European Journal of Work and Organizational ...

This article was downloaded by: [Universiteit Twente] On: 15 July 2015, At: 00:34 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pewo20

Lean on me: The importance of one's own and partner's intercultural personality for expatriate's and expatriate spouse's successful adjustment abroad a

Kim J. P. M. van Erp , Karen I. van der Zee

b c

d

, Ellen Giebels & Marijtje A. J. van Duijn

e

a

Department of Human Performance Management , Eindhoven University of Technology , Eindhoven , TOrganizational Psychologys b

Faculty of Behavioural Sciences , University of Twente , The Netherlands

c

Department of Organizational Psychology , University of Groningen , The Netherlands

d

Click for updates

Department of Psychology of Conflict , Risk, and Safety, University of Twente , Twente , The Netherlands e

Department of Sociology , University of Groningen , Groningen , The Netherlands Published online: 22 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: Kim J. P. M. van Erp , Karen I. van der Zee , Ellen Giebels & Marijtje A. J. van Duijn (2014) Lean on me: The importance of one's own and partner's intercultural personality for expatriate's and expatriate spouse's successful adjustment abroad, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23:5, 706-728, DOI: 10.1080/1359432X.2013.816088 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2013.816088

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2014 Vol. 23, No. 5, 706–728, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2013.816088

Lean on me: The importance of one’s own and partner’s intercultural personality for expatriate’s and expatriate spouse’s successful adjustment abroad Kim J. P. M. van Erp1, Karen I. van der Zee2,3, Ellen Giebels4, and Marijtje A. J. van Duijn5 1

Department of Human Performance Management, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Faculty of Behavioural Sciences, University of Twente, The Netherlands 3 Department of Organizational Psychology, University of Groningen, The Netherlands 4 Department of Psychology of Conflict, Risk, and Safety, University of Twente, Twente, The Netherlands 5 Department of Sociology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

Downloaded by [Universiteit Twente] at 00:34 15 July 2015

2

This research explores the role of three intercultural personality traits—emotional stability, social initiative, and open-mindedness—as coping resources for expatriate couples’ adjustment. First, we examined the direct relationships of expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ personality trait levels with psychological and sociocultural adjustment. Psychological adjustment refers to internal psychological outcomes such as mental health and personal satisfaction, whereas sociocultural adjustment refers to more externally oriented psychological outcomes that link the individual to the new environment. Second, we examined the association of expatriates’ personality trait levels with professional adjustment, which was defined in terms of job performance and organizational commitment. Cross-sectional analyses among 196 expatriates and expatriate spouses (i.e., 98 expatriate couples) revealed that the three dimensions are each associated with specific facets of adjustment. A longitudinal analysis among a subsample (45 couples) partially confirmed these findings. Furthermore, we obtained evidence for a resource compensation effect, that is, the compensatory process whereby one partner’s lack of sufficiently high levels of a certain personality trait is compensated for by the other partner’s high(er) levels of this traits. Through this resource compensation effect, the negative consequences of a lack of sufficient levels of a personality trait on adjustment can be diminished. Apparently, in the absence of sufficiently high trait levels, individuals can benefit from personality resources in their partners. Keywords: Expatriate couples; Multicultural personality questionnaire; International adjustment; Dyadic data analysis; Dutch expatriates abroad.

Business exchanges more and more occur in a global context, increasingly urging organizations to send their employees to overseas postings. It is expected that the number of expatriate employees will keep growing (Brookfield Global Relocation Services, 2011). Since expatriates usually fulfil key positions, and assignment costs are high, huge investments are necessary for realizing international postings. Furthermore, the costs involved in a failed assignment or even a premature return of the expatriate are high (see, e.g., McNulty, De Cieri, & Hutchings, 2009). Therefore, expatriates’ effective adjustment is of great importance during the international assignment (Bhaskar-Shrinivas, Harrison, Shaffer, & Luk, 2005). Effective adjustment is defined as the degree of comfort that individuals experience in their professional and private (expatriate) lives (Black,

1988). Unfortunately, effective adjustment is not a matter of course. Although the new situation provides challenges and opportunities to the assigned couple, moving abroad is often also characterized by high levels of uncertainty due to unfamiliarity with the new circumstances and a loss of control (Van der Zee & Van der Gang, 2007). To cope with these potentially taxing aspects of an international assignment, personality seems to be an important resource (e.g., DeLongis & Holtzman, 2005; Hobfoll, 1989; Shaffer, Harrison, Gregersen, Black, & Ferzandi, 2006). Personality not only determines whether individuals perceive potentially stressful events as challenging or threatening, it also influences whether they are capable of constructive behavioural reactions to those events (Connor-Smith & Flachsbart, 2007).

Correspondence should be addressed to Kim J. P. M. van Erp, Eindhoven University of Technology, Faculty of Industrial Engineering & Innovation Sciences, Department of Human Performance Management, PO Box 513, 5600MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] At the time of research Kim. J. P. M van Erp was associated to the University of Groningen. © 2013 Taylor & Francis


EXPATRIATION AND INTERCULTURAL PERSONALITY

In this study we investigated the relationship of personality with several aspects of the adjustment of both the expatriate and his/her life partner, that is, the expatriate spouse. In line with previous studies (e.g., Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; Searle & Ward, 1990), we will adopt a multidimensional view of international adjustment. Specifically, we will distinguish between psychological, sociocultural, and professional adjustment. Psychological adjustment refers to “internal psychological outcomes such as mental health and personal satisfaction” (Ali, Van der Zee, & Sanders, 2003, p. 565; cf. Van der Zee, Ali, & Haaksma, 2007). Sociocultural adjustment refers to more externally oriented psychological outcomes that link the individual to the new environment, such as the ability to deal with daily problems pertaining to general living conditions, transportation, entertainment, and health care services in the host country (Ali et al., 2003; cf. Van der Zee et al., 2007). For the expatriate, we will additionally focus on the relationship between personality and professional adjustment, defined in terms of job performance and organizational commitment. Expatriate job performance refers to the behaviours and actions of the expatriate that contribute to the organization’s goals and are necessary to fulfil the position in the organization as implied in a job description (Becker & Kernan, 2003; Daniels & Harris, 2000). Organizational commitment is the degree to which an individual identifies with, and is involved in a particular organization (Mowday, Steers, & Porter, 1979). We specifically focus on the degree to which a person holds positive attitudes towards the organization, supports its goals, and intends to remain a member of the organization, that is, a type of organizational commitment usually referred to as affective commitment (e.g., Brown, 1996; Mowday, 1998). Since the expatriate’s new position abroad is the main reason for the international move, such work-related outcomes may be the ultimate criteria for success. Indeed, there is much empirical work on the possible determinants (e.g., previous overseas experience, cultural novelty) of expatriates’ work-related outcomes (for an overview, see Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005). Although in the 1960s and 1970s several studies focused on personality-based measures predicting expatriate success, results were not unequivocal and a unifying framework was lacking. As a result, after the 1970s the focus in research shifted to other predictors of international success (e.g., previous experience, role ambiguity, Black, 1988; technical competence, Tung, 1987; see Ones & Viswesvaran, 1997). However, there is a regained interest in personality predictors of expatriation (work) outcomes (e.g., Caligiuri, 2000; Shaffer et al. 2006; for a meta-analytic review, see Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005). In the present study, we attempted to gain further insight into the relationship between personality dimensions and expatriation. This may help us to arrive at better prediction regarding who will be suitable

707

candidates for international assignments. Furthermore, such knowledge may guide organizations’ (preassignment) support towards expatriate candidates, as it becomes clearer what expatriates’ strengths and weakness are. This may help organizations predict which expatriate candidates are best suited for the job. Moreover, we were not only interested in the expatriate but also in the expatriate spouse. The expatriate spouse seems to play an important role during the assignment abroad. First of all, the vast majority—about 80%—of expatriate employees is accompanied by their spouse or partner (Brookfield GRS, 2011). More importantly, the adjustment of the expatriate spouse has been found to be an essential predictor of the adjustment of the expatriate (BhaskarShrinivas et al., 2005; Brookfield GRS, 2011), and recent findings point at the impact of processes within the relationship of the expatriate couple, such as the mutual influence of feelings of justice and conflict, on both partners’ adjustment (Van Erp, Giebels, Van der Zee, & Van Duijn, 2011). However, until now most studies on personality and expatriation have focused primarily on expatriates themselves rather than their spouses (e.g., Ali et al., 2003), and studies simultaneously considering both partners’ perspectives are virtually nonexistent. Consequently, little is known about the interpersonal processes that underlie this mutual influencing in expatriate couples. Therefore, next to exploring the effect of personality traits on expatriates’ and expatriate partners’ own adjustment, this study explores whether and how expatriates’ and expatriate partners’ personality traits will influence their partners’ adjustment. Gaining insight into such interpersonal processes will not only contribute to the expatriation literature, but may also provide expatriate couples and assigning companies with concrete insights and advice on how to optimize adaptation abroad. The present research adds to the expatriate literature in several ways. Our central aim is to study the impact of personality on intercultural adjustment. First, elaborating on the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989) and on the basis of a two-dimensional perspective on intercultural traits (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-a), we will provide a theoretical rationale explaining why intercultural traits can be considered important coping resources in an intercultural context. That is, not only are intercultural traits important coping resource in their own right, they may also facilitate the attainment of additional coping resources (e.g., social support, mastery, self-esteem) in the new cultural environment. High levels of intercultural traits are therefore expected to contribute to better adjustment, whereas low levels on such traits leave individuals prone to resource losses, and therefore less likely to adjust successfully. Second, we will propose that the partner’s intercultural traits can be considered additional resources when one’s own personality resources do not suffice.

708 VAN ERP ET AL.


Although previous studies have explored personality in couples in terms of resemblance and differences (e.g., Barelds & Barelds-Dijkstra, 2007; Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008), the ways in which partners’ characteristics may mutually influence each others’ adjustment has until now not been investigated. In the present research we therefore investigate the interaction between the expatriate’s and expatriate partner’s personality traits and its effect on both parties’ level of adjustment. As such, this copingresource perspective provides another contribution to the expatriation literature. Finally, in addition to cross-sectional explorations, we investigated the long-term impact of personality traits on expatriate couples’ adjustment, something that is relatively rare in expatriation research (see Hechanova, Beehr, & Christiansen, 2003).

