Would you describe yourself as a task-oriented leader or a relationship-oriented leader? This week, you read about the style and skills approaches to leadership. Consider the styles and skills addressed in this week’s media, Effective Leadership Styles and Find Your Personal Communication Style. Are communication or social interaction skills necessary for every leader? Will a particular style work best in certain situations? Imagine that you work for a large, UK-based pharmaceutical corporation and you have just been assigned to lead a team in a new branch office that is located in Lagos, Nigeria. As the leader, you have to decide whom to hire, how to achieve the first-year goals that have been given to you, and how to create a timeline for key milestones. With these thoughts in mind, for this week’s second discussion, post a 1,000- to 1,500-word response to the following question to the Discussion Board: • How will the concepts addressed in this week’s textbook reading as well as in the articles ‘Developing Advanced Decision-Making Skills in International Leaders and Managers’ and ‘From Experience to Experiential Learning: Cultural Intelligence as a Learning Capability for Global Leader Development’ help you succeed in this new assignment? Developing Advanced Decision- Making Skills in International Leaders and Managers Asila Safi and Darrell Norman Burrell Socially, economically, politically, and technologically, our world is transforming in complex ways that are beyond what we could have fathomed even five years ago. Now, more than ever, managerial decisions have far-reaching consequences in the way that organizations fail or succeed in bridging commerce and compassion, sustainability and profitability, and move from vision to effective strategic implementation. Solving problems, making decisions, and picking the courses of action are the most critical aspects of being in charge because it is risky and very difficult. Bad decisions can damage a career, influence peoples’ lives, and hurt an organization’s performance. But, where do bad decisions come from? In many cases, they can be traced back to the way the decisions were made. Maybe the right questions were not asked. Maybe the right alternatives were not explored or may be the data collected was wrong. Sometimes, the fault of poor leadership decisions lies not in the decision-making process, but rather in the mind of the decision-maker. How does an organizational manager make the correct leadership decisions when the unexpected occurs or the existing plans are insufficient or important organizational core values and goals are threatened? Critical Thinking in decision-making helps the professionals ask relevant questions, gather opinions from various groups, interpret complex problems, and make wise decisions. The development of critical thinking skills in international executives has never been more vital than it is today. The engagement in managerial critical thinking is about learning to apply experience-based, team-based, and formal problemsolving methods to situations. It is essential to develop a keen ability to overcome and become self-aware of biases, false assumptions, myths, and faulty paradigms that can hamper effective decision-making. Executive Summary P E R S P E C T I V E S presents emerging issues and ideas that call for action or rethinking by managers, administrators, and policy makers in organizations KEY WORDS Decision-making Skills Problem-solving Critical Thinking International Leaders VIKALPA • VOLUME 32 • NO 3 • JULY - SEPTEMBER 2007 1 1 Evolving international management challenges like succession planning as the members of the “baby boomer” generation retire, managing employee generational conflict, valuing cultural diversity, and developing adaptive strategy have made decision-making for international managers more perplexing and almost overwhelming. Even with the best strategic planning, there is a likelihood of mishandling a crisis or leadership strategy decision. Consider the myriad of decisionmaking challenges that the leaders in northern Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras faced related to hurricane Felix, which flooded the area with over 15 inches of rain. Think about the decisions that the Mayor of New Orleans had to take when the levies broke from Hurricane Katrina. Think of the leadership decisions that the public managers in government and law enforcement bodies had to take after the terrorist attacks on the train in Spain and London. Consider the challenge of decisionmaking that faced the President of Virginia Tech University in the wake of the shooting massacre. Socially, economically, politically, and technologically, our world is transforming in complex ways that are beyond what we could have fathomed even five years ago. Now, more than ever, managerial decisions have far-reaching consequences in the way that organizations fail or succeed in bridging commerce and compassion, and sustainability and profitability, and move from vision to effective strategic implementation. Solving problems, making decisions, and picking the courses of action are the most critical aspects of being in charge because it is risky and very difficult. Bad decisions can damage a career, influence peoples’ lives, and hurt an organization’s performance. So, where do bad decisions come from? In many cases, they can be traced back to the way the decisions were made. Maybe the right questions were not asked. Maybe the right alternatives were not explored or may be the data collected was wrong. Sometimes, the fault of poor leadership decisions lies not in the decision-making process, but rather in the mind of the decision-maker. The way the human brain works can harm the quality of our decisions (Phillips, 2005). In many organizations, bad decisions often occur by not making a decision at all in a situation that is in need of attention. This can occur in organizations, where responsibility, accountability, blame, and punishment are attached to an action or decision that is not successful while the same level of punishment and blame are usually not levied on individuals who do not take a risk and do not make a decision. How does an organizational manager make the correct leadership decisions when the unexpected occurs, existing plans are insufficient, and important organizational core values and goals are threatened? The development of critical thinking skills in today’s international executives has never been more vital. The engagement in managerial critical thinking is about learning to apply both experience-based, team-based, and formal problem-solving methods to situations. It is essential to develop a keen ability to overcome and become self-aware of biases, false assumptions, myths, and faulty paradigms that can hamper effective decision- making. CRITICAL THINKING: THE CONCEPT The concept of using critical thinking skills is not simple. On the surface, most people assume that the decisions made by intelligent and educated people include critical thinking. In the context of discussion, the activity is more complex. The definition of critical thinking has somewhat changed over time. The following are some examples of attempts to define critical thinking: • ...the ability to analyse facts; generate, and organize ideas; defend opinions; make comparisons; draw inferences; evaluate arguments and solve problems (Chance,1986) • ...involves analytical thinking for the purpose of evaluating what is read (Hickey, 1990) • ...a conscious and deliberate process which is used to interpret or evaluate information and experiences with a set of reflective attitudes and abilities that guide thoughtful beliefs and actions (Mertes,1991) • ...active, systematic process of understanding and evaluating arguments. An argument provides an assertion about the properties of some object or the relationship between two or more objects and evidence to support or refute the assertion. Critical thinkers acknowledge that there is no single correct way to understand and evaluate arguments and that all attempts are not necessarily successful (Mayer and Goodchild, 1990) • . . . reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do (Ennis, 1992). The fact is that everyone has the ability to think about an issue. Most international managers find it extremely challenging to evaluate a written or spoken 2 DEVELOPING ADVANCED DECISION-MAKING SKILLS 2 commentary on a hot topic because both sides of the controversy seem to have good arguments. The critical thinker is able to distinguish high-quality, well-supported arguments from arguments with flaws, poor data, or weak evidence (Diestler, 2004). To understand why using critical thinking skills is so important, one has to have some sense of how human beings process information. We are taught from an early age to make sense out of information and experience by summarizing it, or more technically, to reduce the amount of detail through the use of concepts. The engagement in managerial critical thinking is about learning to apply both experience-based, team-based, and formal problem- solving methods to situations. It is essential to develop a keen ability to overcome and become self aware of biases, false assumptions, myths, and faulty paradigms that can hamper effective decision-making. The development of critical thinking is about learning how to overcome those biases to make better managerial decisions and develop new activities so that they become a part of the permanent leadership behaviour (Bazerman, 2005). “Researchers have been studying the way our minds function in making decisions for half a century. This research, in the laboratory and in the field, has revealed that we use unconscious routines to cope with the complexity inherent in most decisions. These routines, known as heuristics, serve us well in most situations. In judging distance, for example, our minds frequently rely on a heuristic that equates clarity with proximity. The clearer an object appears, the closer we judge it to be. The fuzzier it appears, the farther away we assume it must be. This simple mental shortcut helps us to make the continuous stream of distance judgments required to navigate the world. Researchers have identified a whole series of such flaws in the way we think in making decisions. Some, like the heuristic for clarity, are sensory misperceptions. Others take the form of biases. Still others appear simply as irrational anomalies in our thinking. What makes all these traps so dangerous is their invisibility. Because they are hard-wired into our thinking process, we fail to recognize them even as we fall right into them. For executives, whose success hinges on the many day-to-day decisions they make or approve, the psychological traps are especially dangerous. They can undermine everything from new-product development to acquisition and divestiture strategy to succession planning. While no one can rid his or her mind of these ingrained flaws, anyone can follow the lead of airline pilots and learn to understand the traps and compensate for them,” (Hammond, Keeney and Raiffa, 2006). In most companies, strategic planning is often devoid of real time decision-making. It can sometimes be an exercise in documenting strategies and plan actions that have already been made, often without the benefit of the nuances of a critical thinking decision-making process. The progressive firms are changing their approach to the advanced analysis and assessment of organizational course direction to improve planning, problem-solving, and decision-making (Mankins and Steele, 2006). To understand the value of managerial critical thinking processes in organizations, think about the way that most organizations conduct strategy reviews as formal meetings between the middle and senior level organizational managers. While these reviews are intended to produce a fact-based dialogue, they often amount to a little more than a “dog and pony show.” Senior managers come in for a few days, get a superficial presentation, socialize with the staff, and leave. The middle management spends an inordinate amount of time preparing information to explain or sell to senior manager a course of strategy. The unit hopes to escape with few unanswered questions and an approved course of direction. Accordingly, middle administrators attempt to control the flow of information upward, and senior managers are presented only with the information that shows each department in the best perspective. The departmental successes are show-cased; the opportunities are emphasized; and the threats are omitted or marginalized. This style of planning and decision-making hinders the senior managers from engaging in any detailed information gathering or complex questioning. These quick overview presentations do not provide the type of valuable information that is needed for senior managers to help in critical thinking in problem-solving and decision-making. The most common obstacles to decision-making in large companies are the disagreements among the executives over the past decisions, current alternatives, and even the facts presented to support strategic plans. The leading companies structure their strategy review sessions to overcome these problems (Mankins and Steele, 2006). Pursuing a competitive advantage and improving the quality of service delivery can be a time-consuming and fruitless search through the ever-expanding moun- VIKALPA • VOLUME 32 • NO 3 • JULY - SEPTEMBER 2007 3 3 tain of leadership trends, growing sets of data, fads, and theories. Most organizations have a timing problem with decision-making. Even when the leaders allot sufficient time in strategy development to address tough issues, the timing of the process can create problems with how decisions are made. At most enterprises, strategy-oriented problem-solving and decision-making is a batch process in which the managers analyse internal and external environment factors, identify threats and opportunities, and then define a multi-year plan based on variables that exist at that point of time. But in the real world, managers make strategic decisions continuously, often motivated by an immediate need for action or reaction. Critical thinking in leadership decision-making is about developing the ability to cut through the clutter of information, myths, assumptions, and buzz words to consider a variety of variables and possible scenarios (Spitzer and Evans, 1997). USING CRITICAL THINKING PROCESSES In critical thinking, professionals should create multiple solutions to problems by constantly questioning and challenging their strengths, and through examination of decision-making preferences and practices. Thinking is fuelled by questions. Questions define variables, state factors, outline tasks, clarify issues, and express problems. Complex questioning drives the thought beyond what is superficial. Asking questions forces everyone involved in the decision to express and challenge preconceived notions and assumptions. Asking questions forces public managers and political leaders to look at their sources of information and consider the validity and quality of the information. Critical thinking problem- solving is an optimal process for arriving at wellthought- out decisions that not only develop strong remedies to organizational perplexities, but also create an ability to rank and assess how well the solution meets the overall goals and objectives. This kind of in-depth questioning and analysis helps assure that the solution would actually solve the problem, not just be the best of mediocre options. Engaging in this process also creates a mechanism of reassessment where if the solution does meet a determined level of satisfaction, the decision- makers re-open the process and further research and brainstorm, until the most effective outcome of decision is established (McAuliffe, 2005). The theorists have hypothesized that critical thinking is correlated with internal motivation to think. The cognitive skills of analysis, interpretation, explanation, evaluation, and correction of one’s own reasoning are at the heart of critical thinking. For instance, since the way a problem is posed can influence how one thinks about it, one should try to reframe the question in various ways and ask oneself how his/her thinking might change for each version. When it comes to leadership