Profiling intercultural competence of Indonesians in Asian workgroups

International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Intercultural Relations journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijintrel

Profiling intercultural competence of Indonesians in Asian workgroups夽 Hana Panggabean a,∗∗ , Juliana Murniati a , Hora Tjitra b,∗ a b

Faculty of Psychology, Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia. Jl. Jenderal Sudirman 51, Jakarta, Indonesia School of Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, 148 Tianmushan Rd., Hangzhou, PR China

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Accepted 30 March 2012

Keywords: Intercultural competence Indonesia China Singapore Asia

a b s t r a c t There have been numerous intercultural competence studies; yet, only a few of them have examined the dynamics of intercultural competence among non-westerners in international contexts. This study attempts to identify specific intercultural competences for Indonesian sojourners and local co-workers in Indonesian-Chinese and IndonesianSingaporean work groups. We propose a holistic approach that incorporates perspectives of both Indonesians and their Asian co-workers to elaborate their cross-cultural experiences. Eighty-one in-depth interviews were conducted in Indonesia and China using Indonesian sojourners and locals (N = 47) as well as their Chinese and Singaporean co-workers (N = 34). A grounded theory data analysis was conducted using atlas.ti software. A model of Indonesian intercultural competences in international work groups was developed to depict four core intercultural competences: motivating leadership, personable mediation, climate management and multiculturalism. Three potential synergy and problematic areas are identified: the meaning of work, communication style, and perception of competition versus harmony. Future research directions and practical implications to improve intercultural effectiveness among these three cultures are discussed. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Asian economies have grown dramatically over the last decade. The launch of the ASEAN-China Free Trade Agreement (ACFTA) in 2010 created the third largest free trade zone and increasingly globalized cooperation among Asians. The dramatic growth of international cooperation in this region calls for appropriate preparations and support to promote qualified Asian global leaders. Unfortunately, this preparation has not occurred. Based on interviews with 44 CEOs from Singapore, Bangalore, and Beijing, Avolio and Ong (2010) reported that many CEO’s admitted they had reached their leadership positions without proper grooming. One important reason for this limited international preparation is the lack of a theoretical model for Asian global leaders. A larger portion of global leadership and management research has been developed in the west by western researchers. Consequently, the concepts and theories derived from these studies may not be fully applicable to Asian sojourners (see Avolio & Ong, 2010; Ward, Bochner, & Furnham, 2001). Dinges and Baldwin (1996) foresaw this situation almost two decades ago when they suggested applying non-western perspectives to intercultural competence studies to meet the needs of non-western societies. 夽 The paper was reviewed and accepted by the prior Editor-in-Chief, Dan Landis. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 571 8763 1203; mobile: +86 138 6805 8529; fax: +86 571 8763 1210. ∗∗ Corresponding author at: Sekolah Pascasarjana Unika Atma Jaya. Jl. Jenderal Sudirman 51, Gedung C lantai 7. Jakarta 12930-Indonesia. Tel.: +62 21 5708805/62 817 704 769; fax: +62 21 5741841. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Panggabean), [email protected] (J. Murniati), [email protected] (H. Tjitra). 0147-1767/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2012.04.002

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

87

The present study contributes to intercultural competence studies in two ways. First, we study Asian diversity by examining the key competences of Indonesians who work with their fellow Asians in international contexts. Most intercultural competence studies have focused on the cultural differences between westerners and non-westerners (e.g., Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992; Fremerey & Panggabean, 2004; Nisbett, Peng, Choi, & Norenzayan, 2001) and tend to overlook Asian-specific cultural incompatibilities, despite the problematic relationships among Asians in the workplace (Anwar, 2011; Avolio & Ong, 2010). Second, the present study applies an integrated perspective of sojourners and their local co-workers. Few intercultural competence studies have included the culturally different perspectives of co-workers, regardless of their importance in revealing culture relativism and situational dynamics (Spitzberg, 2000; Thomas, 2003). This study focuses on key competences of Indonesians who work with Chinese and Singaporean co-workers. Indonesia is one of the most diverse countries in the world. With more than 350 ethnic groups and 250 regional languages, as well as six formal religions, diversity is a fact of life in Indonesian society. However, managing the cultural differences present in this setting has been a critical challenge for Indonesians as the research on domestic intercultural relationships has shown (e.g., Gunawan, 2011). Indonesians encounter similar challenges in international contexts, ranging from the culture shock of Indonesian sojourners overseas (e.g., Anwar, 2011) to the conflicts and frictions between Indonesians and their foreign co-workers at home (Tjitra, 2001). The typical problems that Indonesians have in international contexts include indirect communication styles, conflict avoidance behaviors, and hierarchical power orientations (Fremerey & Panggabean, 2004; Tjitra, 2001). These findings confirm that a systematic approach to prepare Indonesians for foreign assignments is needed. Unfortunately, research on Indonesian intercultural relationships and adequate cross-cultural learning programs remain scarce. Singapore and China are among the most important Asian trading partners for Indonesia. Singapore is ranked as the top Asian study abroad destination for Indonesian students, and China is ranked fourth (Latif, 2011). Data from the Indonesian Embassy in Singapore reported that Singapore was Indonesia’s third largest investor from 1967 to 2005, and Indonesia is the fifth largest business partner for Singapore (Bilateral relations between Indonesia and Singapore, 2007). The webpage of the China–Indonesia Economy and Trading Partnership reported a dramatic growth of approximately 360% in trading volume between these countries over the past two decades with an average annual growth of 20% (Dibanding mitra ASEAN Lain, 2011). Therefore, the current study draws on these cultures as the primary intercultural contexts for Indonesians.

