The globalization of the business market along with increased diversity in the workplace, consist cross-cultural training and cross-cultural competencies for the workforce and for organisations themselves more important than ever before (Gertsen 1990; Nauman 1992).For example, one very common response to the occurrence of discrimination is the creation of diversity training programs of behalf of the organisation (Rynes & Rosen, 1995).
To begin with, the principal goal of the CCT is to alleviate expatriates’ cultural shock and as a result to make them more productive by increasing their performance (Dowling et al., 2008; Waxin & Panaccio, 2005; Forster, 2000). Bennet et al., (2000) suggested that “personal adjustment in the new host environment, …show more content…
In addition, employees’ ability to interact with colleagues from a diverse host environment results into their ability to adjust interpersonal with individuals from dissimilar cultures into the same organisation. This enhances the notion that CCT is capable of supporting the increased diversity within organisations. Therefore, the concept of CCT is far from being flawed because not only prepare individuals for working abroad but also train them in order to adjust their interaction with the “natives” in the new and unfamiliar host environments. Another argument in favour of the usefulness of the CCT is the fact that prepares and allows people to adjust to the new culture and to the new roles quicker and more effectively. This …show more content…
For example, Littrell et al. (2006) have pinpointed that “despite many claims by researchers that the CCT is necessary to increase the probability of success on foreign assignments, MNC(E)s are not listening”. Due to the qualitative nature of the objectives of this type of training, the outcomes are really difficult to measure effectively, and hence are dubious. There are numerous reasons explaining the low use of CCT and among the most prevailing are the lack of a theoretical framework and its questionable effectiveness (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Littrell et al., 2006). An example of the above limitations is the effort of several researchers such as (Black & Mendenhall, 1990) to promote certain aspects of other theories, like Social Learning Theory, in order to explain the way which the adjustment of the expatriates in different cultures could be achieved by learning new behaviors. This research inefficiency is probably an explanation of the possibly corporate leaders’ cynicism in regard with the effectiveness of CCT (Dowling et al., 2008). This mean that if imitation for example, or vicarious reinforcement,
To begin with, the principal goal of the CCT is to alleviate expatriates’ cultural shock and as a result to make them more productive by increasing their performance (Dowling et al., 2008; Waxin & Panaccio, 2005; Forster, 2000). Bennet et al., (2000) suggested that “personal adjustment in the new host environment, …show more content…
In addition, employees’ ability to interact with colleagues from a diverse host environment results into their ability to adjust interpersonal with individuals from dissimilar cultures into the same organisation. This enhances the notion that CCT is capable of supporting the increased diversity within organisations. Therefore, the concept of CCT is far from being flawed because not only prepare individuals for working abroad but also train them in order to adjust their interaction with the “natives” in the new and unfamiliar host environments. Another argument in favour of the usefulness of the CCT is the fact that prepares and allows people to adjust to the new culture and to the new roles quicker and more effectively. This …show more content…
For example, Littrell et al. (2006) have pinpointed that “despite many claims by researchers that the CCT is necessary to increase the probability of success on foreign assignments, MNC(E)s are not listening”. Due to the qualitative nature of the objectives of this type of training, the outcomes are really difficult to measure effectively, and hence are dubious. There are numerous reasons explaining the low use of CCT and among the most prevailing are the lack of a theoretical framework and its questionable effectiveness (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Littrell et al., 2006). An example of the above limitations is the effort of several researchers such as (Black & Mendenhall, 1990) to promote certain aspects of other theories, like Social Learning Theory, in order to explain the way which the adjustment of the expatriates in different cultures could be achieved by learning new behaviors. This research inefficiency is probably an explanation of the possibly corporate leaders’ cynicism in regard with the effectiveness of CCT (Dowling et al., 2008). This mean that if imitation for example, or vicarious reinforcement,