INTERCULTURAL PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS Not every individual responds the same to an expatriation experience. Personality has been identified as a substantial predictor of expatriate outcomes, for instance in terms of adjustment and willingness to stay on the assignment (e.g., Shaffer et al., 2006; Van der Zee et al., 2007; Van Oudenhoven, Mol, & Van der Zee, 2003). Personality “represents those characteristics of the person that account for consistent patterns of feeling, thinking, and behaving” (Pervin & John, 2001, p. 4). Numerous studies have documented the importance of personality traits as determinants of intercultural success (e.g., Caligiuri, 2000; Dalton & Wilson, 2000; Huang, Chi, & Lawler, 2005; Shaffer et al., 2006; for an overview, see Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005). Usually these studies relied on an influential general model of personality —the Five Factor Model (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992; Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1990): I Extraversion, II Agreeableness, III Conscientiousness, IV Emotional Stability, and V Intellect/Openness to Experience. A drawback of using the Big Five dimensions in the context of expatriation is that these general personality dimensions are not specifically geared towards thoughts and behaviours that are relevant in the intercultural context. To overcome this limitation, recent work increasingly focuses on specific intercultural traits. Intercultural traits are traits that are specifically defined against an intercultural context and that capture specific behavioural tendencies that predict successful adaptation to a multicultural context (e.g., Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001). In this regard, Van der Zee and Van Oudenhoven (2000, 2001) developed a personality framework consisting of five intercultural traits—emotional stability, cultural empathy, social initiative, open-mindedness, and flexibility—and developed a 91-item scale to measure these dimensions (the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire [MPQ], see also the Method section). Although the five traits are conceptually close to the Big Five, they are more narrowly defined. Open-mindedness,

for instance, entails tendencies as being nonjudgemental regarding differing norms and values, embracing diversity, and being fascinated by and getting involved in other cultures. The related, but more general Big Five construct of openness to experience is defined in more general terms of investigativeness, imaginativeness, and capability of forming one’s own opinion. Empirical studies relying on the MPQ have supported the predictive value of the five intercultural traits in a variety of intercultural settings, for instance among expatriates (Van der Zee et al., 2007; Van Oudenhoven et al., 2003) and international students (Leone, Van der Zee, Van Oudenhoven, Perugini, & Ercolani, 2005; Van der Zee, Van Oudenhoven, & De Grijs, 2004; Van Oudenhoven & Van der Zee, 2002). Moreover, studies have demonstrated the predictive ability of the five traits above and beyond the Big Five (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000; Van der Zee, Zaal, & Piekstra, 2003; Van Oudenhoven, Timmerman, & Van der Zee, 2007). For example, performing a hierarchical multiple regression analysis, Leone et al. (2005) found that the intercultural personality traits predicted students’ international orientation over and above the effects of general personality traits (i.e., Big Five traits) with 9% additional variance explained. The significant effects of the Big Five traits, especially openness to experience and conscientiousness, reduced to nonsignificance after the five intercultural personality traits were entered into the equation. In particular, open-mindedness and social initiative were positively associated with international orientation. Similarly, in a sample of 264 job applicants Van der Zee et al. (2003) showed that the five intercultural personality traits explained 14% additional variance above general personality in assessor-rated behavioural competency. In particular, open-mindedness and cultural empathy positively influenced behavioural competency. In sum, intercultural traits are more specifically aligned to an intercultural context and there is empirical evidence that such intercultural traits have additional value in predicting intercultural success over more general traits. In the remainder of this paper we will focus in more detail on these traits as resources to cope with the new situation abroad.

PERSONALITY AS AN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COPING RESOURCE Coping resources are “objects, personal characteristics, conditions or energies that are valued by the individual or that serve as a means for attainment of these object, personal characteristics, conditions, or energies” (Hobfoll, 1989, p. 516). Psychological distress is the individual’s reaction to an actual or impending loss of such resources or a lack of resource gain after an investment of resources. Therefore, and being the central tenet of Hobfoll’s (1989) COR theory, individuals will seek to acquire and create resources (e.g., mastery), while at the



same time they will try to protect and maintain the resources they already have (e.g., self-esteem). Furthermore, because people must invest their available resources (e.g., personality, energy) “in order to protect against resource loss, recover from loss, and gain resources” (Hobfoll, 2011, p. 117), those who have more resources at their disposal are less vulnerable to losing resources and possess more possibilities to attract additional ones (e.g., social support; Hobfoll, 2011). Thus, in order for expatriates and expatriate spouses to cope effectively with the new situation abroad, it is important that they have enough coping resources at their disposal (e.g., Hobfoll, 1989; Hobfoll, Johnson, Ennis, & Jackson, 2003). In the present study we were interested in one’s own and one’s partners’ intercultural traits as coping resources. We specifically focused on the intercultural traits of emotional stability, open-mindedness and social initiative. As COR theory explains, intercultural traits may function as resources in their own right, and facilitate the attainment of additional resources as well. Although Hobfoll (1989) indeed mentioned personality as a potential resource, until now research has not considered the partner’s personality as a resource. Furthermore, whereas COR theory does explain that resources are important to cope with a variety of situations, exactly how intercultural personality traits may impact an international assignment is not explained by this theory. In order to understand how intercultural traits may act as a coping resource, we first need to get insight into the characteristics of international assignments that expatriates and their spouses need to cope with. In this regard, international assignments have been described in terms of both threats and challenges (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-a, in press-b). First, an international assignment may be considered stressful and taxing, as it poses a threat to one’s coping resources. For example, expatriates lose the proximity of family and friends, and expatriate spouses— often turning from being financially independent and having their own career into dependent fulltime housekeepers —may experience a loss of identity. Second, an international assignment contains challenges and opportunities to literally and metaphorically expand one’s boundaries and resources. One may establish valuable contacts within new cultural groups and learn from the culturally different perspectives of other individuals who have different norms and values. Empirical evidence suggests that the intercultural traits that we discussed earlier, may serve different functions in intercultural situations (Van der Zee & Van der Gang, 2007; Van der Zee et al., 2004; see Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-a). More specifically, recent data suggest that they can be divided into stress-buffering traits that protect against the threatening features of intercultural situations, versus social-perceptual traits that enable individuals to appreciate and benefit from the opportunities of intercultural situations (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-a, in press-b).

709

Stress-buffering traits have their neurological basis in the Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) in the brain (Gray, 1972, 1991). This system inhibits behaviour that may lead to negative or painful outcomes, and leads to negative feelings such as anxiety and fear in response to signals of nonreward and novelty. In this regard, emotional stability is a stress-buffering trait referring to the tendency to remain calm in novel and stressful situations versus a tendency to show strong emotional reactions under stressful circumstances (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001). Emotionally stable individuals put setbacks into perspective more easily and are not easily daunted by demanding intercultural situations characterized by high uncertainty and lack of control, probably making it easier to adjust to the context of a foreign posting. In contrast, social-perceptual traits have their basis in the Behavioural Activation System (BAS; Fowles, 1980). Greater sensitivity of the BAS may lead to a greater tendency to engage in goal-directed behaviour, and the experience of positive feelings in the face of challenges (Gray, 1991; see Carver & White, 1994). In the present study, we focused on the social-perceptual trait of social initiative and open-mindedness. Social initiative refers to a tendency to actively approach social situations, whereas open-mindedness refers to an open and unprejudiced attitude towards outgroup members and towards different cultural norms and values (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001). Social initiative can thus be referred to as a social trait concerning capacities in relationship building, whereas open-mindedness is primarily a perceptual trait referring to the ability to perceive differences in an open and nonjudgemental way (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-b). Both traits provide personal resources to embrace the challenges of diversity and to build additional resources by making contact with locals as a source of social support, rapidly learning the hostcountry language, or discovering a nicer house or interesting cultural activities as a result of exploring the new living environment. In the present study, we linked emotional stability, social initiative, and open-mindedness to adjustment outcomes of expatriates and expatriate spouses. We not only expected their own intercultural traits to be of importance but also that they, being in an intimate relationship, may draw from their partners’ intercultural traits as well. That is, we further explored the application of COR theory by introducing the hypothesis that if individuals have insufficient resources at their disposal, they will attempt to utilize external resources, in our case personality characteristics of their partner. We term this a resource compensation effect. Next, we will further expound our expectations regarding the relationship of both parties’ intercultural personality traits with their psychological and sociocultural adjustment. Moreover, for expatriates we also investigated the relationship between their own and their partners’ personality traits and their professional adjustment.

710 VAN ERP ET AL.


NONWORK OUTCOMES: PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIOCULTURAL ADJUSTMENT In order to reach higher levels of psychological adjustment, expatriates and expatriate spouses will especially benefit from the ability to cope with expatriation-related stress and uncertainty in an emotionally balanced way. Not surprisingly, past research has indicated emotional stability as the most important intercultural trait influencing psychological adjustment (Van der Zee et al., 2007; Van Oudenhoven et al., 2003). In addition, the social-perceptual trait of social initiative may be positively associated with psychological as well as sociocultural adjustment. Since individuals high in social initiative experience intercultural situations as a challenge rather than a threat (Van der Zee & Van der Gang, 2007; Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-b), they will experience the international assignment as more positive, and will be better able to seize opportunities and see possibilities than those low in social initiative. We therefore expect that individuals high in social initiative will experience a better mental health and higher levels of personal satisfaction (psychological adjustment). Furthermore, because persons high in social initiative are more likely to take initiatives to explore new places and people, they are better able to develop and maintain new social contacts in the host-country (cf. Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-b). They will actively seek out to solve the daily problems of an international assignment, enabling them to reach higher levels of sociocultural adjustment. Similar predictions can be made regarding openmindedness. The unprejudiced attitude of open-minded expatriates and expatriate spouses helps them to experience the new norms and values of their host country positively, rather than as a threat to their cultural identity (Van der Zee et al., 2004; Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-b). By postponing their judgement about the new situation with its new habits, behaviours, and values, open-minded individuals create possibilities to learn from their new environment. As such, open-mindedness may enhance psychological and sociocultural adjustment. Indeed, studies have revealed a positive relationship of openmindedness with indicators of psychological (Van Oudenhoven & Van der Zee, 2002) and sociocultural adjustment (Ali et al., 2003; see also Hechanova et al., 2003). In sum, we posited: Hypothesis 1: Emotional stability is positively associated with the psychological adjustment of (a) expatriates and (b) expatriate spouses.

Hypothesis 2: Social initiative is positively associated with the psychological and sociocultural adjustment of (a) expatriates and (b) expatriate spouses. Hypothesis 3: Open-mindedness is positively associated with the psychological and sociocultural adjustment of (a) expatriates and (b) expatriate spouses.

WORK OUTCOME: PROFESSIONAL ADJUSTMENT We have discussed personality as a predictor of psychological and sociocultural adjustment for both expatriates and expatriate spouses. However, and in particular for the assigning organization, expatriates’ professional adjustment seems to be the ultimate criterion for a successful international assignment. As indicators of professional adjustment we will include job performance as well as organizational commitment. First, as the expatriate’s new position is the main reason for the international move, meeting the requirements of the job is of major importance, both to the expatriate employee, and to the assigning organization (e.g., Mol, Born, & Van der Molen, 2005). Moreover, given the high monetary and immaterial costs involved in premature termination of an assignment, dedicated and loyal expatriates are of great importance to the organization as well. Individuals who are highly committed to the organization more strongly identify with its goals and values and are willing to make an effort for the benefit of the company (Mowday et al., 1979). That is, organizational commitment encompasses both a motivation (e.g., effort) and satisfaction (e.g., willingness to stay) component. Indeed, highly committed employees are less likely to leave (e.g., Mowday et al., 1979; Naumann, Widmier, & Jackson, 2000). Therefore, organizational commitment may be considered crucial to the actual completion of the international assignment (e.g., Guzzo, Noonan, & Elron, 1994). Although studies in the international context have increasingly started to investigate the role of personality dimensions for work outcomes such as job performance (e.g., Ones & Viswesvaran, 1997; Shaffer et al., 2006; see also Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005), research exploring the effect of personality on organizational commitment is scarce and limited to the domestic domain (e.g., Erdheim, Wang, & Zickar, 2006; Tziner, Waismal-Manor, Vardi, & Brodman, 2008; Westerman & Simmons, 2007). Furthermore, these studies focused on general measures for personality. In the present study, focusing on intercultural traits, we first predicted that emotionally stable expatriates will be less susceptible to unpleasant surprises and more capable of dealing with the unsettled situation resulting from the international move (Shaffer et al., 2006). Because they will more easily handle the various complications on the job, they