2. Theoretical review 2.1. Indonesian intercultural sensitivity Numerous intercultural studies have explored and identified the global skill known as intercultural competence (for details see Dinges, 1983; Dinges & Baldwin, 1996). Intercultural competence is basically understood as the factors or variables that predict overseas assignments. Various perspectives have explained intercultural competence by adopting a typology approach that focuses on a single competence (e.g., Sewell & Davidsen, 1956 in Dinges, 1983), exploring comprehensive competences (e.g., Kealey & Ruben, 1983), presenting developmental models (Bennett, 1993; Hoopes, 1980) and building an integrative model (Chen & Starosta, 1998; Spitzberg, 2000). One of the most important intercultural competences is intercultural sensitivity (ICS). ICS is generally defined as the ability to manage cultural differences and the willingness to accept the perspectives of culturally different individuals (Bhawuk & Brislin, 1992). Some studies have confirmed that ICS predicts intercultural effectiveness (e.g., Cui & Van den Berg, 1991) and that it is an important criterion for expatriate selection and placement (Vulpe, Kealey, Protheroe, & MacDonald, 2001). A conceptual exploration revealed four perspectives that define ICS (Panggabean, 2004a). The first perspective focuses on the cognitive aspects of ICS. This perspective understands ICS as the logical reasoning behind a particular culture needed to form appropriate attributions that results in mutually positive evaluations and high sensitivity (e.g., Triandis, 1975). In this sense, ICS is perceived to be a mental capacity that deals with ambiguity and familiarity (Cui & Van den Berg, 1991). To cope with cultural differences, one should gain knowledge of others’ “subjective cultures” to develop a logical and coherent understanding of them (e.g., Albert, 1983). The second perspective focuses on the affective portion of ICS. In this sense, ICS is perceived as a refined affect that assesses and analyzes situations directed at finding situation-appropriate behaviors. Emotional life is important because it serves as a tool to understand the world and to grasp meanings. This affective component of ICS is represented by the Javanese concept of sensitivity (rasa), which is defined by Geertz (1964) as a meaning “. . .applied to the words in a letter, poem, or even in speech, to indicate the between-the-lines ‘looking north and hitting south’ type of allusive suggestion that is so important in Javanese communication” (p. 238). The third perspective focuses on the behavioral indicators of ICS that are discussed extensively in the fields of intercultural communication (e.g., Hammer, 1989). ICS is understood as a group of skills that infer and project others’ feeling and thoughts to achieve mutual understanding (Hammer, 1989; Martin, 1993; Ruben & Kealey, 1979). The fourth perspective is Bennet’s work on the ICS developmental model, which focuses on the stages of ICS as well as the developmental means and indicators that create sensitivity (see Bennett, 1993). A few scholars have proposed integrative perspectives of ICS. Chen and Starosta (1998) noted that ICS is correlated with cognitive, affective and behavioral aspects of interactional situations. Spitzberg (2000) proposed an integrative intercultural communication competence model that portrayed dyadic interactions from individual, episodic, and relational systems.

