 13 items used in this study. With regard to foreign language conversation abilities, participants were asked to choose one of five options: none, beginner, intermediate, advanced, and almost native.
4. Results
Scale Development
To examine discriminant and convergent validity, we conducted exploratory factory analysis (EFA) with maximum likelihood factor analysis with varimax rotation to extract underlying factors from the 13 items. Eigenvalues >1 and scree plot investigation were used to determine dominant factors. Subsequently, to determine whether an item was maintained or dropped, we applied three criteria:
(a) A factor loading of >0.5 as a cutoff point (Maskey, Fei, & Nguyen, 2018) (b) The elimination of cross-loading items of >0.4 (Maskey et al., 2018)
(c) Three or more items with >0.5 value per factor to explain the total variance (Thompson, 2004)
The first EFA of the 13 items led to three factors, as illustrated in Table 1. Factor 1 of adaptability comprised five items with a factor loading of >0.5, but one item was dropped due to the elimination of cross-loading items of >0.4. Factor 2 of goal management also had five items, but one item was eliminated for the same reason. Factor 3 had only two adaptability items but was invalid because it had less than three items with a loading >0.5. Accordingly, this study kept two factors. Ultimately, five items were eliminated: three items had cross- loading of >0.4 (Goal Management No. 1 and Adaptability Nos. 2 and 7), and two items had a factor loading of <0.5 (Goal Management No. 5 and Adaptability No. 4). Thus, the final scale had eight items.
The second EFA of the remaining eight items resulted in two factors, as shown in Table 1.
Factor 1 had four items for adaptability (Nos. 1, 3, 5, and 6), while Factor 2 consisted of four items of goal management (Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 6). Cross-loading scores of these two factors ranged from 0.15 to 0.31 for Factor 1 of adaptability and from 0.03 to 0.34 for Factor 2 of goal management. With regard to convergent and discriminant validity, results from the second EFA supported the two factors.
Table 1: Results of exploratory factor analysis using maximum likelihood factor analysis with varimax rotation
First EFA Second EFA
Factor Factor
Competency items 1 2 3 h2 1 2 h2
Goal Management 1 0.56 0.47 0.73 Goal Management 2 0.75 0.64 0.69 0.48 Goal Management 3 0.77 0.75 0.78 0.64 Goal Management 4 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.47
Goal Management 5 0.42 0.57
Goal Management 6 0.88 0.79 0.93 0.69 Adaptability 1 0.69 0.68 0.70 0.64 Adaptability 2 0.45 0.89 0.80 Adaptability 3 0.78 0.80 0.83 0.72
Adaptability 4 0.40
Adaptability 5 0.97 0.89 0.94 0.84 Adaptability 6 0.74 0.74 0.80 0.70 Adaptability 7 0.62 0.55 0.82 Eigenvalue 6.17 2.10 1.09 4.14 1.83
% of total variance 47.47 16.14 8.35 72 51.72 22.91
Total variance 74.63
Note. N = 38. Bold numbers = a factor loading >0.5.
To validate the two dominant factors produced by the EFA, we performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the same sample. Results of the CFA illustrated that the fit indices were acceptable, except for the goodness-of-fit index, which was slightly weak (0.864). Table 2 lists the results for the fit indices. Finally, Cronbach’s α coefficients for the competencies of goal management and adaptability were acceptable at 0.85 and 0.91, respectively.
Table 2: Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
χ2 p CMIN/DF GFI CFI IFI TFI RMSEA SRMR
Two competency
factors (8 items) 25.484 0.145 1.341 0.864 0.962 0.964 0.945 0.096 0.078 Note. N = 38; CMIN/df = minimum discrepancy per degree of freedom; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; IFI = incremental fit index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual.
Cross-Cultural Competencies and Foreign Language Conversation Capability
By using regression analysis, we examined how the development of two cross-cultural competencies, goal management and adaptability, related to foreign language conversation capability. After controlling for gender, age, and total length of stay abroad as overseas experiences, results of regression analysis revealed that foreign language conversation capability significantly related to both competencies: goal management (β = 0.43, p < 0.05) and adaptability (β = 0.41, p < 0.05). It can be translated that the higher the foreign language conversation capability, the greater the goal management and adaptability competencies in cross-cultural workplaces.
Table 3: Results of regression analysis.
β
Dependent variables Goal management Adaptability
Control variables
Gender 0.35 -0.01
Age 0.01 -0.07
Overseas experience -0.17 0.09
Independent variable
Foreign language conversation capability 0.43* 0.41*
F 2.64† 2.20†
Adjusted R2 0.15 0.11
Note: N = 38; * p < 0.05; † p < 0.10.