decisions, there is rarely such a thing as a no-brainer. Our brains are always at work, sometimes, unfortunately, in ways that hinder rather than help. At every stage of the decisionmaking process, misperceptions, biases, and other tricks of the mind can influence the actions taken (Welch, 2001). Highly complex and important decisions are the ones most prone to distortion because they tend to involve assumptions, estimates, and inputs from the maximum number of people. Even if the managers cannot eradicate the distortions ingrained in the way their minds work, they can build appropriate systems into our decisionmaking processes to improve the quality of the choices we make. It is quite possible that managers can develop those skills to the extent of their natural abilities through practice and guidance just like artistic, athletic, or leadership skills. Self-reflection is a very important skill in decision-making. This process includes the understanding of principles and strategies, financial constraints, and probability. Furthermore, this process is about expanding and understanding of psychology and even sociology in addition to learning to assess values, expectations, and needs of employees, organizational stakeholders, and their reaction to leadership decisions (Welch, 2001). Critical thinking is purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. Critical thinking is a vital tool of inquiry. The successful application of these core critical skills requires that one take into reasoned consideration the evidence, methods, contexts, theories, and criteria which, in effect, define specific disciplines, fields, and areas of human concern. The process is more than just making decisions. It is also about the ability to consistently develop better alternatives, rank the alternatives that are developed, make better group decisions even in contentious environments, and sell or defend decisions successfully within any organizational hierarchy (McAuliffe, 2005). 4 DEVELOPING ADVANCED DECISION-MAKING SKILLS 4 VARIABLES THAT HAMPER CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS One school of thought that hampers critical thinking is that executive decisions are often made by looking solely in the past, with too much emphasis on the past events, without looking to the future and how variables might change. Another belief that hurts the decision-making process is when decisions are made in isolation, gathering information, exploring alternatives, and making a choice, without regard to anything that has gone before. The fact is that decisions are made in the context of other decisions. The typical metaphor used to explain this is that of a stream. There is a stream of decisions surrounding a given decision. Many decisions made earlier have led to this decision and made it both possible and limited. Many other decisions will follow from it. Another way to describe this situation is to say that most decisions involve a choice from a group of pre-selected alternatives, made available to us from the universe of alternatives by the previous decisions we have made (Ennis, 1992). Another problem with decision-making is that sometimes people’s desire to be considered team players overrides their willingness to engage in critical thinking and thoughtful analysis; so, the group readily accepts the first remotely plausible option. Popularly known as “groupthink,” this mind-set is prevalent in the presence of strong advocates, especially in new teams, whose members are still learning the rules and may be less willing to openly question or disagree with a decision (Ennis, 1992). Often leadership decision-making is based on an elementary way of analysing the problems and making decisions. Organizational managers can often engage in a linear way of thinking. This thinking follows a certain level of going from A to B to look at issues in the way someone would think and respond to if asked to say the alphabet. With linear thinking, leaders tend to work on developing one solution based on the consideration of one scenario. Problem-solving is viewed as looking at pieces of a puzzle. Once a familiar or logical pattern is discovered, managers work on putting the pieces together based on the one pattern that is easily established and understood. Most leadership decision-making never anticipates that the factors or variables that exist today, could change tomorrow. When assumptions are made about an instant or a pre-selected solution, leaders do not consider other variables, other options or the possibility that the variables might change before the solution can be implemented. Most leaders treat decisionmaking as an event or a discrete choice that takes place at a single point in time. To look at decision-making that way is to overlook larger social and organizational contexts, which ultimately determine the success of any decision. Problem-solving and decision-making are not an event. These are processes that unfold over weeks, months, or even years. It is subject to debate, individual agendas, organizational politics, leadership power plays, and institutional history (Sanders, 2002). Critical thinking and rigorous debate invariably lead to conflicts. The good news is that the conflicts bring the issues into focus, allowing managers to make more informed choices. The bad news is that the wrong kind of conflicts can derail the decision-making process altogether. The conflicts come in two forms: cognitive and affective. Cognitive, or substantive conflicts, relate to the work at hand. They involve disagreements over ideas and assumptions and differing views on the best way to proceed. Not only are such conflicts healthy, they are crucial to effective problem-solving and sound decisionmaking. When people express differences openly and question the underlying assumptions, they can uncover the weaknesses and introduce new concepts and actions. Affective, or interpersonal conflicts, are emotional. They involve personal friction, rivalries, and clashing personalities, and thus tend to diminish people’s willingness to cooperate in a positive way to problem-solving and decision-making. Effective critical thinkers engage in comprehensive, flexible thinking, thus enhancing manager’s ability to generate good alternatives, design something new, and successfully resolve conflict. (Spitzer and Evans, 1997). They can develop strategies to manage and analyse information and risk perception in high pressure situations. The managers have the ability to identify and avoid reasoning fallacies so that they can present sound, persuasive arguments for critically examining the concepts of change and innovation as ongoing processes for organizational renewal. When carried out effectively, critical thinking skills can allow managers to: • develop paths to reasoned judgment when variables in a situation are changing and evolving • understand how to build a thought-provoking group consensus around complex issues • learn to encourage and ensure consideration of many breakthrough or “out-of-the-box” ideas VIKALPA • VOLUME 32 • NO 3 • JULY - SEPTEMBER 2007 5 5 • dramatically reduce the off-focus debates and tangents • reduce the number and duration of meetings • discover how to foster equal participation by all group members, including bosses and subordinates • acquire techniques to speed up group decisionmaking, while still developing multiple solutions. EXECUTIVE COURSES FOR DEVELOPING CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS The goals of the Critical Thinking courses are to help managers: • become familiar with different styles of thinking and identify their personal critical thinking preferences • ask oneself the “big picture” questions • learn how to use critical thinking to challenge assumptions and expand perceptions about situations • come to better conclusions and decisions more often. These courses can provide practical hands-on training for international managers and political leaders on how to incorporate the use of critical thinking skills and processes in leadership decision-making. By developing these tools, leaders can enhance their ability to constructively solve organizational programmes