will more easily meet the requirements of their international jobs. This is in line with the meta-analytic findings that general Big Five emotional stability is positively related to expatriates’ job performance (Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005). The effect of emotional stability on organizational commitment is less straightforward. On the one hand, emotional stability will reduce feelings of insecurity and worries in the new organizational context. This may promote a positive attitude and commitment to the organization. On the other hand, exactly because emotionally stable persons are more self-confident and tend to worry less, they will be less deterred by the prospect of seeking other job opportunities (cf. Erdheim et al., 2006). In a domestic study using a Big Five measure of emotional stability, Erdheim et al. (2006) showed that stable employees had a lower continuance commitment (i.e., employee’s perceived costs of staying with the organization vs. leaving) compared to employees who were less stable. No significant effects were found on affective commitment—the (emotional) involvement and identification with the organization—and normative commitment—the perceived obligation to remain in the organization. Tziner et al. (2008) and Westerman and Simmons (2007) did not find a relationship between the Big Five trait of emotional stability and organizational commitment. Given this potentially ambiguous relationship, no specific prediction was formulated for the effect of emotional stability on commitment. Hypothesis 4: An expatriate’s level of emotional stability is positively associated with his or her job performance. Second, the intercultural trait of social initiative is expected to be related to both job performance and organizational commitment. Because individuals high in social initiative may perceive the intercultural situation as a challenge, and will more easily connect to others (Van der Zee & Van der Gang, 2007), they may develop fruitful and pleasant social contacts on the job. Smooth interactions with coworkers and more active engagement in the team may facilitate learning on the job, thereby enhancing the expatriate’s job performance. Moreover, it may cause expatriates to experience being a member of the organization as more rewarding, as such positively influencing an expatriate’s organizational commitment. Studies on general personality traits are generally in line with these expectations. For instance, meta-analytic results have revealed a significant effect of extraversion— a trait that is conceptually related to social initiative—on expatriate job performance (Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005). In line with our reasoning, earlier studies have also reported significant positive effects of extraversion on organizational commitment (Erdheim et al., 2006; Westerman & Simmons, 2007). In sum, we posited:

711

Hypothesis 5: An expatriate’s level of social initiative is positively associated with his or her job performance and organizational commitment. Finally, open-minded individuals are curious and eager to learn. Furthermore, low prejudice towards the new situation on the job may help expatriates to arrive at more accurate interpretations of cues in the new work environment, enabling them to meet the requirements of the job more promptly. Unexpectedly, studies have failed to reveal a relationship between the Big Five trait of openness to experience and expatriates’ job performance (e.g., Caligiuri, 2000; Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005; Ones & Viswesvaran, 1997). Nevertheless, we predict that the trait of open-mindedness, which is closely related to openness but more specifically taps into the intercultural nature of a foreign assignment, is positively associated with an expatriate’s job performance. Open-minded individuals will more easily identify with the new norms and values in the organization. They will therefore better grasp which behaviours and actions are valued by the organization and will contribute to the organizations goals (cf. Becker & Kernan, 2003; Daniels & Harris, 2000). Consequently, openmindedness helps individuals to arrive at higher level of job performance. Additionally, open-minded individuals feel encouraged rather than discouraged by unknown customs, and their unprejudiced attitude may increase their ability to identify with the norms and values of the international organization (cf. Tziner et al., 2008). As such, open-mindedness may enhance expatriates’ organizational commitment and willingness to remain on the international assignment. At the same time, however, it may increase expatriates’ enduring search for new adventures. In this regard, DeNeve and Cooper (1998) stated that openness to experience (a Big Five trait closely related to open-mindedness) may serve as a “double-edged sword that predisposes individuals to feel both the good and the bad more deeply” (p. 199). The scarce empirical results on expatriates’ organizational commitment reflect this two-sidedness: Tziner et al. (2008) for example revealed a positive effect of openness to experience on commitment, whereas Erdheim et al. (2006) found no effect of this trait on affective and normative commitment. Furthermore, the latter authors report a negative effect of openness on continuance commitment, indeed suggesting that open and curious employees are more likely to leave the organization. We therefore refrain from predictions regarding the role of open-mindedness on organizational commitment. In sum, we posited, Hypothesis 6: An expatriate’s level of openmindedness is positively associated with his or her job performance.

712 VAN ERP ET AL.

LONGITUDINAL EFFECTS OF INTERCULTURAL PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS In order to draw more definite conclusions on the impact of the intercultural traits on expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ levels of adjustment, a cross-sectional analysis of a sample of expatriate couples was followed by a longitudinal analysis of a subsample that participated in a follow-up survey 1 year later.


INTERCULTURAL PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND MUTUAL INFLUENCE As already described, expatriates and expatriate spouses who are emotionally stable, high in social initiative, and open-minded, possess valuable resources that enable them to successfully adjust to the situation abroad. Conversely, being low on these personality traits may complicate an expedient adjustment. Possibly, however, high levels of resources in one’s partner may compensate for this, especially since the international assignment may increase partners’ mutual dependency. That is, the process of getting adjusted is not something that takes place in a vacuum. On the contrary, expatriates and expatriate spouses likely influence each others’ adjustment (cf. Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al., 2005), and, moving abroad, become more reliant on each other, because familiar social networks are left behind. Therefore, we suggest an extension of COR theory, and argue that especially when one’s own personality resources are not sufficient, one’s partner’s intercultural personality dimensions may provide supportive, external coping resources. Through a resource compensation effect, not only one’s own intercultural traits may facilitate adjustment, but high levels of these traits in one’s partner may facilitate adjustment as well. Emotionally unstable expatriates or expatriate spouses may feel reassured in stressful situations by their partners’ calm and emotionally stable responses. Through their sociable partners, individuals receive easy access to sociocultural interactions, despite being low in social initiative themselves. Furthermore, an open and curious partner will provide a less open-minded partner with essential information and support to adjust effectively. Because partners’ lives become more interdependent in the host-country situation, these interpersonal effects may be amplified (e.g., Takeuchi, Yun, & Tesluk, 2002; Van der Zee, Ali, & Salomé, 2005). In sum, we posited, Hypothesis 7: The relationships between one’s own intercultural traits (emotional stability, social initiative, open-mindedness) and adjustment is moderated by the personality traits of one’s partner.

METHOD Respondents Participants were approached through Global Connection (GC), an Internet-based expatriation contact organization; through a multinational company from the Netherlands; and via a request for participation published in a Dutch online expatriate magazine (for further details, see Van Erp et al., 2011). Among the 240 participants (58.8%) who returned the questionnaire were 105 couples (210 participants, 51.5%). Because in the initial turbulent period of moving, feelings of adjustment may be distorted by the hectic start-up, and adjustment measures may not capture representative levels of adjustment, participants who were less than 2 months into their assignment were excluded from participation. In a similar vein, it can be doubted whether an individual who has been on an assignment for an extensive period of time can still be regarded as an expatriate. Following Aycan and Kanungo (1997), who suggested a period of “usually more than six months and less than five years in one term” (p. 250), we only included those couples that had been living in the host country for 5.5 years or less (i.e., range = 2 months–5.5 years). Consequently, five couples who had exceeded this time period were excluded. Additionally, two couples who filled out the questionnaire inappropriately were removed. The remaining 196 participants (98 couples) had been living in the host country for, on average, 1.75 years (SD = 1.16). They were aged between 24 and 64 years (M = 40.30, SD = 8.44). Expatriates were predominantly men (90.8%), expatriate spouses predominantly women (88.8%; our sample contained one homosexual couple). The majority of the participants were married (87.8%); the remaining 12.2% were cohabiting. Relationship duration was, on average, 16.54 years (SD = 9.24, range 1.5– 37.0 years). All expatriates had Dutch nationality. Five expatriate spouses had another nationality (they originated from Bosnia, Indonesia, South Africa, or the USA), but indicated that they were fluent in the Dutch language.1 Fifty-four per cent of the couples had children under the age of 18. In all but one case, minors accompanied their parents. Additionally, four couples were accompanied by children older than 18 years. The age of the eldest child (for families with trailing children) varied between 0 and 22 years (M = 8.79 years, SD = 5.69). The majority of the participants (86.7% of the expatriates, 77.6% of the expatriate spouses) had finished an education at university or higher vocational 1

Excluding the non-Dutch participants from the analysis revealed similar results, although one additional partner effect emerged: Expatriates’ sociocultural adjustment was positively related to their spouses’ level of emotional stability (B = 0.67, SE = 0.29, p = .02). Because this did not change the conclusions we can draw from our hypotheses testing, we decided to include the non-Dutch participants in the final analyses.


levels. Most expatriate spouses did not have paid jobs (n = 76, 77.6%). The majority of those who did have a job indicated that they worked below their educational level. Participants were located in 43 different countries. For 41.8% of the couples this was their first assignment. Twenty-four different organizations were mentioned as the assigning organization.


Participants at T2. Ninety-six couples had indicated (at T1) to be willing to participate in a follow-up study. They received a follow-up questionnaire 1 year after the first measurement. Fifty-four (56.3%) couples returned correctly completed questionnaires. However, nine couples had moved to another host country or back to The Netherlands. The longitudinal analyses are therefore based on a subsample of 45 couples.2

Instruments All scales were included both in the T1 and the T2 questionnaires, with the exception of the intercultural personality traits (solely included at T1). Furthermore, all scales were included in both expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ questionnaires, with the exception of scales for job performance and organizational commitment. Control variables. In the analyses, several demographic characteristics were included as control variables. We controlled for gender. Although gender and role are confounded, recent research has found gender differences in adjustment abroad (Haslberger, 2010), and we therefore wanted to investigate its importance in the present study. We also took into account age and whether the present assignment was the couple’s first assignment (=1) or not (=0) as control variables. Experienced couples may have learned the pitfalls and effective means to adjust successfully. Older individuals may have acquired a greater arsenal of (job-)relevant skills that help them in life and work abroad. Although there is still some obscurity regarding how exactly assignment duration impacts adjustment, research has suggested that it plays a role in the couples’ levels of adjustment (e.g., BhaskarShrinivas et al., 2005). Therefore, we accounted for the time a couple had been living in the host country (measurement unit in years, rounded to two decimal points to take into account months). Couples who move abroad with children may face extra challenges (e.g., children’s schooling, and extra worries over health and safety), but they may benefit from extra opportunities to get adjusted as well (e.g.,

2

ANOVAs on key constructs (i.e., emotional stability, social initiative, open-mindedness, psychological, sociocultural, and professional adjustment) and control variables revealed no differences between participants who filled out the questionnaire at T1 only and participants who filled out both the T1 and T2 questionnaires.

