This study is divided into two phases: training program development and effectiveness examination. The purpose of this study is to develop an effective intercultural training program which meets the training needs of the participants. This chapter includes five sections, training needs assessment and program development will first be discussed. Then the descriptive statistics, correlation and ANCOVA analysis, and paired T-test are presented in order to show the training outcomes. Lastly, summary of the results is provided and discussed. Besides, three research questions mentioned in chapter one were answered accordingly in the chapter:
Question 1: What are the characteristics of a cultural incident in multicultural workplace?
In response to this question, training needs assessment was employed. The six identified themes emerged from data analysis reflected the characteristics of cultural incidents in multicultural workplace. The cultural incidents provided from TaiwanICDF program managers reported various situations and difficulties when interacting with different stakeholders.
Question 2: How to develop an intercultural training program based on identified characteristics of cultural incidents?
Based on the six identified themes, learning points were developed accordingly in response to participants’ needs and to construct the training program. All six learning points were linked to cultural differences with training methods as lecture, discussion, role-play, videos and experience sharing. The learning points of “what leads to cultural differences,” “intercultural communication,” “supplementary information about other
culture,” “cultural differences” and “communication difficulties” were used to explain the second theme of communication skills. “What leads to cultural differences,”
“intercultural communication,” “cultural differences” and “communication difficulties”
also responded the third theme of characters as a liaison role. Moreover, the learning points of “intercultural communication,” “cultural differences” and “communication difficulties” provided solutions for interaction boundary and guidance and counseling.
Lastly, four learning points (intercultural communication, supplementary information about other culture, cultural differences, and communication difficulties) were developed for the sixth theme of international relations.
In addition, the experimental learning theory was implied into the developed training program since the participants were workers in multicultural workplace. The developed training made a good use of experiences from participants, and not only provided intercultural knowledge but also tried to create learning in workplace.
Question 3: What is the training outcomes of the developed intercultural program?
Overall, the TaiwanICDF program managers had good performance on behavioral CQ and intercultural effectiveness. They performed better in analyzing the causes of difficulties of intercultural communication, using strategies to improve the efficacy of intercultural communication, and managing the situations and strategies of communication with foreign students and embassies. Since behavioral change will directly influent performance of workers (Sadri, 2015), the developed training program brought a good effect on the participants.
Training Needs Assessment and Program Development
The content of training program is developed based on the six identified themes from the needs assessment. The result of assessment shows that all employees had international experiences from schooling, traveling or working. Moreover, cultural differences and communication difficulties are the most challenging issues from their interactions with stakeholders in work. From the responses of the needs assessment, 41% related to cultural differences, 23% related to communication skills, 15%
mentioned the characters as a liaison role when communicating between stakeholders, 9% felt the interaction boundary is an important issue, 6% involved with guidance and counseling, and 6% encountered issues about international relations (Figure 4.1). The six themes are linked to several learning points in order to response to the training needs of the participants (Figure 4.2).
Figure 4.1. Identified themes from needs assessment
Figure 4.2. Learning points in response to identified themes
Both experimental group and control group receive the same content of training program but via different ways. For experimental group, the researcher utilizes various materials in delivering the training in 3 times. Especially, the experiential learning theory is embedded throughout the training process via discussion, sharing, reflection and observation & suggestion from supervisors in universities. The supervisors are the people who frequently interact with the participants in work and they are able to have a close observation on the performance of participants. The pre-survey is conducted at the beginning of the first training. Definitions of culture, cultural iceberg, perception model of communication and Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory (Hofstede, 2001) is included in the lecture of first training. In addition, videos, case studies and role-play are also employed to demonstrate cultural differences, intercultural communication and supplementary information as well. Considering the participants’ workload and
mobility, the second training is conducted via an online educational platform
“U.camdemy”, with 6 clips from the movie, “Outsourced” (Figure 4.3).
Figure 4.3. Images of U.camdemy and online training
The story is about an American, Todd who is a manager working in the customer service department in an American company. However, the company decided to outsource the customer service to India. Todd is assigned to India in order to train a group of local people as the new customer service. He was reluctant at the beginning
and encountered many difficulties when first arriving at the foreign country. The cultural differences between America and India make him frustrated. The communication difficulties between the local people and him also make him headache.