88

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

Indonesian ICS has cognitive, affective, and behavioral natures (Panggabean, 2004b). The cognitive nature of Indonesian ICS is understood as a comprehensive understanding of other cultures that is manifested in the awareness of cultural differences and the knowledge of other cultures. The affective nature of ICS uses emotion to comprehend the symbolic meaning of communication that is manifested in expressions of rasa. In general, this level includes the mostly indirect efforts to grasp the true meaning of conveyed messages. The behavioral level of ICS includes the skills needed to perform culturally adequate behaviors and modify behavioral readiness. Studies on Indonesian ICS have been conducted by applying the Indonesian ICS scales to various groups (e.g., students, teachers, professionals, and blue collar workers) in both multicultural and international contexts. A factor analysis revealed seven Indonesian ICS dimensions covering the cognitive, affective, and behavioral natures (Panggabean & Suryani, 2008). These seven dimensions comprise groups of harmony (the inclination to maintain a harmonious and positive group atmosphere), multiculturalism (the mental readiness to accept cultural differences as a central part of an individual’s identity), active sensitivity (bridging cultural differences based on personal relationships and familiarity with group members and climate), initial cautiousness (acts of observation, alertness and personal distance at the beginning of a group interaction), conflict avoidance (acts of conflict avoidance), implicit communication (the frequent use of non-verbal communication channels and indirect communication styles), and musyawarah untuk mufakat (a specific decision-making technique characterized by a high level of consensus amongst group members). The aforementioned dimensions are useful to understand the Indonesian diversity management style; therefore, they will be used as theoretical reference. However, applying the Indonesian ICS model as a single theory does not sufficiently meet our study purposes. The Indonesian ICS model is derived from a quantitative approach; hence, its rigid application limits the explorative purposes of this study. Furthermore, the model is based on the single perspective of sojourners, whereas this study aims at a more holistic view between the sojourners and their co-workers. In line with our study objectives, gaining insights into the specific cultural values of Indonesian, Chinese and Singaporean citizens with regard to social behavior is important. 2.2. Indigenous perspectives on cultural diversity 2.2.1. Indonesian values regarding diversity Indonesian culture views diversity as an inherent nature of society because it is reflected in its folklore artifacts. The ultimate concept for living with diversity is social harmony. Harmony originates from the cosmological balance among humans, nature, and God; everything is in its place. Harmony is not created but inherent in nature; therefore, it must be preserved (Magnis-Suseno, 1996; Mulder, 2001). Based on this philosophical view, social harmony represents a social order that structures the complexity of diversity and makes it more manageable. Another characteristic of Indonesian society is its relationship-oriented nature. Studies of Indonesia have identified its communal nature and its strong emphasis on group orientation (Hofstede, 1997; Martin & Thomas, 2002). In this sense, group values and norms serve as a point of reference for individuals’ behaviors and opinions. Harmonious group relationships are strongly encouraged, and contradictory individual expressions are less emphasized. Indonesian multicultural society provides a suitable context for global diversity. A study of 23 Indonesians who work with their fellow Indonesians with different cultural backgrounds (multicultural group) and with Germans (international group) suggested that the ICS indicators that were displayed in the multicultural group resembled those in the international group (Panggabean, 2004b). In this sense, the experience of domestic cultural diversity provides Indonesians with behavioral patterns to cope with global diversity. An additional study of 773 Indonesians in multicultural and international contexts (e.g., students, teachers, professionals, and blue collar workers) found that group harmony and multicultural attitudes were among the strongest dimensions consistently observed in Indonesians, in both the multicultural and international groups (Panggabean & Suryani, 2008). These dimensions were used to maintain comfortable group atmospheres and to perform well in situations with people of diverse cultural backgrounds. 2.2.2. Confucian values in Chinese working relationships Traditional Confucian values are a valuable resource in understanding Chinese social behavior (Hwang, 2001). Three core values of Confucianism are important for this study: harmony, mian-zi (face), and guanxi (relationship). Confucian harmony places a stronger focus on maintaining mutual respect in a relationship to reach a common view, rather than avoiding conflicts (Leung, Koch, & Lu 2002). This notion clearly suggests that a respectful relationship is crucial and should be prioritized over acts of conflict avoidance and conformity. Mian-zi represents the prestige and honor that is earned by a person as a result of a success. The negative aspect of mian-zi represents ostentatious behaviors in the presence of others (Bond & Hwang, 1986). Mian-zi is a basic element of the important Chinese concept of face, which represents a claimed sense of favorable social self-worth that people want others to have of them (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998). Face is an instrument used to maintain harmonious relationships and is highly valued in Chinese society; yet, this concept includes the complex techniques of protecting face, saving face, and giving face. Guanxi refers to the web of social connections between two people or among people with shared interests and identities (Jacobs, 1979). Guanxi is a special kind of relationship characterized by implicit rules, obligations, and reciprocity. This concept plays important role in Chinese social life and is often considered to represent Chinese networking due to its symbolic meanings of power, social status, and resource transmission (Hackley & Dong, 2001).