713

social contact with other experienced parents). We used a dichotomous measure to indicate whether couples did not have children or were not accompanied by them (=0) versus being accompanied by their children (=1). Finally, adjustment may be easier the less the host culture differs from one’s home culture (e.g., Black & Stephens, 1989). We calculated the distance between the host-country culture and the home-country culture (The Netherlands). Based on Hofstede’s dimensions (1980), we calculated cultural distance as the Modified Mahalanobis distance as proposed by Kandogan (2012). This measure takes into account the four Hofstede dimensions (i.e., power distance, individualism, masculinity, and uncertainty avoidance) and recognizes the nonzero covariances among them. (For 13 couples, no cultural distance measures could be calculated because Hofstede’s dimensions were not available for some countries, e.g., for Syria, Honduras.) Intercultural traits. The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001) was used as an instrument to measure intercultural traits. The MPQ has proven to be stable over time (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2001), and has been validated in several different cultures (e.g., Leone et al., 2005; see, e.g., Leong, 2007). In our study, we used subscales for emotional stability, social initiative, and open-mindedness. Examples of items from the emotional stability scale (20 items; α = .88) are “is not easily hurt” and “keeps calm at bad-luck”. The scale for social initiative (17 items; α = .87) includes items such as “takes initiative” and “easily approaches other people”. Finally, open-mindedness (18 items; α = .86) has items such as “is fascinated by other people’s opinions” and “has a broad range of interests”. Respondents could provide their answers on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = “not at all applicable”, 5 = “totally applicable”). Psychological adjustment. Psychological adjustment was measured with the Dutch translation of the scale for psychological health (α = .72, five items), drawn from the RAND-36 (Van der Zee & Sanderman, 1993; cf. RAND Health Science Program, 1992). Participants were asked to indicate how they had been feeling during the previous 4 weeks on a 5-point scale (1 = “strongly disagree”, 5 = “strongly agree”). Sample items were “how often … have you felt downhearted and blue?” and “how often … have you been a happy person?” Sociocultural adjustment. In order to measure expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ adjustment to the general, external environment in the host country, participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they had adjusted to a number of areas of life in the host country. Items were drawn from

714 VAN ERP ET AL.


Black (1988) (i.e., on food, entertainment, general living conditions, shopping) and Ali (2003; i.e., health-care facilities, cost of living, housing conditions, local cultural events, children’s schooling; see also Ali et al., 2003) and complemented with an item on interaction with the local community. The internal validity of the overall 10-item scale was good (α = .87), and for all items the corrected item-total correlations were acceptable (i.e., >.51). Answers were given on a 7-point scale (1 = “not adjusted at all”, 7 = “completely adjusted”). Because some items were not applicable to all participants (e.g., the question on children’s schooling is not applicable to couples without children) we added a category “not applicable”. Job performance. Job performance was measured with a six-item scale (α = .82) drawn from Denison, Hooijberg, and Quinn (1995). This 7-point scale includes items such as “my overall effectiveness is …” very ineffective (1) to very effective (7)”. Organizational commitment. We used the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ; α = .88; Mowday et al., 1979) to measure organizational commitment. To enhance scale reliability, one item was removed from the original nine-item scale. This item showed lower interitem correlations than the other items (i.e., corrected item-total correlation for OC-5 item was .39, compared to .57 to .70 for the other items). The content of this item—“I would accept almost any kind of job assignment in order to keep working for this organization”—was more extreme than the other items in that many individuals disagreed with this item to a great extent. No matter how committed, an employee working, for instance, as a manager is unlikely to accept a job as a cleaner or coffee lady. A sample item of the remaining items is “I really care about the fate of this organization”. Answers were given on a 5point Likert-type scale (1 = “strongly disagree”, 5 = “strongly agree”).

Statistical analysis An important contribution of this study is that it explores the way in which both partners’ intercultural personality traits influence each other’s adjustment through a possible resource compensation effect. To do so properly, we used the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model with distinguishable parties (APIM; Campbell, Simpson, Kashy, & Roles, 2001; Kenny & Cook, 1999; Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, 2006) to analyse our data. First, the APIM model accounts for the influence of both partners’ behaviour on their own outcome variable(s), that is, the actor effect. Second, interdependence is modelled through partner effects: the influence of the intercultural personality

of Partner A on the outcome measure of Partner B (Kenny et al., 2006). Importantly, this distinction allows us to analyse the interaction between the own personality traits and the partner’s personality traits (hereafter referred to as “own-by-other” interaction) on adjustment for expatriates and expatriate spouses simultaneously. We used the MLwiN 2.00 software (Rasbash, Browne, Healey, Cameron, & Charlton, 2004) to analyse the data. We distinguished between effects for expatriates and effects for expatriate spouses by using a two-intercepts approach (Cook & Kenny, 2005; Raudenbush, Brennan, & Barnett, 1995).3 We first estimated a model for expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ nonwork adjustment. In order to control for interrelatedness of the two nonwork aspects of adjustment, we used a multivariate analysis with both psychological and sociocultural adjustment as outcome variables. Second, we tested the hypotheses regarding expatriates’ job performance and organizational commitment by means of a similar multivariate approach. We chose to examine the work and nonwork adjustment outcomes separately because expatriate spouses’ did not have data on the work-related adjustment measures. The proposed models were estimated in several steps. First, we tested a model containing only the intercepts for expatriates (and expatriate spouses, where applicable). This was the “baseline” model. Next, to explore the effects of (own) intercultural personality traits on the adjustment measures (H1–6), actor effects of the intercultural personality traits were entered. Finally, in order to test the interaction hypothesis (H7), we first controlled for partner effects of intercultural personality, and then entered the interaction effects into the equation: own-byother (i.e., actor-by-partner) effect of emotional stability, own-by-other’s social initiative, and own-by-other’s open-mindedness. Model improvement was tested through the difference in deviance using a chi-squared test. The deviance—minus twice the log likelihood value —is an inverse relative-goodness-of-fit measure: The smaller the deviance, the better the model fits the data, and the more the deviance has decreased, the more the model has been improved. Finally, due to the smaller sample size of 45 couples, we performed univariate instead of multivariate analyses to test the hypotheses with the longitudinal subsample. Furthermore, interaction effects were not included in these equations. Controlling for the level of adjustment at T1, we estimated the effect of the intercultural personality dimensions on adjustment at T2. 3 The dependent variables of professional adjustment are merely applicable to expatriates. The APIM approach is therefore only necessary for psychological and sociocultural adjustment. However, the multivariate model is readily analysed using the MLwiN software.



It has been recommended to centre independent variables in a moderation analysis. First, this reduces problems associated with the otherwise high correlations (multicollinearity) between the independent variables and the interaction term created from them (Aiken & West, 1991; Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004). Second, centring creates an interpretable meaning for values of zero (=0) for the independent variables, facilitating easier interpretation of the results (Snijders & Bosker, 2012). Therefore, in all analyses the independent variables were centred. Because the two-intercept model estimates the intercepts and coefficients for expatriates and expatriate spouses separately, we used “role-wise” centring, that is, separate centring for expatriates and expatriate spouses based on their separate means. In this way, we model “relative” differences among expatriates and expatriate spouses. Centring on the grand mean, however, did not lead to different results. The results of the analysis did not change when we controlled for the demographic variables, including our measure for cultural distance. Because this measure of cultural distance did not reveal a fixed effect, we explored whether the host country had an influence on adjustment outcomes by including the host country as an additional level in the multilevel structure and checking whether a significant amount of variance was attributable to host country. As this turned out not to be the case, we decided to exclude cultural distance as well as the demographic variables from the final analyses we report.

715

RESULTS Means, ranges, and standard deviations of the key variables at T1 are presented in Table 1. Paired t-tests on these variables revealed that expatriates scored higher on emotional stability, t(97) = 4.15, p < .001, and psychological adjustment, t(97) = 3.60, p = .001, than expatriate spouses. Expatriate spouses, on the other hand, had somewhat higher scores on sociocultural adjustment, t(91) = –2.12, p = .037. Means, ranges, and standard deviations of the subsample at T2 are depicted in Table 2. Expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ individual correlation coefficients are depicted in Table 3. Expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ intercultural personality dimensions were not strongly correlated, with open-mindedness as an exception. Additionally, the correlations revealed that whereas both partners’ indicators of psychological adjustment were significantly correlated, their indices of sociocultural adjustment were correlated only marginally (r = .20, p = .059). Correlations in the subsample at T2 are depicted in Table 4. Although one could argue that emotional stability and psychological adjustment are factors that may be difficult to distinguish, the correlations between emotional stability and psychological adjustment are strong but not extreme (expatriates r = .45, expatriate spouse r = .64, Table 3). Furthermore, theoretically, emotional stability and psychological adjustment are clearly different concepts, with emotional stability being a stable personality trait (Van der Zee &

TABLE 1 Ranges, means, and standard deviations for expatriates and expatriate spouses, full sample T1 Expatriate

Emotional stability Social intiative Open-mindedness Psychological adjustment Sociocultural adjustment Job performance Organizational commitment

Expatriate spouse

Min – Max

M

SD

Min − Max

M

SD

2.85 − 4.70 2.71 − 4.76 2.89 − 4.61 2.80 − 5.00 3.20 − 6.90 3.00 − 6.67 2.38 − 5.00 n = 98

3.89 3.82 3.84 4.38 5.49 5.62 3.97

0.37 0.40 0.37 0.40 0.84 0.51 0.60

2.65 − 4.80 2.59 − 4.71 2.22 − 4.61 3.00 − 5.00 3.50 – 7.00

3.64 3.74 3.82 4.19 5.72

0.45 0.49 0.44 0.46 0.79

n = 98

TABLE 2 Ranges, means, and standard deviations for expatriates and expatriate spouses, subsample, T2 Expatriate

Psychological adjustment Sociocultural adjustment Job performance Organizational commitment

Expatriate spouse

Min – Max

M

SD

Min – Max

M

SD

2.40 – 5.00 3.50 – 6.75 4.17 – 6.33 2.38 – 5.00 n = 45

4.19 5.33 5.49 4.06

0.51 0.80 0.47 0.66

2.00 – 5.00 3.67 – 7.00

3.99 5.53

0.64 0.87

n = 45

716 VAN ERP ET AL. TABLE 3 Correlations for expatriates and expatriate spouses separately (full sample, T1)


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Gender Age First assignment Years in host-country Accompanying children Cultural difference Emotional stability Social initiative Open-mindedness Psychological adjustment Sociocultural adjustment Job performance Organizational commitment

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

— −.14 .02 .02 −.18 −.04 −.19 −.11 −.05 −.05 .06 −.11 −.07

.00 — −.47** .17 −.14 −.24* .01 .04 −.12 .07 .03 .01 .12

.04 −.42** — −.24* .18 .10 −.00 −.16 −.08 −.07 −.22* −.10 −.15

.01 .20* −.25* — .17 .00 .08 −.03 .14 .00 .10 .24* −.09

.24* −.15 .18 .18 — .28* .09 .03 .05 −.04 .09 −.09 −.20

.06 −.25* .10 .00 .28* — .14 −.03 .19 .03 .21 .01 .01

−.05 .18 −.20* .02 .01 −.04 −.03 .25* .17 .45*** .03 .26** .24*

.13 .11 −.08 .10 .06 −.13 .41*** .16 .47*** .19 .13 .31** .34***

.04 −.01 −.01 .05 .03 .00 .35*** .61*** .22* .09 .32** .08 .21*

−.01 −.01 −.06 −.02 −.03 −.11 .64*** .16 .13 .26** .05 .32** .24*

.01 .05 −.09 .15 −.05 −.04 .07 .19 .20 .04 .20 −.04 .02

— — — — — — — — — — — — .02

***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, two-tailed. Expatriates and spouses seperately, n = 98. a Correlation coefficients for expatriates are printed below the diagonal, coefficients for expatriate spouses are printed above the diagonal. b Intercorrelations between expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ measures on the diagonal (in bold). TABLE 4 Correlations for expatriates and expatriate spouses separately (subsample, T2)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Gender Age First assignment Years in host-country Accompanying children Cultural difference Emotional stability (T1) Social initiative (T1) Open-mindedness (T1) Psychological adjustment (T2) Sociocultural adjustment (T2) Job performance (T2) Organizational commitment (T2)

1

2

3

4

5

6

— −.02 −.02 .12 −.22 −.10 −.41** −.19 −.03 −.16 .13 −.17 −.19

−.15 — −.58** .11 −.36* −.19 −.03 −.01 −.24 .13 .21 .14 .17

.07 −.54** — −.18 .39** .19 .14 .09 .10 −.25 −.08 −.06 −.06

−.13 .22 −.15 — −.01 .01 .04 −.21 −.13 −.04 .03 .10 −.05

.27 −.38* .38* .03 — .46** .23 .14 .11 −.13 .20 −.20 −.13

.25 −.20 .19 .04 .46** — .26 −.07 .27 −.08 .32 −.10 .03

7

8

9

.06 .10 −.06 .19 .17 −.09 −.20 −.16 .18 −.06 .09 −.10 −.11 −.06 .04 −.01 −.02 .02 −.16 .52*** .34* .39** .02 .53*** .16 .51*** .29 .40*** .06 .16 .08 .09 .23 .10 .19 .20 .33* .41** .09

10

11

12

−.03 −.15 — −.05 .17 — −.08 .07 — −.23 .05 — −.12 .11 — −.04 −.12 — .61*** .16 — .37* .16 — .17 .51*** — .21 .06 — .17 .24 — .28 .08 — .05 −.11 −.10

***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, two-tailed. Expatriates and spouses seperately, n = 45. a Correlation coefficients for expatriates are printed below the diagonal, coefficients for expatriate spouses are printed above the diagonal. b Intercorrelations between expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ measures on the diagonal (in bold).