The movie demonstrates well about the main character (Todd) facing cultural differences and communication difficulties in work. The story describes the changing process about how Todd overcomes the encountered challenges and transforms the mindset. After watching the movie clips, the participants of this study were requested to answer the following questions (Table 4.1.) and their responses were collected for further discussion in the third time training.
Table 4.1.
Questions in the Second Training and Examples of Participants’ Responses
Question Responses
Q1. What are the cultural differences the main character encountered in the movie?
1. The differences of pronunciation in English.
2. The differences of workplace culture.
3. The differences of customs about dining and hygiene.
Q2. What are the communication difficulties between the main character and his employees?
1. The superiority from the managerial level.
2. Lack of empathy.
3. The usage of language and slangs.
Q3. What are the reasons contributed to low efficiency of the customer service?
1. Cultural differences between staffs and customers.
2. Communication difficulties between staffs and the foreign supervisor.
3. Different expectations.
(continued)
Table 4.1. (continued)
Question Responses
4. Using the wrong way as rewards to staffs.
Q4. What did the main character change during the process?
He became aware of the differences and tried to manage his emotions and reactions. He also adjusted his behaviors and improved interactions with staffs.
Q5. Do you encounter cultural differences when interacting with foreign students and other stakeholders in work? What is your strategy?
A foreign student was upset about our staff accidently opened a personal letter.
Firstly, I apologized for our mistake and expressed my understanding to the student. Then I asked to the student whether there’s other ways to make things up.
Q6. Do you encounter communication difficulties when interacting with foreign students and other stakeholders in work? What is your strategy?
I have received complaints about our foreign students from other offices.
I firstly respected their feelings and tried to calm them down. Then explained things from student’s angle and further discussed about the policy level if necessary. I will communicate with a strategy in order to create the mutual benefits.
The third training is conducted with an opening lecture regarding to the importance of intercultural communication and a summary about this customized intercultural training program. The online responses from the second training are classified using Hall’s cultural iceberg theory (1976) in order to recap the theoretical backgrounds which have been introduced in the first training. Employees were able to distinguish visible and invisible cultural factors, then to develop their own communication strategy.
Besides, employees were divided into groups for further discussions on question 5 and 6. In this activity, employees with different tenure and backgrounds were able to share
experiences and provide insights. Later, supervisors are invited to share the observed difficulties or successful interaction cases from the employees so the participants could learn from other angles. In the end, the training concluded with supervisors’ suggestions and two identified insights during the training process. Then the post-survey is employed as well.
On the other hand, two videos with the same contents of the first & second trainings for the experimental group are also put on U.camdemy for the control group.
Participants of the control group are invited to take the same pre & post-survey as the experimental group before and after watching two videos. The data of pre & post-survey collected from both groups are analyzed in following paragraphs.
Table 4.2. presents the instructional process of the developed training program and Table 4.3. explains how the experiential learning theory was employed into training program design.
Table 4.2.
Instructional Process of Developed Training Program
Training Learning Point Event Time
I
Training
introduction & Pre-survey
With a short opening, the pre-survey was conducted before all activities. Then a briefing about the result of needs assessment was introduced.
1.5 hr
Definitions of Culture
“What is culture?” was asked at the beginning, participants were able to share their views about culture. Lecture about definitions of culture was presented in order to show the diverse opinions from professionals.
(continued)
Table 4.2. (continued)
Training Learning Point Event Time
I
What leads to cultural differences?
Lectures about cultural iceberg, perception model of communication and Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory were bring onto the table and discussions was made. One video about different behaviors from cultures and role-play about different interpretations were demonstrated for further understanding on the learning point.
1.5 hr
Intercultural Communication
A short movie clip was played in demonstrating the communication difficulties, discussions and opinions were shared between participants. The high- &
low-context of communication was introduced with a cartoon picture and a case study about story of an old Chinese scholar.
Another discussion was made afterward.
Supplementary information about other culture
Video about Indian culture was displayed as a conclusion of the first training section.