through the engagement of new activities. These managerial actions include the following: • Never forget that decision-making is a process and not a single event or activity. • Overcome the notion that there is only one ‘right solution’ to the organizational quandaries. • Eliminate mental blocks in the forms of biases, myths, and false assumptions. • Stop and think before acting and making quick decisions without the benefit of data and variable evaluation. • Always check to see whether you are examining all evidences with equal rigour. Avoid the tendency to accept confirming evidence without questioning. • Get someone respectable to play the devil’s advocate, to argue against the decision you are contemplating. • Be honest with yourself about the agendas and motives. Are you really gathering information to help you make a smart choice, or are you just looking for evidence confirming your preconceived notions? • In seeking the advice of others, do not ask leading questions that invite confirming evidence. • Do not stack your decision-making staff with yesmen or yes-women. • Focus on the organization’s goals and values before making a major decision by asking if the ideal outcome is in alignment with the mission and values. • Write down all the positive and negative factors for and against taking a particular course of action. • Minimize the possible distortion caused by your ability or lack of ability to clearly recall the key facts, historical events, and variables connected to the decision-making process. Carefully examine all your assumptions. Get real hard data whenever possible. • Establish priorities by asking what are the critical factors and what is the single most important consideration. • Look for opportunities in any decision. Each “mistake” is a potential opportunity for the organization to learn and grow. • Make decisions with an understanding that the variables and circumstances have the ability to change. • Change course of action if the strategy is not working. • Do not make decisions by only looking backwards. • Look ahead to the future in a spirit of hope and optimism because the past is already gone. CONCLUSIONS Decisions can be made on blind instinct. Gut feelings cannot always be trusted but there is an assumption that these feelings can become more educated. The main purpose of flight simulators, for instance, is to make pilots experience unlikely surprises so many times that, should one actually occur, their decision-making under Box: Critical Thinking Courses in the US (a) Colorado Technical University has an on-line Doctor of Management Programme that requires four applied research projects instead of a dissertation. The programme has classes and a curriculum focus on developing managers with strong Critical Thinking skills. http://www.instituteforadvancedstudies.com/ (b) The University of MA has an on-line certificate programme in Critical Thinking. http://ccde.umb.edu/certificates/cct/ (c) The American Management Association has a classroom course in Critical Thinking. www.amanet.org (d) Management Concepts, a professional training organization offers a classroom course in Critical Thinking. www.mgmtconcepts.com 6 DEVELOPING ADVANCED DECISION-MAKING SKILLS 6 pressure will be more relaxed, natural, reflexive, and reasoned. Using critical thinking skills is about developing a keen ability to bridge the knowledge chasm between fact and fiction, and the blind acceptance of viewpoints in the critical analysis of making decisions. International managers that are critical thinkers have the ability to respond openly to opposing perspectives and develop a solid foundation for making choices about what to accept and what to reject as they read, listen, and deliberate (Browne and Keeley, 2006). Critical thinking skills are something that can be learned with practice and guidance by changing the actions involved in decision-making so that they become part of the permanent behaviour especially as international management decisions continue to be more complex. The managers who include individuals in teams simply because it is the politically wise thing to do should accept that the team members expect their inputs to be taken seriously, whatever the ultimate decision may be. To effectively engage in all the aspects of critical thinking in decision-making, the managers must demonstrate that they are indeed taking their feedback seriously. To do otherwise may undermine their ability to create support for an initiative and to implement it effectively. Furthermore, managers need not sacrifice quality in the name of commitment and cooperation. On the contrary, listening to and selectively incorporating the suggestions of team members can actually improve the quality of the final decision. Leaders who are effective critical thinkers pay careful attention to the way issues are framed as well as to the language used during discussions. When they facilitate decision-making meetings, they preface contradictory remarks or questions with phrases that have the potential to offend. They also set ground rules about language, insisting that the team members avoid words and behaviour that trigger defensiveness. To facilitate critical thinking skills with problemsolving, the managers can help the employees step back from their pre-established positions by breaking up natural coalitions and assigning people to tasks on some basis other than the traditional loyalties. The managers can shift subordinates and other managers out of the well-grooved patterns, where vested interests are the highest. They can, for example, ask the team members to research and argue for a position they did not endorse during the initial discussions. Similarly, they can assign the team members to play functional or managerial roles different from their own, such as asking a lower-level employee to assume the senior manager’s strategic perspective. Finally, the managers can ask the participants locked in debate to revisit key facts and assumptions and gather more information. Often, people become so focused on the differences between opposing positions that emotional and counterproductive conflicts can occur that create an impasse. Asking people to examine the underlying presumptions can defuse the tension and set the team back on track. People quickly recognize the areas of agreement, discover precisely how and why they disagree, and then focus their common values and areas of collaboration on the critical issues. Finally, critical thinking in decision-making helps the professionals ask relevant questions, gather opinions from various groups, weigh evidence offered in support of the arguments, interpret complex problems, and make wise decisions. Making wise decisions is the key to organizational growth, longevity, and renewal. REFERENCES Bazerman, Max (2005). Judgment in Managerial Decision Making, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons. Browne, Neal and Keeley, Stewart (2006). Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking, New York: Prentice Hall. Chance, P (1986). Thinking in the Classroom: A Survey of Programs, New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Diestler, Sherry (2004). Becoming a Critical Thinker: A User Friendly Manual, New York: Prentice Hall. Ennis, R (1992). “Critical thinking: What is It?” Proceedings of the Forty-Eighth Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society Denver, Colorado, March 27-30. Hammond, John S; Keeney, Ralph L and Raiffa, Howard (2006). “The Hidden Traps in Decision,”Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 118-126. Hickey, M (1990). “Reading and Social Studies: The Critical Connection,” Social Education, 54(3), 175-179. Mayer, R and Goodchild, F (1990). The Critical Thinker, New York: Wm. C. Brown. McAuliffe, Thomas P (2005). The 90% Solution: A Consistent Approach to Optimal Business Decisions, Los Angles, CA: Authorhouse. Mertes, L (1991). “Thinking and Writing,” Middle School Journal, 22(2), 24-25. Mankins, Michael C and Steele, Richard (2006). “Stop Making Plans and Start Making Decision,” Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 76-84. Phillips, Jan (2005). The Art of Original Thinking: The