Van Oudenhoven, 2001) indicating a person’s tendency to remain calm and experience little strain, and psychological adjustment being a state-like measure, indicating whether an individual experiences greater levels of psychological wellbeing abroad. We are therefore confident that emotional stability and psychological adjustment can be treated as distinguishable factors.

Main effects of intercultural personality dimensions Cross-sectional results. As mentioned in the Method section, we used an APIM approach to account for the interdependencies existing between the expatriate and the expatriate spouse. Furthermore, we applied a multivariate analysis to control for the associations between

psychological and sociocultural adjustment. Tables 5 and 6 depict the fixed effects of psychological and sociocultural adjustment, with the random effects depicted at the bottom of Table 5. Model 0 (Tables 5 and 6) represents the baseline model, which includes only the intercepts. We expected emotional stability to be positively associated with psychological adjustment (H1a–b). Additionally, we expected social initiative (H2a–b) and open-mindedness (H3a–b) to be positively associated with both psychological and sociocultural adjustment. Adding actor effects of the three intercultural personality dimensions for expatriates and expatriate spouses separately (Model 01, Tables 5 and 6), significantly improved the overall model, Δχ2(12) = 89.5, p < .001. Being emotionally stable was positively related to the psychological adjustment of expatriates (B = 0.44, SE = 0.10, p < .001) and expatriate spouses (B = 0.69, SE = 0.09, p < .001), supporting H1a and H1b. No significant


717

outcome measures are applicable only to the expatriate, this is not an APIM. For reasons of clarity we will use the same idiom and the same representation as in the earlier analysis. Tables 7 and 8 depict the fixed effects and variances, with Model 0 again being the baseline model. In Model 01 we added expatriates’ own intercultural personality traits, exploring whether emotional stability (H4) and open-mindedness (H6) were positively associated with job performance, and whether social initiative (H5) was positively associated with both job

effects emerged for social initiative; therefore, H2a and H2b were rejected. Finally, open-minded expatriates reported higher levels of sociocultural adjustment (B = 0.70, SE = 0.24, p = .004), supporting H3a. However H3b, pertaining to the effect of open-mindedness on expatriate spouses’ sociocultural adjustment was not supported. The relationships of the intercultural traits with job performance and organizational commitment were also explored with a multivariate approach. Because these

TABLE 5 APIM analysis of psychological and sociocultural adjustment (Part 1) Model 0


Fixed effects DV: Psychological adjustment Intercept expatriate expatriate spouse MPQ Actor effect expatriates ES SI OM Actor effect expatriate spouses ES SI OM Partner effect expatriates ES SI OM Partner effect expatriate spouses ES SI OM Interaction expatriates ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner) Interaction expatriate spouses ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner) Variance and covariance

Model 01

Model 02

Model 03

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

4.38 4.19

.04 .04

4.38 4.19

.04 .04

4.38 4.19

.04 .04

4.39 4.21

.04 .04

.44*** .09 −.01

.10 .10 .11

.47*** .08 −.05

.10 .11 .11

.43*** .08 −.05

.10 .11 .11

.69*** −.08 −.07

.09 .09 .10

.71*** −.09 −.04

.09 .09 .10

.71*** −.06 −.10

.09 .09 .11

.07 .01 −.01

.09 .09 .11

.10 .00 −.04

.09 .09 .11

.14 .04 −.09

.10 .11 .11

.12 .02 −.10

.10 .11 .11

.16 −.27 −.06

.20 .18 .20

.03 −.08 −.60**

.20 .18 .20

Var.

SE

Var.

SE

Var.

SE

Var.

SE

Couple level τ2 psych τ2 socio covariance ρ

.05 .13 .04 .52

.02 .07 .03

.03 .11 −.01 −.11

.01 .06 .02

.03 .10 −.01 −.11

.01 .06 .02

.03 .11 −.01 −.25

.01 .06 .02

σ2 psych σ2 socio covariance ρ

.14 .53 −.02 −.09

.02 .08 .03

.09 .50 .02 .07

.01 .07 .02

.09 .47 .01 .05

.01 .07 .02

.09 .43 .01 .06

.01 .06 .02

Individual level

Deviance Δ Deviance

666.7

578.2 89.5*** df = 12

*p < .05, **p < .01. ES = emotional stability, SI = social initiative, OM = open mindedness. n = 385 out of 392 cases (196 participants, times 2 dependent variables, minus missing cases).

563.3 14.9 df = 12

541.7 21.6* df = 12

718 VAN ERP ET AL. TABLE 6 APIM analysis of psychological and sociocultural adjustment (Part 2) Model 0


Fixed effects DV: Sociocultural adjustment Intercept expatriate expatriate spouse MPQ Actor effect expatriates ES SI OM Actor effect expatriate spouses ES SI OM Partner effect expatriates ES SI OM Partner effect expatriate spouses ES SI OM Interaction expatriates ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner) Interaction expatriate spouses ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner)

Model 01

Model 02

Model 03

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

5.49 5.72

.08 .08

5.49 5.71

.08 .08

5.49 5.71

.08 .08

5.48 5.74

.08 .08

−.13 −.05 .70**

.22 .24 .24

−.06 −.13 .72**

.22 .24 .25

−.05 −.12 .73**

.23 .24 .24

−.08 .20 .31

.20 .21 .24

−.09 .18 .32

.20 .21 .25

.04 .17 .30

.20 .20 .25

.36 −.02 −.19

.20 .20 .24

.36 .02 −.20

.20 .20 .24

.23 .25 .25

.28 .08 .27

.24 .24 .25

.25 .40 −.07

.44 .43 .44

.76 −1.03* −.61

.45 .44 .48

.46* .00 .31

*p < .05, **p < .01. ES = emotional stability, SI = social initiative, OM = open mindedness.

performance and organizational commitment. The overall model significantly improved, Δχ2(6) = 28.6, p < .001. Specifically, expatriates’ emotional stability was positively related to job performance (B = 0.27, SE = 0.13, p = .040), which supported H4. H5 is supported as well, since social initiative was positively associated with both expatriates’ job performance (B = 0.40, SE = 0.14, p = .005) and their organizational commitment (B = 0.41, SE = 0.16, p = .012). No significant effects emerged for open-mindedness, so H6 was rejected. Longitudinal results. Intercultural traits were expected to influence expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ adjustment over time. We therefore additionally tested the previously mentioned hypotheses in the longitudinal subsample of 45 couples. Controlling for T1 measures of adjustment, we analysed the relationship of the intercultural personality dimensions (measured at T1) with T2 adjustment.4 First, we analysed the longitudinal 4 In order to generate reliable results from the smaller subsample, we used a univariate approach instead of a multivariate approach for the longitudinal analysis. Note that the longitudinal results are not depicted in a table.

effects of intercultural personality traits on nonwork adjustment. In line with H1a (but not with H1b), emotional stability emerged as a significant positive predictor of psychological adjustment, but only among expatriate spouses (B = 0.64, SE = 0.19, p = .001). H2a and H2b were again not supported: In line with the cross-sectional results, no significant effects emerged for social initiative. Open-mindedness was significantly and positively associated with sociocultural adjustment (T2). Whereas at T1 this relationship was significant only among expatriates, the longitudinal results revealed that especially expatriate spouses seemed to benefit from high levels of open-mindedness (expatriates, B = 0.55, SE = 0.33, p = .104; expatriate spouses, B = 0.81, SE = 0.29, p = .006). Thus, in the subsample, H3a was supported, but only marginal results were found for H3b. Second, we analysed the longitudinal effects of intercultural traits on job performance and organizational commitment. Contrary to our expectations (H4), emotional stability did not relate to job performance (T2). In line with H5, and similar to the cross-sectional results, social initiative was positively related to organizational commitment (T2, B = 0.33, SE = 0.16, p = .045).


719

TABLE 7 Multivariate analysis of job performance and organizational commitment (Part 1) Model 0

Model 01

Model 02

Model 03

Fixed effects

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

B

SE

DV: Job performance Intercept (expatriates) MPQ: actor effects

5.62

.05

5.62

.05

5.62

.05

5.60

.05

.27* .40** −.14

.13 .14 .15

.31 .35 −.18

.15 .14 .15

.38** .33* −.18

.14 .14 .15

.13 .03 .03

.12 .13 .14

.08 .02 .08

.12 .12 .14

−.48† .24 .26

.27 .24 .27

SE

Var.

SE

ES SI OM MPQ: partner effects ES SI OM


Interaction effects ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner) Var.

SE

Var.

SE

Var.

Variance and covariance σ2 jper σ2 oc

.26 .36

.04 .05

.22 .31

.03 .04

.22 .30

.03 .04

.21 .27

.03 .04

covar jper-oc

.01

.03

−.03

.03

−.03

.03

−.02

.02

ρ jper - oc

.02

Deviance Δ Deviance

−.13

319.6

−.12

288.1 31.5*** df = 6

−.10

285.5 2.6 df = 6

270.4 15.1* df = 6

***p < .001 **p < .01, *p < .05, †p < .08. ES = emotional stability, SI = social initiative, OM = open mindedness. n = 195 out of 196 cases (98 expatriates, times 2 dependent variables, minus missing case).

TABLE 8 Multivariate analysis of job performance and organizational commitment (Part 2) Model 0

DV: Organizational Commitment Intercept (expatriates) MPQ: actor effect ES SI OM MPQ: partner effects ES SI OM Interaction effects ES (actor * partner) SI (actor * partner) OM (actor * partner)

Model 01

Model 02

Model 03

Coeff

SE

Coeff

SE

Coeff

SE

Coeff

SE

3.97

.06

3.96

.06

3.96

.06

3.97

.06

***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05, †p < .08.

.27 .41* .09

.16 .16 .18

.26 .43* .11 −.12 .09 −.01

.16 .17 .18 .15 .15 .17

.16 .45** .12

.16 .16 .17

−.04 .02 −.00

.14 .15 .16

.44 −.73** .54

.31 .27 .32

However, unlike the cross-sectional results, no significant effect of social initiative on job performance emerged. Thus, partial support was found for H5. In line with H6, open-mindedness was positively related to job performance (B = 0.32, SE = 0.14, p = .027). In sum, our results show that specific intercultural personality dimensions influence specific domains of adjustment. First, emotional stability emerged as an important resource for both partners’ psychological adjustment at T1 and for expatriate spouses’ psychological adjustment at T2 (H1a–b), as well as for expatriates’ job performance T1 (H4). Second, social initiative was significantly related to expatriate’s job performance at T1 and organizational commitment (T1, T2; H5), but showed no association with nonwork adjustment (H2a– b). Third, open-mindedness was significantly associated with expatriates’ T1 and expatriate spouses’ T2 sociocultural adjustment (H3a–b), and performance T2 (H5). Since some of the significant cross-sectional results were partially replicated longitudinally, and taking into account the relatively small longitudinal sample size, we concluded that the longitudinal results indeed endorsed the cross-sectional findings.