II
Cultural Differences
TaiwanICDF program managers were invited to register in an online educational platform, U.camdemy for participating the second training section.
6 clips from a selected movie, “Outsourced”
were edited with 4 content-related and 2 self-reflection questions. Managers were requested to provide answers accordingly in the online discussion. Participants and the training facilitator were able to interact online as more questions or opinions were reflected from the managers.
1.5~2 hr
Communication Difficulties
(continued)
Table 4.2. (continued)
Training Learning Point Event Time
III
Cultural Differences &
Communication Difficulties
A lecture about the tendency of intercultural communication was performed as an opening of the third training. The responses from previous training section were collected and discussed in recapping some learning points in first training. Additionally, the 2 self-reflection questions were highlighted for further experience sharing.
Program managers were divided into groups mixed with juniors and seniors. With this arrangement, people were able to share, discuss, and reflect different points of view.
Besides, supervisors of the managers were invited to share their observations from managers’ work and feedbacks to enrich the discussion.
Two main reflections were made as conclusion from training facilitator.
1.5 hr
Post-survey The post-survey was applied after the training section.
Table 4.3.
Corresponding Design to Four Stage of Experiential Learning Theory (ELT)
Stage of ELT Corresponding Design
Concrete Experience (Experience)
The application of needs assessment was able to collect concrete experience from participants.
Reflective Observation (Reflect)
The identified themes from needs assessment were structured for developing learning points. Discussion and experience sharing during the training extended more reflections.
Abstract Conceptualization (Generalize)
Many concepts and theories introduced in the training were abstracted in promoting behavioral change.
Active Experimentation (Apply)
Reflections and experience sharing from participants created a learning cycle, so that the participants were able to apply
Descriptive Statistics
There are 3 categories in the demographic information, gender, institute, and tenure. It is used to check whether there are missing items and compare whether different groups of people may have special tendencies when answering the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics also present mean and standard deviation value of the dimensions. Minimum and maximum values are shown to see whether the data includes incorrect ratings that fall outside of the scale. Table 4.4. and 4.5. present the frequencies of the respondent of experimental & control groups in pre- & post-survey, and the data are analyzed to compare whether there are differences between different groups.
Table 4.4.
Experimental Group: Demographic Information of the Participants of this Study
Note. N= 25
Variable Item Frequency Percentage
Gender Male
Institute National Tsing Hua University National Taiwan Ocean National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences
National Taiwan University Ming Chuan University Kaohsiung Medical University
Taipei Medical University Taipei National University of
the Arts National Dong Hwa University
1
Table 4.5.
Control Group: Demographic Information of the Participants of this Study
Note. N= 25
The participants of experimental group are TaiwanICDF program managers who work in 16 universities. Most of them (92%) are female and only 2 (8%) male program managers, and over half (64%) of them work as a program manager under two years,
Variable Item Frequency Percentage
Gender Male
Institute Taipei National University of the Arts
National Taiwan University Christ's College Taipei
TaiwanICDF
National Taipei University of Business
National Taiwan University of Sport
Chinese Culture University Umbo CV
Career Consulting Co. Ltd.
Georgia Institute of Technology Taiji Clinic
only 4 (16%) people work over 5 years at this position. On the other hand, 15 (60%) participants in control group are female and 10 (40%) are male, and over half (56%) of them work in universities, 9 (32%) samples are from private companies, 2 (8%) are from TaiwanICDF and 1 (4%) is in public sector. The participants’ tenure varies from 40% (10 people) under 2 years to 28% (7 people) over 5 years.
Table 4.6.