5. Discussion
This study showed that two cross-cultural competencies, goal management and adaptability, were significantly related to foreign language conversation capability. Our results are congruent with those of Sarwari and Wahab (2016) and Çiloğlan and Bardakçı (2019), whose study focus was intercultural communication competence or intercultural sensitivity. Based on the study results, it is crucial to enhance foreign language conversation capability for the learning and development of cross-cultural competencies, particularly goal management and adaptability in cross-cultural work settings. However, this study highlighted only two competencies. As presented in the section of literature review, the study of Grin and Faniko (2012) examined foreign language skills in relation to five cross-cultural competencies: open- mindedness, cultural empathy, social initiative, flexibility, and emotional stability. By applying various cross-cultural competencies, it would strengthen understanding of the relationship between cross-cultural competence and foreign language conversation capability. A future study should include not only those five competencies but also human relationship building, tolerance for ambiguity, and conflict resolution skills.
The present study offers a practical implication based on the study result of the strong relationship between foreign language conversation capability and two cross-cultural competencies: goal management and adaptability. When considering preparation for international assignments, especially concerning the first assignees, the organization may provide an opportunity for the international assignees to have several training sessions before
they are transferred to a foreign country. The organization should not separate two kinds of training sessions independently: foreign language conversation development and cross-cultural competence development. Rather, those two kinds of training sessions should be integrated into one session where international assignees can learn cross-cultural competencies through foreign language required for their overseas job assignment. Since the study result indicated that the higher foreign language conversation capability, the greater the two cross-cultural competencies, an integrated training session may be effective. However, each international assignee has a different foreign language conversation level, so a training content needs to be carefully designed by considering their level.
Another study result was associated with the scale development of goal management and adaptability as elements of cross-cultural competence. These two competencies play an important role in cross-cultural and international management. Particularly, goal management competence in Asian countries was key to managerial effectiveness in global firms; a level of developed goal setting skills of Asian managers did not meet sufficiently that of the demand of the skills in their work places (Yamazaki, 2014). As a practical implication, before international assignees are transferred to a new country, their goal management and adaptability competencies should be assessed to determine whether training may be needed. This study provides a useful measure for analysis of these two competencies.
This study had several limitations. The first limitation concerns the small sample size. If the participants had very unique features, study results might also be unique to them rather than representative. The second limitation is the research site, a university in Japan. Although the university has an international or cross-cultural context, Japan is a homogeneous country, which might have an effect on the results. The third limitation concerns the control variables:
gender, age, and overseas experiences. To comprehensively understand the relationship between foreign language conversation capability and cross-cultural competencies, other control variables like individual difference variables should be considered, including personality traits (McCrae & Costa, 1987, 1997) and learning style (Kolb, 1984; Kolb & Kolb, 2017), which are thought to involve cross-cultural adaptation and skill development. The fourth limitation is related to the scale development process. We applied EFA and CFA on the same sample. To confirm factors extracted from EFA, use of a different sample is preferred. Thus, a future study should apply two different samples for the scale development process.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (grant no. 19K01893). An early version of this study was presented at the International Virtual Conference on Education, Social Sciences and Technology 2021 (IVEST2021) on July 31, 2021.
References
Allowood, J. (1990). On the role of cultural context and cultural context in language instruction. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics, 60, 1–60.
Benson, P. (1978). Measuring cross-cultural adjustment: The problem of criteria. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2, 21–37.
Bird, A., Mendenhall, M., Stevens, M. J., & Oddou, G. (2010). Defining the content domain of intercultural competence for global leaders. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(8), 810–828. doi: 10.1108/02683941011089107
Bird, A., & Oddou, G. R. (2008). Global leadership knowledge creation and transfer. In M. E.
Mendenhall, J. S. Osland, A. Bird, G. R. Oddou, M. I. Maznevskil, & M. J. Stevens
(Eds.), Global leadership: Research, practice, and development (pp. 114–130). New York, NY: Routledge.
Black, J. S., Morrison, A. J., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). Global explorers: The next generation of leaders. New York, NY: Routledge.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). The competent manager: A model for effective performance. New York, NY: Wiley.
Boyatzis, R. E., & Kolb, D. A. (1993). Learning Skills Profile. Boston, MA: Hay/McBer.