Moderating effect of partner’s intercultural personality dimensions Now that we have added and explored the actor effects of personality above (see Tables 5–8, Models 1) we can start investigating the interaction effects of both partners’ intercultural traits (H7). We made use of the larger, cross-sectional sample.5 Before adding the presumed interaction effect, we first controlled for partner effects (Aiken & West, 1991). Both for nonwork adjustment measures (Tables 5 and 6), and professional adjustment (Tables 7 and 8), partner effects

did not improve the overall model, Δχ2(12) = 12.1, p = .437, and Δχ2(6) = 4.2, p = .650. Next, interaction terms of the intercultural traits were entered, both for expatriates and expatriate spouses. For example, for expatriates we added the interaction term of expatriates’ own emotional stability (actor effect) by expatriate spouses’ emotional stability (partner effect), and vice versa for the expatriate spouse. Equivalent interaction terms were entered for social initiative and open-mindedness. With respect to nonwork adjustment, introducing the interaction terms significantly improved the overall model, Δχ2(12) = 21.6, p = .042 (Table 5). Significant interactions emerged for psychological adjustment as well as sociocultural adjustment and among expatriate spouses only. First, the own-by-other’s open-mindedness interaction showed a negative association with psychological adjustment (B = –0.60, SE = 0.20, p = .003). In Figure 1 we plotted psychological adjustment as a function of expatriate spouses’ open-mindedness, with separate lines for low (–1SD) and high (+1SD) values of expatriates’ open-mindedness. As expected, the psychological adjustment of expatriate spouses who scored low on open-mindedness were positively influenced by expatriates’ open-mindedness. However, the figure also suggests that expatriate spouses who score relatively high were negatively influenced by partners’ open-mindedness. Additional analyses6 revealed that this was indeed the case for relatively high levels of open-mindedness. This implies that, when both partners are very open-minded, it may have a downside for their psychological well-being. We will come back to this in the discussion. Second, own-by-others’ social initiative showed a negative association with sociocultural adjustment (B = –1.03, SE = 0.44, p = .022; Table 6). In Figure 2

4.5 Psychological adjustment expatriate spouse


720 VAN ERP ET AL.

OM expatriate low (–1SD)

4.4 4.3

OM expatriate high (+1SD)

4.2 4.1 4 3.9 3.8 OM expatriate spouse low (–1SD)

OM expatriate spouse high (+1SD)

Open mindedness expatriate spouse Figure 1.

Interaction between expatriate’s and expatriate spouse’s open-mindedness on expatriate spouse’s psychological adjustment.

5 The longitudinal subsample is too small to generate reliable results when the number of independent variables becomes large.

6 Following Preacher, Curran, and Bauer (2006), we calculated the region of significance for the simple slopes.


721

Socio cultural adjustment expatriate spouse

6.4

SI expatriate low (–1SD) SI expatriate high (+1SD)

6.2 6 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 5 SI expatriate spouse low (–1SD)

SI expatriate spouse high (+1SD)

Social initiative expatriate spouse Interaction between expatriate’s and expatriate spouse’s social initiative on expatriate spouse’s sociocultural adjustment.

we plotted the separate slopes for low (–1SD) and high (+1SD) values of expatriates’ social initiative in our sample. Expatriate spouses low in social initiative had higher scores on sociocultural adjustment, the higher their partners’ social initiative score. For professional adjustment the interaction terms significantly improved the overall model as well, Δχ2(6) = 15.4, p = .017. More specifically, a marginally significant interaction effect of own-by-other emotional stability on job performance emerged, B = –0.48, SE = 0.27, p = .079. In Figure 3 we plotted separate lines for low (–1SD) and high (+1SD) values of expatriate spouses’ emotional stability in our sample. Expatriates low in emotional stability reported a better job performance, the higher their partners scored on emotional stability. Finally, for organizational commitment, a significant interaction between expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ social initiative emerged (B = –0.73, SE = 0.27, p = .008). Figure 4 depicts the separate lines for low (–1SD) and high (+1SD) levels of expatriate spouses’ social initiative. For expatriates low in social initiative, organizational commitment is higher the higher expatriate spouses’ social initiative. Because the results are based on a relatively small sample, we performed a parametric bootstrap procedure

(using MLwiN) to check and improve inferential accuracy. This bootstrapping procedure is not available for multivariate response models. We therefore used univariate models instead, which resulted in the same results as the multivariate models. Following the recommendations in the MLwiN manual (Rasbash, Steele, Browne, & Goldstein, 2009, chap. 17), we obtained highly comparable results from the parametric bootstrapping procedure, replicating all three earlier reported significant interactions and the one marginally significant effect, albeit with slightly lower parameter estimates (for expatriate spouses: openmindedness, B = –0.57, SE = 0.18, p = .002, and social initiative, B = –0.99, SE = 0.37, p = .009; for expatriates: emotional stability B = 0.46, SE = 0.28, p = .098, and social initiative B = 0.70, SE = 0.28, p = .013). In sum, several results emerged in support of a resource compensation effect within expatriate couples (H7). That is, a lack of a resource in oneself (in terms of intercultural personality traits) could be compensated by the availability of this intercultural personality trait in the partner. Results showed significant interaction effects of expatriate’s by expatriate partner’s social initiative and open-mindedness (and a marginally significant interaction effect of emotional stability) on expatriate spouses’ psychological and

6

ES expatriate spouse low (–1SD)

5.9 Job performance expatriate


Figure 2.

ES expatriate spouse high (+1SD)

5.8 5.7 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.3 5.2 ES expatriate low (–1SD)

ES expatriate high (+1SD)

Emotional stability expatriate Figure 3.

Interaction between expatriate’s and expatriate spouse’s emotional stability on expatriate’s job performance.

Organizational commitment expatriate

722 VAN ERP ET AL. 4.4 4.2 4

SI expatriate spouse low (–1SD)

3.8

SI expatriate spouse high (+1SD)

3.6 3.4 3.2 3 SI expatriate low (–1SD)

SI expatriate high (+1SD)

Social initiative expatriate


Figure 4.

Interaction between expatriate’s and expatriate spouse’s social initiative on expatriate’s organizational commitment.

sociocultural adjustment and expatriates’ job performance and organizational commitment. These interaction effects revealed that being low in a certain dimension could be compensated for by high levels of the same dimension in one’s partner. Only for open-mindedness, the combination of both partners being high in this dimension led to lower levels of adjustment.

DISCUSSION Based on COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2011) and a bipartite categorization of the characteristics of an international assignment as both threatening and challenging (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in press-a), this study provided a theoretical explanation of how intercultural traits are important resources that facilitate expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ adjustment abroad. This study has demonstrated the role of both the stress-buffering trait of emotional stability, and the social-perceptual traits of social initiative and open-mindedness in effective adjustment. Emotional stability was positively associated with both parties’ psychological adjustment at T1, expatriate spouses’ psychological adjustment at T2, and expatriate’s job performance at T1. Social initiative was positively related to both indicators of professional adjustment. It emerged as a resource for job performance and organizational commitment at T1, and organizational commitment only at T2. Open-mindedness, finally, acted as a positive resource for expatriates’ T1 and expatriate spouses’ T2 sociocultural adjustment. Furthermore, it was significantly associated with performance at T2. In line with our expectations, results endorsed the existence of resource compensation effects for all three intercultural traits. For one, the negative consequences of expatriate’s low levels of emotional stability for his/her job performance were compensated by expatriate spouse’s high(er) levels of this trait. Similar compensatory processes whereby one partner’s lack of sufficiently high levels of a certain personality trait is compensated

for by the other partner’s high(er) levels of this traits, emerged for social initiative and its effects on expatriate’s organizational commitment and expatriate spouses sociocultural adjustment. Finally, expatriate spouses’ being low in open-mindedness can be compensated by high levels of expatriates’ open-mindedness. However, the combination of both partners being high in this dimension led to lower levels of expatriate spouses’ psychological adjustment. This study contributes to the knowledge on expatriation in several ways. First, we took into account both the expatriate and the expatriate spouse simultaneously. This enabled us to determine the importance of the intercultural traits for participants’ own adjustment, but also allowed us to demonstrate a resource compensation effect. Partners can compensate for a lack of sufficiently high levels of (intercultural) personality traits in the other partner. Although previous studies have investigated the importance of both partners’ personality traits in intimate relationships, such studies usually explored the extent to which resemblances (or differences) in traits influenced couples’ relationship satisfaction or quality (e.g., Barelds & Barelds-Dijkstra, 2007; Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008). The current study is unique in that it aimed to explore whether and how one’s partner’s personality traits can actually buffer one’s potential “shortcomings” with regard to the adjustment process abroad. Second, the longitudinal analyses partially replicated the cross-sectional analyses, endorsing the importance of personality dimensions over time. Furthermore, the finding that emotional stability seems to become a less important, and open-mindedness a more important personality trait at T2 is in line with research suggesting that stress-buffering traits are particularly important in earlier phases of adjustment, whereas social-perceptual traits become increasingly important in the longer run (Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, in pressa; Van Oudenhoven & Van der Zee, 2002). Since only a limited number of studies on expatriation have used a longitudinal research design (Hechanova et al., 2003; for


an exception, see e.g., Shaffer et al., 2006), this is another important contribution of the present study. Finally, our research is one of the first to explore the association between personality traits and organizational commitment in an expatriation context.


The importance of emotional stability, social initiative, and open-mindedness Emotional stability arose as the single most important intercultural personality trait affecting psychological adjustment. For expatriate spouses, the longitudinal analysis further confirmed this finding. Moreover, actively approaching social situations and showing initiative facilitate better performance on the job and a stronger commitment towards the assigning organization. In the longitudinal analyses, social initiative remained important, especially for organizational commitment. Surprisingly, social initiative was not significantly associated with psychological and sociocultural adjustment. We had expected that being high in social initiative enables individuals to appraise stressful situations as challenging and to take initiative in solving daily problems. Since we controlled for the effect of the other two intercultural traits—emotional stability and open-mindedness—it may be that no effect emerged because it was partialled out by the shared variance of social initiative with emotional stability and open-mindedness. However, the correlation coefficients between social initiative on the one hand and psychological and sociocultural adjustment on the other hand (Table 3) are relatively low and nonsignificant for both expatriates and expatriate spouses. Alternatively, it may be that showing initiative is not embraced in every society. The Dutch are well known for their directness and this may not be appreciated to the same extent in different countries. In the work context, however, cultural differences are generally smaller, and, as a result, positive effects of social initiative may indeed have emerged, only in the work domain. Open-mindedness was important to several facets of adjustment. Having an open and unprejudiced mindset helps to deal with daily problems (sociocultural adjustment; Van der Zee & Van Oudenhoven, 2000, 2001). Moreover, it turned out to be an important trait for expatriates’ job performance at T2 but not at T1. Possibly, high performance requires different characteristics in different stages of the assignment. That is, being emotionally stable may be particularly beneficial at the start of the assignment as the situation is new, stressful, and bustling. Later on, being open to new experiences may become increasingly valuable for job performance (cf. Van Oudenhoven & Van der Zee, 2002; see also Leong, 2007).