Experimental Group: Minimum, Maximum, Mean, and Standard Deviation of the Data Time Item N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Table 4.6. (continued)
Time Item N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
CQ_MO 25 4.40 7 5.82 .891
CQ_BH 25 3 7 5.64 1.020
IE_IRelax 25 2.40 5 3.66 .624
IE_BF 25 2.25 4 3.21 .477
IE_InteractionM 25 2 5 3.80 .707
IE_MeSk 25 2 5 3.39 .698
IE_IdenMan 25 2.67 4.67 3.48 .553
IE_IRespect 25 3.33 5 4.15 .462
CQ_All 25 4.50 7 5.63 .739
IE_All 25 2.85 4.75 3.59 .423
JR1 25 3 5 4.24 .663
JR2 25 2 5 4.00 .816
JR3 25 3 5 3.92 .812
JR4 25 3 5 4.08 .572
JR5 25 2 5 4.08 .759
JR6 25 2 5 3.64 .860
Note. N= 25. Gender= 0(Male), 1(Female); Tenure= 1(<1 yr.), 2(1~2 yr.), 3(2~3 yr.), 4(3~4 yr.), 5(4~5 yr.), 6(>5 yr.); CQ_MC= Cultural Intelligence Scale_Metacognitive CQ; CG= Cognitive CQ; MO= Motivational CQ; BH= Behavioral CQ; IE_IRelax=
Intercultural Effectiveness Scale_Interaction Relaxation; BF= Behavioral Flexibility;
InteractionM= Interaction Management; MeSk= Message Skills; IdenMan= Identity Maintenance; IRespect= Interactant Respect; JR= Job-related Question.
Table 4.7.
Control Group: Minimum, Maximum, Mean, and Standard Deviation of the Data Time Item N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Table 4.7. (continued)
Time Item N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
JR1 25 2 5 4.04 .790
JR2 25 2 5 3.76 .779
JR3 25 2 5 3.76 .663
Note. N= 25. Gender= 0(Male), 1(Female); Tenure= 1(<1 yr.), 2(1~2 yr.), 3(2~3 yr.), 4(3~4 yr.), 5(4~5 yr.), 6(>5 yr.); CQ_MC= Cultural Intelligence Scale_Metacognitive CQ; CG= Cognitive CQ; MO= Motivational CQ; BH= Behavioral CQ; IE_IRelax=
Intercultural Effectiveness Scale_Interaction Relaxation; BF= Behavioral Flexibility;
InteractionM= Interaction Management; MeSk= Message Skills; IdenMan= Identity Maintenance; IRespect= Interactant Respect; JR= Job-related Question.
Minimum and maximum of each variable and all sub-dimensions are listed to check wrong coding in the data, and all the numbers are in the proper scales.
Correlations Analysis
Cultural intelligence scale and intercultural effectiveness scale are utilized in the pre- and post-survey. Table 4.8. presents the reliability of the data collected from both scales to experimental and control groups. The data from CQ scale have high Cronbach alpha values in overall including all sub-dimensions (above 0.802). On the contrary, the data from IE scale only present well on two sub-dimensions (interaction relaxation and interaction management) and on the overall IE. Two factors in the study may contribute to low scores on reliability of the data from IE scale: reverse question design and smaller sample size. Although the Cronbach’s alpha in some sub-dimensions did not reach acceptable level at 0.7, all dimensions were kept in the following comparison and discussion for a more comprehensive picture.
Table 4.8.
Cronbach Alpha Values of CQ Scale and IE Scale
Scale Item
Cronbach Alpha Value
Experimental Group Control Group
The correlation results as shown in Table 4.9. and 4.10. were performed to examine the direction and the strength of linear relationship between variables. According to the outcomes, gender and tenure are not significantly correlated to cultural intelligence, and intercultural effectiveness on experimental and control groups.
Table 4.9.
Experimental Group: Mean, Standard Deviation, Reliability and Correlation on Gender, Tenure, CQ and IE