Caligiuri, P., & Lundby, K. (2015). Developing cross-cultural competencies through global teams. In J. L. Wildman & R. L. Griffith (Eds.), Global teams: Translating multi- disciplinary science to practice (pp. 123–139). New York, NY: Springer.
Caligiuri, P., Mencin, A., Jayne, B., & Traylor, A. (2019). Developing cross-cultural competencies through international corporate volunteerism. Journal of World Business, 54, 14–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2018.09.002
Caligiuri, P., & Tarique, I. (2012). Dynamic cross-cultural competencies and global leadership effectiveness. Journal of World Business, 47, 612–622. doi: 10.1016/
j.jwb.2012.01.014
Çiloğlan, F., & Bardakçı, M. (2019). The relationship between intercultural sensitivity and English language achievement. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 15(3), 1204–1214. doi: 10.17263./jlls.631563
McCrae, R. P., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five factor model personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
McCrae, R. P., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal.
American Psychologist, 52(5), 509–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.5.509 David, K. (1972). Intercultural adjustment and applications of reinforcement theory to
problems of cultural shock. Trends, 4, 1–64.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241–266. doi: 10.1177/1028315306287002
Dinges, N. G., & Baldwin, K. D. (1996). Intercultural competence: A research perspective. In D. Landis & R. S. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed., pp. 106–
123). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Draghici, A. (2014). The importance of cross-cultural competencies in the new context of human resources management. In A. Rakowska & K. Babnik (Eds.), Human resource management challenges: Learning & development (pp. 63–89). Lublin, Poland:
ToKnowPress.
Grin, F., & Faniko, K. (2012). Foreign language skills and intercultural abilities. Management
& Avenir, 5, 168–184.
Jackson, J. (2011). Host language proficiency, intercultural sensitivity, and study abroad.
Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 21, 167–188.
Johnson, J. P., Lenartowicz, T., & Apud, S. (2006). Cross-cultural competence in international business: Toward a definition and a model. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 525–543. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400205
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2017). The experiential educator: Principles and practices of experiential learning. Kaunakakai, HI: EBLS Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as a source of learning and development.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Leiba-O’Sullivan, S. (1999). The distinction between stable and dynamic cross-cultural competencies: Implications for expatriate trainability. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4), 709–725. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490835
Maskey, R., Fei, J., & Nguyen, H.-O. (2018). Use of exploratory factor analysis in maritime research. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 34(2), 91–111. doi: 10.1016/
j.ajsl.2018.06.006
Olson, C., & Kroeger, K. (2001). Global competency and inter-cultural sensitivity. Journal of Studies in International Education, 5(2), 116–137.
Sarwari, A. Q., & Wahab, M. N. A. (2016). The relationship between English language proficiency and intercultural communication competence among international students in a Malaysian public university. International Journal of Language Education and Applied Linguistics, 5, 1–9.
Spencer, L. M. Jr., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at work: Modesl for superior performance. New York, NY: Wiley.
Stagich, J. (1995). Cultural context: The key to second language learning and acquisition.
Educational Horizons, 73(2), 59–61.
Stone, R. J. (1991). Expatriate selection and failure. Human Resource Planning, 14(1), 9–18.
Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Tung, R. L. (1981). Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments. The Columbia Journal of World Business, 16(1), 68–78.
Wu, J.-F. (2016). Impact of foreign language proficiency and English uses on intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8, 28–
35. doi: 10.5815/ijmecs.2016.08.04
Yamazaki, Y. (2014). Using a competency approach to understand host-country national managers in Asia. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(15), 2103–2128. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.872164
Yamazaki, Y., & Kayes, D. C. (2004). An experiential approach to cross-cultural learning:
A review and integration of competencies for successful expatriate adaptation.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(4), 362–379. doi: 10.5465/
amle.2004.15112543
Appendix: Descriptions of goal management and adaptability competencies.
Competency items Descriptions
Goal Management 1 Make an effective goal for better results Goal Management 2 Set up a standardized performance goal Goal Management 3 Evaluate progress towards goal achievement
Goal Management 4 Establish a practical standard to lead effective performance Goal Management 5 Determine performance evaluation of people
Goal Management 6 Evaluate a result based on goal criteria
Adaptability 1 Become flexible in adapting to the manners of a different culture Adaptability 2 Change myself to meet a different culture
Adaptability 3 Adjust myself to requirements or norms of another culture Adaptability 4 Leave my own ways if necessary
Adaptability 5 Become adaptable to a different culture
Adaptability 6 Adapt myself to a way or behavior required by a different country
Adaptability 7 Adopt the manners of a different culture, even if they are quite different from mine