Compensation of resources A new insight provided by the results is that getting adjusted abroad is not only a matter of who you are,

723

but also of who you are with. In line with our resource compensation expectation, the results revealed that expatriates and expatriate spouses can draw from each others’ intercultural personality dimensions. Specifically in the situation that one’s own intercultural traits are insufficient, high levels of these traits in one’s partner may act as a complementary resource to benefit one’s adjustment. Consequently, a lower score on a specific intercultural trait is not necessarily an impediment as long as one’s partner is sufficiently high in the same trait. For all three intercultural personality dimensions such interaction effects emerged. Interestingly, for openmindedness an additional result emerged. Besides the expected complementary effect—being low in a trait can be counteracted by higher levels of the trait in one’s partner—an “overload effect” seemed to emerge as well. The data showed that expatriate spouses high in open-mindedness were less psychologically adjusted the higher their partners’ level of open-mindedness. Possibly, when both partners are incessantly looking for adventure, there is no room to let the features of the new situation sink in calmly. This may hamper psychological adjustment. Interestingly, interaction effects on nonwork adjustment were significant for expatriate spouses, whereas interaction effects on professional adjustment were significant for expatriates. This suggests that, in the nonwork domains of adjustment, it is especially the expatriate spouse who benefits from the expatriate, whereas for professional adjustment, the expatriate spouse may provide resources to the expatriate. As such, our data confirm the idea that it is not just the expatriate spouse who supports the expatriate, or the expatriate who supports the expatriate spouse. Rather, they are able to mutually benefit from each others’ adjustment levels.

Limitations and future directions Like virtually every study, this one is not without its limitations. First, although the interaction terms that supported the resource compensation effects were significant, in practical terms the effect sizes were quite small. It may be that our sample has been biased through self-selection, thereby reducing the variance on the scores of the intercultural dimensions. More specifically, the participants in this study had already made the (voluntary) decision to work and live abroad, quite likely because it appealed to them. Their affinity with working or living abroad may be partly the outcome of higher levels of intercultural personality dimensions such as open-mindedness. Although this suggests that our results may provide an underestimation rather than an overestimation of actual effects, it is important for future research to explore to what extent such self-selection may have taken place. Because in this case possible self-selection characteristics can be considered features


724 VAN ERP ET AL. of the expatriate population as a whole, this is not a threat to generalization of our result to this group. Nonetheless, our research does not reveal whether the resource compensation effect is a phenomenon unique to an expatriation situation, for instance due to an increased level of dependence (e.g., Van Erp et al., 2011). Future research including comparison groups—something that is rarely done in expatriation research is therefore necessary (Hechanova et al., 2003). For example, although all our adjustment measures reflected the specific situation abroad, similar data could be gathered from nonexpatriation groups. For example, investigating groups that face intercultural interactions in other situations, (e.g., domestic research in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods) may provide further insight into the applicability of the resource compensation effect of intercultural traits to different intercultural settings. Another potential weakness concerns the measure of cultural distance. Rather to our surprise, we found no significant effect of our measure of cultural distance on adjustment. We therefore cannot conclude that the hostcountry culture influenced expatriates’ and expatriate spouses’ adjustment processes significantly. Maybe cultural distance is not simply a function of differences between nations, as it is calculated in the current operationalization, and possibly varies more within countries than between countries. For example, the capital of a West African country like Ghana, Accra, provides a wide variety of (“western”) facilities such as restaurants, shops, and international schools, as well as a large international community. Such a city may be experienced as less culturally distant from the capital of The Netherlands, Amsterdam, than a rural Ghanaian town lacking electricity and running water and with limited (educational) facilities. In a similar vein, one might argue that the (experienced) cultural distance within a close relationship or within the work context can differ from such an (objective measure for) cultural distance between countries. For instance, at work an expatriate may work together with numerous different nationalities. His/her experience of the cultural distance at work may differ from the cultural difference experienced when encountering host-country nationals in everyday life. To overcome these challenges, future studies may incorporate perceptions of cultural distance rather than a “calculated” measure of cultural distance. Third, an important limitation is that the sample size (especially the subsample) was small. Although the majority of the results are in line with our expectations, the findings should therefore be considered with caution. Finally, data were gathered through self-report methods which may cause common method bias. One may argue that for some variables self-reports are inevitable because of the nature of the variable, for instance when the construct reflects an individual’s personal perception (e.g., psychological adjustment). However, for constructs such as job performance, complementing self-ratings with other-ratings (e.g., peer reports or supervisor ratings) or observations may provide a more

reliable source of data. Collecting supervisor or peer ratings is not a matter of course, considering the difficulty of reaching this highly mobile target group. Moreover, given the diversity of expatriate jobs (different functions, in different organizations, in different countries), it will be challenging to define a shared set of relevant job criteria. Future research may try to develop indicators of expatriate job performance that are specifically aimed at performance in international work environments, but that are broad enough to be applicable to several organizations and functions. Alternatively, researchers may collect data among expatriates in one type of job, which limits the generalizability of findings to other jobs, but enhances the possibilities of considering specific aspects of job performance (cf. Mol, Born, Willemsen, & Van der Molen, 2005).

Theoretical implications Our study has a number of scientific and practical implications. First, although there has been some research on the interplay of personality dimensions in close relationships, such studies generally focused on the quality of the relationship. For example, a number of studies have explored the extent to which similarity or, conversely, dissimilarity in personality leads to mutual attraction and perceptions of relationship quality (e.g., Barelds & Barelds-Dijkstra, 2007; Dijkstra & Barelds, 2008; Robins, Caspi, & Moffit, 2000). Furthermore, research that is specifically focused on coping resources has, to our knowledge, never investigated the interplay between personality as a coping resource derived from one’s partner and one’s own personality. The present research extends Hobfoll’s (1989, 2011) COR theory by showing how one’s own intercultural traits act as an (internal) coping resource in an intercultural context. Simultaneously, it provides support that traits in one’s partner may act as a complementary external resource in case one’s own resources do not suffice. To gain further understanding of this phenomenon, research may dig more deeply into the interplay of external and internal resources, specifically regarding (intercultural) personality dimensions. For instance, our study has shown that specifically when one is low in a trait, one’s partner’s higher score on that trait is beneficial. Nonetheless the figures indicate a weak tendency towards an opposite effect as well (i.e., individuals high in a trait benefit when spouses are low on this trait). Future research may thus want to explore whether personality differences develop and increase couples’ ability to adjust “relationally” and whether this “adjustment experience” benefits their international adjustment.7 An additional avenue for future research that follows from the present findings concerns the role of coping mechanisms. As suggested in this study, stress-buffering traits safeguard against resource loss, whereas social7 We thank one of the anonymous reviewers for this interesting suggestion.



perceptual traits may enhance resource gain. Possibly, individuals high in such traits have a tendency to react with different coping styles than those low in these traits, since the former have more resources at their disposal (cf. Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010; Connor-Smith & Flachsbart, 2007). Future research may explore this potentially mediating role of coping styles in the relationship between intercultural traits and intercultural adjustment. Regarding the scientific implications, a first suggestion arising from this study is that by using dyadic data analysis, a more informative picture of important processes influencing couples arises. Using the APIM approach provided us with further insight into how partners may mutually influence each other. Although studies actually taking into account both the expatriate and the expatriate spouse as data sources are scarce (i.e., Black & Stephens, 1989; Shaffer & Harrison, 1998; Takeuchi et al., 2002), the Bhaskar-Shrinivas et al. (2005) meta-analysis revealed that the single most determinant of expatriate’s adjustment is the expatriate spouse’s adjustment (see also Hechanova et al., 2003). Such findings call for reframing expatriate assignments as family relocations (cf. BhaskarShrinivas et al., 2005; Van Erp et al., 2011). Unfortunately, only a limited number of studies have actually used dyadic analyses to explore dyadic constructs (Krasikova & LeBreton, 2012). Dyadic data analysis techniques such as the APIM will “allow researchers to obtain answers to interesting and yet unexplored research questions” (Krasikova & LeBreton, 2012, p. 16). Second, we argued that organizational commitment is an important work outcome for international assignees and companies. Unfortunately, research on the predictive value of personality on commitment is scarce. However, previous research has clearly shown the predictive value of personality traits for other work outcomes such as job performance and job satisfaction (e.g., Judge, Klinger, Simon, & Yang, 2008). The strong association of social initiative with organizational commitment in our study, and Judge et al.’s (2008) observation, that there is reason to believe that associations between personality dimensions and organizational commitment may be comparable to those found for job satisfaction, suggests that further research on organizational commitment may be fruitful and interesting.

Practical implications What are the practical implications of these results? Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of intercultural competence for a successful international assignment. This suggests that the intercultural capacities of expatriate candidates could be taken into account during the selection process. Questionnaires to measure intercultural traits may provide a valuable tool to increase the

725

likelihood of finding the right person for the job, and to give the right advice to those who consider going abroad. However, a major implication of this study is that both spouses are informative factors in the process of adjustment. The drawbacks of having insufficient resources in one’s own intercultural traits can be overcome by high levels of the same traits in one’s partner. It may thus be advisable for companies to not just establish the expatriate’s personality profile, but to assess the expatriate spouse’s personality as well. That way, the intercultural profile of the couple as whole can be considered. On the one hand, this knowledge can guide expatriate couples on whether or not to accept the assignment, whereas the international organization, on the other hand, is provided with information on how to best support the expatriate couple before and during the assignment. Furthermore, it can make the expatriate couple more aware of their strengths and weaknesses, which makes them better prepared for the upcoming challenges. Insight into both partners’ personality traits may guide training and support efforts of assigning organizations as well. When future assignees as well as the assigning company are aware of the assignees strengths and weaknesses, training and support may be provided in those areas. For example, the international organization may provide extra guidance in finding a school, social contacts, and a (voluntary) job (for the expatriate spouse) when the expatriate or spouse is low in social initiative. Surprisingly, until now, such support is primarily aimed at the expatriate and not the expatriate spouse (e.g., Cole, 2011). However, our results imply that not only the expatriate but also the expatriate spouse should receive support before and during the international assignment. Having said this, we believe future research may examine the possible supportive resources for single or unaccompanied expatriates as well. Furthermore, exploring the boundaries of crossover effects for expatriate couples, for instance, when they experience less closeness as a couple, may also be important.

CONCLUSION The present findings imply that both international companies and expatriate couples should approach the challenges of an international assignment from a more comprehensive family perspective. On the one hand, this will help the assigning organization to better predict and understand whether and why expatriate couples will successfully adjust abroad; on the other hand, it will help couples to be better prepared for the challenges they will face together.

REFERENCES Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.