Making of a Thought Leader, Los Angeles, CA: 9th Element Press. VIKALPA • VOLUME 32 • NO 3 • JULY - SEPTEMBER 2007 7 7 Sanders, Irene (2002). “To Fight Terror, We Can’t Think Straight,” The Washington Post, May 5. Spitzer, Q and Evans, R (1997). Heads You Win: How the Best Companies Think, New York: Simon & Schuster. Welch, David (2001). Decisions, Decisions: The Art of Effective Decision Making, First Edition, New York: Prometheus Books. Asila Safi is a doctoral student in Management at Colorado Technical University. Her research is on leadership development in the Federal Government. She has a graduate degree in Organizational Management from the National Louis University. She is fluent in five languages and has over nine years of management experience in government and corporate America. e-mail: asila_safi@yahoo.com Darrell Norman Burrell is a faculty member with the Averett University. He has published in several academic journals. He is also a doctoral student in management at the Colorado Technical University. He has an EdS (Post Master’s Terminal Degree) in Higher Education Administration from The George Washington University. He has graduate degrees in Human Resources Management and Organizational Management from National Louis University, and a graduate degree in Sales and Marketing Management from Prescott College. e-mail: dnburrell@excite.com 8 DEVELOPING ADVANCED DECISION-MAKING SKILLS If we live thinking of ourselves all the time, our life will seem short, it starts with our birth and it ends when we die! But if we live for others, meaning, we live for a notion and a methodology, our life will seem very long! It starts since humanity existed and it lasts until after we die. — Syed Qutub 8 From Experience to Experiential Learning: Cultural Intelligence as a Learning Capability for Global Leader Development KOK-YEE NG Nanyang Technological University LINN VAN DYNE Michigan State University SOON ANG Nanyang Technological University Although international assignments are recognized as important mechanisms for developing global leaders in organizations, existing research has focused primarily on leaders’ performance during international assignments, rather than on the developmental outcomes gained from such assignments. We integrate research on experiential learning and cultural intelligence to propose a process model that focuses on how leaders translate their international work assignment experiences into learning outcomes critical for global leadership development. Our model positions cultural intelligence as a moderator that enhances the likelihood that individuals on international assignments will actively engage in the four stages of experiential learning (experience, reflect, conceptualize, experiment), which in turn leads to global leadership self-efficacy, ethnorelative attitudes toward other cultures, accurate mental models of leadership across cultures, and flexibility of leadership styles. Our model has major implications for the selection and training of individuals, as well as organizational practices related to international job assignments from a developmental perspective. ........................................................................................................................................................................ Effective global leaders are a vital asset for organizations today (Van Dyne & Ang, 2006). In the current milieu of diversity, complexities, and international competition, having leaders who are capable of understanding, functioning, and managing in the global environment is a valuable, rare, and inimitable resource that can offer firms a competitive advantage (Ang & Inkpen, 2008; Barney, 1992). It is, therefore, of little surprise that training and development of global leader competencies is one of the top-five organizational practices that significantly influences effectiveness of multinational companies (Stroh & Caligiuri, 1998). Organizational interventions for enhancing global leadership effectiveness range from didactic programs to intensive cultural experiences (Caligiuri, 2006). Didactic programs typically take the form of cross-cultural training or diversity training that is provided in-house, or conducted off-site by consulting firms or academic institutions. These courses aim to equip individuals with specific knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs) such as greater awareness of cross-cultural differences; knowledge of appropriate behaviors when working with people from different cultures; specific business knowledge, such as international finance and project management; and the ability to converse in a different language. Intensive cultural experiences, on the other Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2009, Vol. 8, No. 4, 511–526. ........................................................................................................................................................................ 511 Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s express written permission. Users may print, download or email articles for individual use only. hand, aim to develop individuals more holistically by exposing them to the challenges of living and working in a foreign environment (Leung, Maddux, Galinsky, & Chiu, 2008). Short- and long-term international assignments are examples of such developmental programs increasingly adopted by organizations to nurture their global leaders, with many firms now requiring that high-potential leaders have at least one overseas assignment in their careers (Hall, Zhu, & Yan, 2001). The growing emphasis on experiential approaches to global leader development may be attributed to the importance accrued to international experience. For example, research demonstrates that firms led by CEOs with international experience perform better financially (Carpenter, Sanders, Gregersen, 2001; Daily, Certo, & Dalton, 2000; Sambharya, 1996). In addition, global leaders themselves find international assignments beneficial for their personal and professional development. In a survey conducted by Gregersen, Morrison, and Black (1998), 80% of respondents reported that living and working abroad was the most powerful experience in developing their global leadership capabilities. Despite the crucial role that international assignments play in global leadership development, most models and empirical research on international assignments have adopted a performance perspective, focusing on performance and adjustment of expatriates (e.g., see review and metaanalysis by Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer, & Luk, 2005). While this stream of research offers important selection and training implications to ensure that international operations are managed effectively, it does not directly address the developmental objectives and benefits of international assignments. Thus, we lack research and conceptual models on how individuals learn to become better global leaders based on their international work experiences. We also lack conceptual frameworks that specify what types of individual are most likely to learn and benefit the most from international assignments. Responding to this gap, we address two questions here: (1) How do global leaders learn from their international assignments to become better global leaders? (2) What attributes of global leaders enhance their learning while on international work assignments? Thus, in contrast to prior research that emphasizes performance and adjustment outcomes, we adopt a developmental perspective and focus on factors that affect global leader learning outcomes. Adopting a developmental perspective requires several shifts in assumptions compared to the traditional performance perspective. A major and obvious difference is the emphasis on learning effectiveness, rather than on work effectiveness. This shift acknowledges that failures during international assignments can present excellent learning opportunities that help individuals hone their global leadership skills (Hall et al., 2001), and contrasts starkly with the traditional view that failures are undesirable outcomes to be avoided. The focus on learning