Time Item Mean S. D. 1 2 3 4
Pre-survey 1. Gender 0.92 0.277
2. Tenure 2.52 1.759 .089
3. CQ_All 5.37 0.924 -.091 .188 (.958)
4. IE_All 3.37 0.417 .123 .218 .637** (.858) Post-survey 1. Gender 0.92 0.277
2. Tenure 2.52 1.759 .089
3. CQ_All 5.63 0.739 -.028 .192 (.938)
4. IE_All 3.59 0.423 .046 .242 .774** (.859) Note. **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 4.10.
Control Group: Mean, Standard Deviation, Reliability and Correlation on Gender, Tenure, CQ and IE
Time Item Mean S. D. 1 2 3 4
Pre-survey 1. Gender 0.60 0.500
2. Tenure 3.48 1.960 .119
3. CQ_All 5.32 0.853 .325 .168 (.951)
4. IE_All 3.34 0.387 .214 .110 .704** (.815) Post-survey 1. Gender 0.60 0.500
2. Tenure 3.48 1.960 .119
3. CQ_All 5.43 0.942 .296 .196 (.967)
4. IE_All 3.40 0.416 .175 .191 .774** (.833) Note. **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
ANCOVA Analysis
Analysis of covariance was utilized in this study. The results presented that all variances of post-survey were equal across groups except JR3 (Table 4.11.). From the tests of between-subjects effects (Table 4.12., 4.13. and 4.14.), the scores of pre-survey had significant influence on the scores of post-survey. Group difference didn’t affect much on the scores of post-survey on CQ and 4 sub-dimensions. Due to the low Alpha values on 4 sub-dimensions of IE (Table 4.8.), here only discussed the results of overall IE and two IE’s sub-dimensions of interaction relaxation and interaction management from Table 4.13. Group difference had an effect on the score of overall IE instead of the two sub-dimensions. Table 4.15., 4.16. and 4.17. listed the estimated marginal means which were adjusted for the covariate and showed that the training program still had an effect on both groups.
Table 4.11.
Levene's Test of Equality of Error Variances
Dependent Variable F df1 df2 Sig.
Pos_CQ_All .634 1 48 .430
Pos_MC .253 1 48 .618
Pos_CG .707 1 48 .404
Pos_MO .860 1 48 .358
Pos_BH .161 1 48 .690
Pos_IE_All .082 1 48 .775
Pos_IRelax 3.404 1 48 .071
Pos_BF 1.093 1 48 .301
Pos_InteractionM .889 1 48 .350
Pos_MeSk .093 1 48 .762
Pos_IdenMan .693 1 48 .409
Pos_IRespect .153 1 48 .698
Pos_JR1 .011 1 48 .917
Pos_JR2 2.199 1 48 .145
Pos_JR3 7.561 1 48 .008
Note. CQ= Cultural Intelligence Scale; MC= Metacognitive CQ; CG= Cognitive CQ; MO=
Motivational CQ; BH= Behavioral CQ; IE= Intercultural Effectiveness Scale; IRelax=
Interaction Relaxation; BF= Behavioral Flexibility; InteractionM= Interaction Management;
MeSk= Message Skills; IdenMan= Identity Maintenance; IRespect= Interactant Respect; JR=
Job-related Question.
Table 4.12.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects_CQ Scale
DV: Pos_CQ_All DV: Pos_MC DV: Pos_CG DV: Pos_MO DV: Pos_BH
Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig.
Pre_CQ_All .000 Pre_MC .000 Pre_CG .000 Pre_MO .000 Pre_BH .000
Group .314 Group .226 Group .952 Group .198 Group .268
Note. Group= 1(Experimental), 2(Control); DV= Dependent Variable; CQ= Cultural Intelligence Scale; MC= Metacognitive CQ; CG= Cognitive CQ;
MO= Motivational CQ; BH= Behavioral CQ.
Table 4.13.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects_IE Scale
DV: Pos_IE_All DV: Pos_IRelax DV: Pos_BF DV: Pos_InteractionM DV: Pos_MeSk DV: Pos_IdenMan DV: Pos_IRespect Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig. Source Sig.
Pre_IE_All .000 Pre_IRelax .000 Pre_BF .003 Pre_InteractionM .000 Pre_MeSk .000 Pre_IdenMan .000 Pre_IRespect .000
Group .033 Group .333 Group .515 Group .816 Group .011 Group .017 Group .495
Note. Group= 1(Experimental), 2(Control); DV= Dependent Variable; IE= Intercultural Effectiveness Scale; IRelax= Interaction Relaxation; BF=
Behavioral Flexibility; InteractionM= Interaction Management; MeSk= Message Skills; IdenMan= Identity Maintenance; IRespect= Interactant Respect.
Behavioral Flexibility; InteractionM= Interaction Management; MeSk= Message Skills; IdenMan= Identity Maintenance; IRespect= Interactant Respect.