726 VAN ERP ET AL. Ali, A., Van der Zee, K. I., & Sanders G. (2003). Determinants of intercultural adjustment among expatriate spouses. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 563–580. doi:10.1016/ S0147-1767(03)00054-3 Ali, A. J. (2003). The intercultural adaptation of expatriate spouses and children: An empirical study on the determinants contributing to the success of expatriation (Unpublished dissertation). University of Groningen. Available from: http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/ 243214448 Aycan, Z., & Kanungo, R. N. (1997). Current issues and future challenges in expatriate management. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management (Vol. 4, pp. 245–260). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Barelds, D. P. H., & Barelds-Dijkstra, P. (2007). Love at first sight or friendship first? Ties among partner personality trait similarity, relationship onset, relationship quality, and love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 479–496. doi:10.1177/ 0265407507079235 Becker, T. E., & Kernan, M. C. (2003). Matching commitment to supervisors and organizations to in-role and extra-role performance. Human Performance, 16, 327–348. doi:10.1207/S15327043HUP1604_1 Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P., Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M. A., & Luk, D. M. (2005). Input-based and time-based models of international adjustment: Meta-analytic evidence and theoretical extensions. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 257–281. doi:10.5465/ AMJ.2005.16928400 Black, J. S. (1988). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in Japan. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 277–294. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490383 Black, J. S., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Towards a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16, 291–317. doi:10.2307/258863 Black, J. S., & Stephens, G. K. (1989). The influence of the spouse on American expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments. Journal of Management, 15, 529–544. doi:10.1177/014920638901500403 Brookfield Global Relocation Services. (2011). Global relocation trends: 2011 survey report. Retrieved from Brookfield Global Relocation Services website: http://www.brookfieldgrs.com/ Brown, R. B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Clarifying the concept and simplifying the existing construct typology. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49, 230–251. Caligiuri, P. M. (2000). The Big Five personality characteristics as predictors of expatriate’s desire to terminate the assignment and supervisor-rated performance. Personnel Psychology, 53, 67–88. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2000.tb00194.x Campbell, L., Simpson, J. A., Kashy, D. A., & Rholes, W. S. (2001). Attachment orientations, dependence, and behavior in a stressful situation: An application of the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 821–843. doi:10.1177/0265407501186005 Carver, C., & White, T. L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333. Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679–709. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.093008.100352 Cole, N. D. (2011). Managing global talent: Solving the spousal adjustment problem. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22, 1504–1530. doi:10.1080/09585192.2011.561963 Connor-Smith, J. K., & Flachsbart, C. (2007). Relations between personality and coping: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 1080–1107. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.1080 Cook, W. L., & Kenny, D. A. (2005). The actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental

studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 101–109. doi:10.1080/01650250444000405 Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Dalton, M., & Wilson, M. (2000). The relationship of the Five-Factor model of personality to job performance for a group of Middle Eastern expatriate managers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 250–258. Daniels, K., & Harris, C. (2000). Work, psychological well-being and performance. Occupational Medicine, 50, 304–309. doi:10.1093/ occmed/50.5.304 DeLongis, A., & Holtzman, S. (2005). Coping in context: The role of stress, social support, and personality in coping. Journal of Personality, 73(6), 1–24. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00361.x DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A metaanalysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. doi:10.1037//00332909.124.2.197 Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organizational Science, 6, 524–540. doi:10.1287/ orsc.6.5.524 Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the fivefactor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.41.1.417 Dijkstra, P., & Barelds, D. P. H. (2008). Self and partner personality and responses to relationship threats. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1500–1511. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.008 Erdheim J., Wang M., & Zickar, M. J. (2006). Linking the Big Five personality constructs to organizational commitment. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 959–970. Fowles, D. C. (1980). The three arousal model: Implications of Gray’s two-factor learning theory for heart rate, electrodermal activity, and psychopathy. Psychophysiology, 17, 87–104. Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115–134. doi:10.1037/00220167.51.1.115 Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.59.6.1216 Gray, J. A. (1972). The psychophysiological basis of introversionextraversion: A modification of Eysenck’s theory. In V. D. Nebylitsyn & J. A. Gray (Eds.), The biological bases of individual behaviour (pp. 182–205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Gray, J. A. (1991). Neural systems, emotion and psychopathology. In J. Madden (Ed.), Neurobiology of learning, emotion, and affect (pp. 276–306). New York, NY: Raven Press. Guzzo, R. A., Noonan, K. A., & Elron, E. (1994). Expatriate managers and the psychological contract. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 617–626. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.617 Haslberger, A. (2010). Gender differences in expatriate adjustment. European Journal of International Management, 4, 163–183. doi:10.1504/EJIM.2010.031281 Hechanova, R., Beehr, T. A., & Christiansen, N. D. (2003). Antecedents and consequences of employees’ adjustment to overseas assignment: A meta-analytic review. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 52, 213–236. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00132 Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513 Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84, 116–122. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02016.x


EXPATRIATION AND INTERCULTURAL PERSONALITY Hobfoll, S. E., Johnson, R. J., Ennis, N., & Jackson, A. P. (2003). Resource loss, resource gain, and emotional outcomes among inner city women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 632–643. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.632 Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Huang, T., Chi, S., & Lawler, J. J. (2005). The relationship between expatriates’ personality and their adjustment to international assignments. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 1656–1670. doi:10.1080/09585190500239325 Judge, T. A., Klinger, R., Simon, L. S., & Yang, I. W. F. (2008). The contributions of personality to organizational behavior and psychology: Findings, criticisms, and future research directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1982–2000. doi:10.1111/ j.1751-9004.2008.00136.x Kandogan, Y. (2012). An improvement to Kogut and Singh measure of cultural distance considering the relationship among different dimensions of culture. Research in Business and Finance, 26, 196–203. doi:10.1016/j.ribaf.2011.11.001 Kenny, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytical difficulties, and illustrations. Personal Relationships, 6, 433–438. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00202.x Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Krasikova, D. V., & LeBreton, J. M. (2012). Just the two of us: Misalignment of theory and methods in examining dyadic phenomena. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 739–757. doi:10.1037/ a0027962 Leone, L., Van der Zee, K. I., Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Perugini, M., & Ercolani, A. P. (2005). The cross-cultural generalizability and validity of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1449–1462. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.010 Leong, C. (2007). Predictive validity of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire: A longitudinal study on the sociopsychological adaptation of Asian undergraduates who took part in a study-abroad program. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31, 545–559. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2007.01.004 McNulty, Y. M., &, De Cieri, H. & Hutchings, K. (2009). Do global firms measure expatriate return on investment? An empirical examination of measures, barriers and variables influencing global staffing practices. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20, 1309–1326. Mol, S. T., Born, M. P., & Van der Molen, H. T. (2005). Developing criteria for expatriate effectiveness: Time to jump off the adjustment bandwagon. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 339–353. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.05.004 Mol, S. T., Born, M. P., Willemsen, M. E., & Van der Molen, H. T. (2005). Predicting expatriate job performance for selection purposes: A quantitative review. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 590–620. doi:10.1177/0022022105278544 Mowday, R. T. (1998). Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 8, 387–401. Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224–247. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(79)90072-1 Naumann, E., Widmier, S. M., & Jackson, D. W. (2000). Examining the relationship between work attitudes and propensity to leave among expatriate salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 10, 227–241. Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (1997). Personality determinants in the prediction of aspects of expatriate job success. In Z. Aycan (Ed.), New approaches to employee management: Vol. 4. Expatriate management: Theory and research (pp. 63–92). Greenwich, CT: Elsevier Science/JAI Press. Pervin, L. R., & John, O. P. (2001). Personality: Theory and research. New York, NY: Wiley.

727

Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448. doi:10.3102/10769986031004437 RAND Health Science Program. (1992). Rand 36-item Health Survey 1.0: Manual. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Rasbash, J., Browne, W., Healy, M., Cameron, B., & Charlton, C. (2004), MLwiN 2.00 [Computer software]. London: Centre for Multilevel Modelling. Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W. J., & Goldstein, H. (2009). A user’s guide to MlwiN. Bristol: Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol. Raudenbush, S. W., Brennan, R. T., & Barnett, R. C. (1995). A multivariate hierarchical model for studying psychological change within married couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 161–174. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.9.2.161 Robins, R. W., Caspi, A., & Moffit, T. E. (2000). Two personalities, one relationship: Both partners’ personality traits shape the quality of their relationship. Personality Processes and Individual Differences, 79, 251–259. doi:10.1037/00223514.79.2.251 Searle, W., & Ward, C. (1990). The prediction of psychological and sociocultural adjustment during cross-cultural transitions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 14, 449–464. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(90)90030-Z Shaffer, M. A., & Harrison, D. A. (1998). Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from international assignments: Work, nonwork, and family influences. Personnel Psychology, 51, 87–118. doi:10.1111/ j.1744-6570.1998.tb00717.x Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D. A., Gregersen, H., Black, J. S., & Ferzandi, L. A. (2006). You can take it with you: Individual differences and expatriate effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 109–125. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.109 Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). London: Sage. Takeuchi, R., Yun, S., & Tesluk, P. E. (2002).An examination of crossover and spillover effects of spousal and expatriate crosscultural adjustment on expatriate outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 655–666. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.655 Tung, R. L. (1987). Expatriate assignments: Enhancing success and minimizing failure. Academy of Management Executive, 1, 17–126. doi:10.5465/AME.1987.4275826 Tziner, A., Waismal-Manor, R., Vardi, N., & Brodman, A. (2008). The personality dispositional approach to job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Psychological Reports, 103, 435–442. doi:10.2466/PR0.103.2.435-442 Van der Zee, K. I., Ali, A. J., & Haaksma, I. (2007). Determinants of effective coping with cultural transition among expatriate children and adolescents. Anxiety, Stress and Coping, 20, 25–45. doi:10.1080/10615800601032781 Van der Zee, K. I., Ali, A. J., & Salomé, E. (2005). Role interference and subjective well-being among expatriate families. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14, 239–262. doi:10.1080/13594320500146250 Van der Zee, K. I., & Sanderman, R. (1993). Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de RAND-36: een handleiding. Groningen: Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken, University of Groningen. Van der Zee, K. I., & Van der Gang, I. (2007). Personality, threat and affective responses to cultural diversity. European Journal of Personality, 21, 453–470. doi:10.1002/per.619 Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven J. P. (2000). The multicultural personality questionnaire: A multidimensional instrument of multicultural effectiveness. European Journal of Personality, 14, 291–309. doi:10.1002/1099-0984(200007/08)14:43.0.CO;2-6


728 VAN ERP ET AL. Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven J. P. (2001). The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire: Reliability and validity of self- and other ratings of multicultural effectiveness. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 278–288. doi:10.1006/jrpe.2001.2320 Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven J. P. (in press-a). Culture shock or challenge? The role of personality as a determinant of intercultural competence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven J. P. (in press-b). Personality and intercultural effectiveness. In V. Benet-Martinez & Y. Hong (Eds.), Handbook of Multicultural Identity. Van der Zee, K. I., Van Oudenhoven, J. P., & De Grijs, E. (2004). Personality, threat, and cognitive and emotional reactions to stressful intercultural situations. Journal of Personality, 72, 1069–1096. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00290.x Van der Zee, K. I., Zaal, J. N., & Piekstra, J. (2003), Validation of the multicultural personality questionnaire in the context of personnel selection. European Journal of Personality, 17, s77–s100. doi:10.1002/per.483 Van Erp, K. J. P. M., Giebels, E., Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Duijn M. A. J. (2011). Expatriate adjustment: The role of justice and conflict in intimate relationships. Personal Relationships, 18, 58–78. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01312.x

Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Mol, S., & Van der Zee, K. I. (2003). Study of the adjustment of Western expatriates in Taiwan ROC with the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 159–170. doi:10.1111/1467-839X.t01-100018 Van Oudenhoven, J. P., Timmerman, M. E., & Van der Zee, K. I. (2007). Cross-cultural equivalence and validity of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire in an intercultural context. Journal of International Communication, 13, 51–65. doi:10.1080/ 13216597.2007.9674714 Van Oudenhoven, J. P., & Van der Zee, K. I. (2002). Predicting multicultural effectiveness of international students: The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire. International Journal of Intercultural Relationships, 26, 637–653. doi:10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00041-X Westerman, J. W., & Simmons, B. L. (2007). The effects of work environment on the personality-performance relationship: An exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues, 2, 288–305. Original manuscript received December 2011 Revised manuscript received May 2013 First published online July 2013