outcomes also moves beyond expatriate research that has commonly focused on ways to staff and manage those in international positions, such as predeparture cross-cultural training (Morris & Robie, 2001), role clarity, and relational skills (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). Finally, switching from an emphasis on performance to a developmental perspective requires a fundamentally different theoretical basis. Thus, we draw on theories of adult learning to develop a model of processes that affect learning outcomes of global leaders. We integrate two streams of research to inform our research questions: First, we adopt Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory (ELT) to explicate the processes that enable leaders to learn and develop their global leadership capabilities through their international work assignments. Second, we consider cultural intelligence (CQ; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008; Earley & Ang, 2003), defined as an individual’s capability to function effectively in culturally diverse contexts, as a key individual attribute that influences the extent to which individuals actively engage in experiential learning during their international work assignments. In the remaining sections, we elaborate on our theoretical model (see Figure 1). We begin with a brief review of ELT (Kolb, 1984) and its application to global leadership development. We then describe the 4-factor conceptualization of CQ and discuss its role in enhancing experiential learning processes and learning outcomes during international assignments. We conclude with a discussion of future research directions and organizational implications aimed at enhancing learning outcomes of global leaders in international work assignments. THEORY DEVELOPMENT Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) ELT is an adult learning theory that highlights the critical role experience plays in affecting learning and change. Kolb’s (1984) formulation of ELT draws on the work of prominent educational and organizational scholars including John Dewey, Kurt 512 Academy of Management Learning & Education December Lewin, and Jean Piaget, who share the common view that learning involves integrating experience with concepts and linking observations to actions (see especially Dewey, 1938). We adopt the ELT framework as the basis of our process model for developing global leaders through international assignments for several reasons. First, ELT emphasizes learning as a process (Kolb, 1984), unlike traditional learning theories that focus on learning as behavioral or cognitive outcomes. This process-oriented approach is consistent with our research question to understand the intervening mechanisms that translate international work assignment experiences into learning outcomes. Second, ELT views learning as a holistic process of adapting to the world that requires the integrated functioning of the total person, which includes thinking, feeling, perceiving, and behaving, as well as interactions between the person and the environment (Kolb, 1984). The holistic nature of ELT fits well with the complexity of international assignments, given that leaders are exposed to, and required to manage a multitude of demands and cues from their new environment. Third, ELT views learning as a continuous process where new knowledge, changing existing ideas and perspectives, relearning, and integrating old and new ideas are important aspects of learning (Kolb, 1984). This emphasis on a continuous and dynamic cycle of learning is particularly crucial for global leaders given the uncertainties and complexities of culturally diverse business settings. Kolb’s (1984) 4-stage learning cycle comprises two fundamental processes that enable learning from experience: (1) grasping the experience, and (2) transforming the experience. The four learning stages are based on two dialectically related modes of grasping experience: concrete experience versus abstract conceptualization, and two dialectically related modes of transforming experience: reflective observation versus active experimentation. Concrete experience and abstract conceptualization are different ways of grasping the experience. Concrete experience focuses on tangible elements of the immediate experience, while abstract conceptualization relies on conceptual interpretation and symbolic representation of the experience. In a similar way, reflective observation and active experimentation are two different ways of acting upon the experience. Reflective observation relies on internal processing, while active experimentation emphasizes actual manipulation of the external world. In essence, Kolb’s ELT model prescribes a process of learning where the learner should undergo four bases—experiencing, reflecting, thinking, and acting—in order to transform an experience effectively into learning (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Having (grasping) an experience without doing anything with it (transforming) is not sufficient. Likewise, transformation cannot occur without an experience that can be acted upon. Hence, the model argues that tangible episodes or events (concrete experiences) are the basis for descriptive processing (reflective observations), which are then assimilated and distilled into conceptual interpretations (abstract conceptualization), which then become the basis for action (active experimentation). This fourth step (testing ideas in the real world) generates new experiences for the learner and triggers another cycle of learning. To date, ELT has received widespread attention in the management development literature (Kayes, 2002; Kayes, Kayes, & Yamazaki, 2005a, b; Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Much of this research (e.g., Cassidy, 2004; Furnham, Jackson, & Miller, 1999; Mainemelis, Boyatzis, & Kolb, 2002; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2007) describes preferred learning styles based on Kolb’s (1999a, b) Learning Style Inventory. Acknowledging the importance of this research and going beyond it, we adopt a prescriptive view of ELT and suggest that individuals need to experience all four stages of learning to gain maximum developmental benefits from international assignments (cf. Mainemelis et al., 2002). Thus, we conceptualize ELT as a process of learning involving conscious behaviors that effective learners display in order to translate experience into learning outcomes that, in turn, should enhance their global leadership effectiveness (cf. Cassidy, 2004). This approach should offer important insights into why individuals do not learn equally from their international experiences (Leslie & Van Velsor, 1996; Spreitzer, McCall, & Mahoney, 1997; Van Velsor, Moxley, & Bunker, 2004). Although researchers have considered an assortment of individual differences that affect ability to learn from international assignments, including cognitive abilities, self-esteem, personality traits, such as openness and conscientiousness, and competencies, such as seeking and using feedback (Spreitzer et al., 1997; Van Velsor et al., 2004; Kayes et al., 2005b), there is no systematic framework to explain previous inconsistent results where some people seem to learn more than others from international work assignment experiences. Responding to this gap, we propose that effective learning varies across individuals because only some individuals engage in the entire experiential learning cycle when exposed to cultural experiences during their international assignments. Thus, the process of ex- 2009 Ng, Van Dyne, and Ang 513 periential learning, as explicated by ELT, provides a theoretical basis for examining individual attributes that affect the extent of learning and leadership development during international assignments. We therefore build on and extend recent research that has examined the competencies necessary for experiential learning (Kayes et al., 2005b; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Specifically, we propose that CQ is an important set of learning capabilities that enhances the extent to which individuals translate their international work experiences into learning outcomes through the experiential learning processes of experiencing, reflecting, observing, and experimenting. This is consistent with Kayes et al.’s (2005a) thesis that individuals must have different abilities to manage each of the four stages in ELT. In sum, we aim to complement existing research on generic learning styles (e.g., Cassidy, 2004; Furnham et al., 1999; Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Mainemelis et al., 2002), and given the international context of our research questions on global leadership development, we focus on CQ as a specific set of learning capabilities. Below, we summarize Earley and Ang’s (2003) conceptualization of CQ. We then present propositions for relationships between international work assignment experiences, CQ, experiential learning processes, and learning outcomes. Cultural Intelligence and Experiential Learning Cultural intelligence (CQ), defined as an individual’s capabilities to function and manage effectively in culturally diverse settings (Earley & Ang, 2003), is an important individual attribute given today’s diversified workplace. The conceptualization of CQ is based on Sternberg and Detterman’s (1986) framework of multiple intelligences, which integrates different perspectives of intelligence to propose four complementary ways of conceptualizing individual-level intelligence: (a) metacognitive intelligence refers to awareness and control of cognitions used to acquire and understand information; (b) cognitive intelligence refers to knowledge and knowledge structures; (c) motivational intelligence acknowledges that most cognition is motivated and thus focuses on the magnitude and direction of energy as a locus of intelligence; and (d) behavioral intelligence focuses on individual capabilities at the action level (behavior). By expanding the scope of intelligence to include abilities related to self-regulation and the display of overt behaviors (Gardner, 1993), Sternberg and Detterman (1986) offer a more comprehensive theory of intelligence that goes beyond cognitive abilities such as linguistic or logicalmathematical intelligence. Based on Sternberg and Detterman’s (1986) model, Earley and Ang (2003) conceptualized CQ as a multidimensional construct with mental (metacognitive and cognitive), motivational, and behavioral components. Hence, unlike previously fragmented research on intercultural competencies (Gelfand, Imai, & Fehr, 2008; Spitzberg, 1989), CQ offers a theoretical and parsimonious framework that comprises four capabilities. Metacognitive CQ is the capability for consciousness and awareness during intercultural interactions. It reflects mental capabilities to acquire and understand culturally diverse situations and includes knowledge of and control over individual thought processes (Flavell, 1979) relating to culture. Relevant capabilities include planning, monitoring, and revising mental models. Those with high metacognitive CQ are consciously mindful of cultural preferences and norms—before and during interactions. They question cultural assumptions and adjust mental models during and after experiences (Nelson, 1996). While metacognitive CQ focuses on higher order cognitive processes, cognitive CQ focuses on knowledge of norms, practices, and conventions in different cultural settings acquired from education and personal experiences. This includes knowledge of economic, legal, and social systems of different cultures (Triandis, 1994). Individuals with high cognitive CQ are able to anticipate and understand similarities and differences across cultural situations. As a result, they are more likely to have accurate expectations and less likely to make inaccurate interpretations of cultural interactions (e.g., Triandis, 1995). In addition to mental capabilities that foster understanding of other cultures, CQ also includes the motivational capability to cope with ambiguous and unfamiliar settings. Motivational CQ is the capability to direct attention and energy toward learning about and functioning in situations characterized by cultural differences. It is based on the expectancy-value theory of motivation (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002) and includes intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997). Those with high motivational CQ have intrinsic satisfaction and are confident about their ability to function in culturally diverse settings. The fourth aspect of CQ recognizes that cultural understanding (mental) and interest (motivational) must be complemented with behavioral flexibility to exhibit appropriate verbal and nonverbal actions, based on cultural values of a specific setting (Hall, 1959). Thus, behavioral CQ is the capability 514 Academy of Management Learning & Education December to exhibit situationally appropriate behaviors from a broad repertoire of verbal and nonverbal behaviors, such as being able to exhibit culturally appropriate words, tones, gestures, and facial expressions (Gudykunst, Ting-Toomey, & Chua, 1988). Although a relatively new construct, CQ research has extended the conceptualization and theoretical grounding of CQ (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008; Ng & Earley, 2006; Triandis, 2006) to examine relationships with cultural adaptation and performance (Ang, Van Dyne, Koh, Ng, Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2007), expatriate effectiveness (Kim, Kirkman, & Chen, 2008; Shaffer & Miller, 2008; Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2006), personality (Ang, Van Dyne, & Koh, 2006; Oolders, Chernyshenko, & Stark, 2008), intercultural training (Earley & Peterson, 2004; Harris & Lievens, 2005), and multicultural teams (e.g., Earley & Mosakowski, 2004; Janssens & Brett, 2006; Rockstuhl & Ng, 2008). Going beyond existing research on CQ that has theorized and demonstrated the importance of CQ for performance in cross-cultural contexts, we focus here on CQ as a set of learning capabilities that are important for global leaders. Specifically, we consider how the four CQ dimensions enhance the likelihood that individuals will be actively engaged in the four stages of experiential learning—concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation—during international work assignments. Concrete Experience Individuals differ in how active they are or in how much they enjoy learning from concrete experiences. Kolb (1984) argues that individuals with an orientation toward concrete experience are open to new experiences, emphasize feeling rather than thinking, and function well in unstructured situations. In the context of international assignments, we propose that two CQ dimensions—motivational CQ and behavioral CQ—will affect the amount and quality of concrete experiences leaders seek during international assignments. Self-efficacy research (Bandura, 1997) suggests that individuals who are more confident of their ability to complete a particular task are more likely to initiate effort, persist in their efforts, and perform better. Since intercultural interactions are typically stressful because of unfamiliar cultural norms and cues (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Oberg, 1960; Shaffer, Harrison, Gregersen, Black, & Ferzandi, 2006), we suggest those with high motivational CQ, characterized by greater interest and self-efficacy, will actively seek cross-cultural experiences during their international assignments. This is consistent with Yamazaki and Kayes’ (2004) point that valuing people of different cultures is an important learning skill for engaging in concrete experiences. Conversely, those with little interest or confidence will minimize their degree of cultural involvement, thus restricting the amount and quality of concrete cross-cultural experiences they could learn from. Thus, our first proposition predicts that the relationship between international experience and concrete experiences will be stronger for those with higher motivational CQ. Proposition 1: Motivational CQ enhances the likelihood that individuals will seek concrete cross-cultural experiences during their international job assignments. Next, we propose that those with high behavioral CQ—the capability to exhibit appropriate verbal and nonverbal actions in culturally diverse situations—will also seek and engage in more cross-cultural experiences during international assignments. Gaining concrete experiences requires people to engage with the environment and typically involves interpersonal interactions. Since cultures differ in their norms for appropriate behaviors (Hall, 1959; Triandis, 1994), the capability of displaying a flexible range of behaviors is critical to creating positive impressions and developing meaningful intercultural relationships (Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005; Gudykunst & Kim, 1984). Building relationships with locals, in turn, creates more opportunities for cross-cultural contact (Kayes et al., 2005b; Yamazaki & Kayes, 2004). Accordingly, we predict that the relationship between international experience and concrete experiences will be stronger for those with higher behavioral CQ. Proposition 2: Behavioral CQ enhances the likelihood that individuals will seek concrete cross-cultural experiences during their international job assignments. We surmise that cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ are unlikely to be related to concrete experiences, given that these two mental CQ capabilities emphasize knowledge and analytical processes involved in reasoning, rather than actions. Cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ, however, are critically important for the next two stages of the experiential learning cycle, as described below. Reflective Observation Reflective observation occurs when people think about experiences and reflect critically on their 2009 Ng, Van Dyne, and Ang 515 assumptions and beliefs. This is an important process because it helps people to describe the situation objectively and develop an understanding of why things happen (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). It also allows them to consider different perspectives or views of the situation. We propose that cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ enhance reflective observation during international assignments. Individuals with high cognitive CQ possess elaborate cultural schemas. Schemas are mental representations of patterns of social interaction that are characteristic of particular cultural groups (Triandis, Marin, Lisansky, & Betancourt, 1984), and are important because they enhance information processing (Taylor & Crocker, 1981) and enable more accurate identification and understanding of cultural issues. Research has shown that area studies training aimed at increasing cultural knowledge enhanced accuracy of interpreting social behaviors across cultures because trained participants were less likely to apply their own cultural assumptions to other cultures (Bird, Heinbuch, Dunbar, & McNulty, 1993). Similarly, Ang and colleagues (2007) demonstrated that cognitive CQ enhanced accuracy of judgment and decision making about crosscultural interactions. We argue that because individuals with high cognitive CQ have greater understanding of differences and similarities across cultural systems, they are more aware of what cues they should look for. They are also less likely to make negative evaluations of cultural norms and behaviors, which allows them to be more objective and accurate in their observations of cross-cultural experiences (Osland & Bird, 2000). Therefore, we propose that the relationship between international experience and reflective observation will be stronger for those with higher cognitive CQ. Proposition 3: Cognitive CQ enhances the likelihood that individuals will reflect on their cross-cultural experiences during their international assignments. We also propose that metacognitive CQ—thinking about thought processes related to crosscultural experiences—will facilitate reflective observation during international assignments. Those with high metacognitive CQ monitor and think about their own assumptions, beliefs, and emotions as well as the way they process environmental and behavioral cues provided by others. They actively process their cognitive observations, create new categories in their memory storage, and consider multiple perspectives in making sense of their experiences (Flavell, 1979). Thus, we predict the following: Proposition 4: Metacognitive CQ enhances the likelihood that individuals will reflect on their cross-cultural experiences during their international assignments. Since reflective observation emphasizes perceptual and cognitive capabilities, we do not expect motivational CQ or behavioral CQ, which deal with the “heart” and the “body” of the learner, respectively (Earley, Ang, & Tan, 2006), to be of direct relevance to this stage of experiential learning. Abstract Conceptualization Abstract conceptualization, the third stage of experiential learning, emphasizes the importance of building general theories using scientific, as opposed to intuitive, approaches. This stage requires learners to distill their reflections into more general concepts that can guide their future actions, and emphasizes thinking, rather than feeling (Kolb, 1984). Similar to reflective observation, we propose that cognitive CQ and metacognitive CQ will facilitate abstract conceptualization during international assignments. Research in cognitive psychology has shown that experts conceptualize problems more efficiently and effectively because they have more organized knowledge structures with stronger linkages among domain-related concepts. In contrast, novices are less efficient because their knowledge representations tend to be based on salient surface elements (Chase & Simon, 1973; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982). In addition, novices are often less effective in their knowledge acquisition because their lack of pre-organized schemas hinders efficient classification of knowledge (Kalyuga, Ayres, Chandler, & Sweller, 2003). Therefore, we propose that individuals with higher cognitive CQ will be more accurate and effective in developing general ideas and conceptual interpretations of culture based on their international assignments. This is because they have more organized and elaborated knowledge structures that facilitate their information processing as well as identification of relevant principles. Conversely, those with low cognitive CQ are less able to integrate their insights and reflections into coherent knowledge structures about culture, thus impeding the formation of higher order concepts and theories. Accordingly, we propose that the relationship between international experience and abstract conceptualization will be stronger for those with higher cognitive CQ. Proposition 5: Cognitive CQ enhances the likeli- 516 Academy of Management Learning & Education December hood that individuals will detect patterns and develop conceptual generalizations of cross-cultural experiences during their international assignments. Metacognitive CQ should also enhance abstract conceptualization during international assignments because many cross-cultural situations do not fit typical norms or tendencies, even when expectations are based on rigorous research. Cultural paradoxes—situations or interactions that involve contradictory norms or behaviors—are common encounters for expatriates in all cultures (Osland & Bird, 2000). In fact, Osland and Osland (2006) reported that expatriates who are more involved in the host culture are more likely to be aware of paradoxes. Thus, having the metacognitive CQ capability of thinking about thinking facilitates abstract conceptualization, particularly when faced with cultural paradoxes. Considering personal assumptions and being open to disconfirming experiences is a form of higher order reasoning that allows individuals to analyze new cross-cultural experiences without being biased or constrained by past experiences or expectations (Earley & Ang, 2003). Those with high metacognitive CQ have analogical reasoning capabilities that enable them to translate their insights from a particular experience into more general concepts and interpretations that can be applied to other cultural contexts. Thus, we propose that the relationship between international ex