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

89

2.2.3. Singaporean views on multiculturalism Chinese is the largest ethnic group in Singapore, which causes this society to put great values on Confucian teachings, in particular in the concepts of mian-zi (Bond & Hwang, 1986; Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998) and harmony (Leung, Koch, & Lu 2002). Harmony refers to the value of promoting a common goal over an individual one, especially within the family. It also refers to the notion of an amicable relationship across the various ethnicities and religions in Singapore. This notion is reflected in state formalized rules and regulations regarding diversity management. Singaporeans are well known for their highly competitive ad risk-avoidant nature among Asians. This nature is represented by kiasu. Kiasu is understood as an obsessive concern with getting the most out of every transaction and a desire to surpass others (Hwang, Ang, & Fransesco, 2002). This competitive tendency can be found in everyday contexts such as school or the work place. Although kiasu may not be specific to Singaporean society (Ho, Ang, Loh, & Ng, 1998), it is nevertheless widely recognized as typical Singaporean social behavior. Conceptual explorations of these three interacting cultures demonstrate both their similarities and distinctiveness. Similar cultural concepts might contribute to a misleading perception of Asian uniformity; however, cultural relativism views each culture as unique but equal (Pedersen, 1994). This theory suggests that the similar concepts across different cultures bear different meaning and therefore shape behaviors in a different manner. The dynamics of interacting cultures creates challenges and requires abilities and skills to manage this diversity to meet goals. To investigate the comprehensive competences of Indonesians among other Asians, this study follows Pedersen (1994) suggestion that a multicultural awareness perspective should emphasize each group’s similarities and differences. Thus, our first research question (RQ) is as follows: RQ1: What are the intercultural competences of Indonesians who work with Chinese and Singaporean co-workers? 2.3. Intercultural synergy International mobility and cooperation within multicultural and multidisciplinary teams are an increasing necessity in international corporations and joint ventures. Culturally determined differences may either act as obstacles to productive cooperation in multicultural teams or become a source of creativity and higher achievement. On the other hand, cultural diversity may be regarded and used as productive potential by providing numerous alternative approaches, mutually compensating for culture-specific deficits, and creating synergy effects. The necessary conditions for this positive dynamic include the ability to reflect upon one’s own cultural framework as well as recognize the value of other cultures and the capacity for treating both as an equally valid means to reach a solution. This positive alternative is often termed “intercultural synergy”: the interplay of cultural characteristics in terms of attitudes, values, cognitions, and behaviors in a mutually goal-enhancing way such that the attained performance or output is of higher quality than the sum of individual elements. Conflicting cultural values create a critical hurdle for intercultural synergy. Each culture has its own symbols, promotes certain values, and follows certain rules in shaping behavior (Thomas, 2003). Accordingly, each culture develops its own assumptions and expectations that may conflict with others. Another obstacle to synergy may be rooted in culturally overlapping situations in which similar and familiar symbols as well as attributes occur but have different meanings for different cultures, which causes unfamiliarity and creates feelings of insecurity and cognitive dissonance (Thomas, 2003). These types of situations may lead to miscommunications and misinterpretations, which lead to friction and conflict. This study examines the potential synergy among Indonesians and their fellow Asians to enable insights into the common grounds of Asian diversity. Therefore, we developed the second RQ as follows: RQ2: What are the challenges to synergy and the potential for Indonesians working with Chinese and Singaporean co-workers? 3. Methods 3.1. Participants Data were collected from 81 sojourners and local co-workers in China and Indonesia (Table 1). We approached participants via our professional networks and personal contacts, and we invited them to participate using social media. Five assistants accompanied the main interviewers (i.e., the authors). All interviews (approximately 60–90 min each) were conducted in the respondents’ native language (Bahasa Indonesia, English or Mandarin) or in their preferred language (for example, one Table 1 The numbers and types of participants in each country. Indonesia 15 Chinese sojourners 15 Indonesian co-workers

China 8 Singaporean sojourners 15 Indonesian co-workers

17 Indonesian sojourners 11 Chinese co-workers

90

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

Table 2 Participant job titles. Respondents

Indonesian sojourners Chinese sojourners Singaporean sojourners Indonesian co-workers Chinese co-workers Total

Job title

Total

Owner/entrepreneur

Top manager (CEO, VP, Director, GM)

Senior manager (country manager, regional manager, and so on)

Others (consultant, senior staff, and so on)

5 0 1 1 0 7

6 8 3 8 1 25

6 6 2 14 7 35

0 1 2 7 3 13

17 15 8 30 11 81

Indonesian sojourner preferred Mandarin to Bahasa Indonesia because of length of stay in China). With prior consent, all interviews with respondents were audio-recorded and fully transcribed. Types of participants. Based on the research goal to obtain a holistic perspective of Indonesians in multinational contexts, we included Indonesian sojourners and local co-workers with their foreign partners. There were 17 Indonesian sojourners in China and 11 local Chinese coworkers. Thirty local Indonesian co-workers participated in Indonesia, 15 of whom had working experience with Chinese sojourners (N = 15) and another 15 of whom had working experiences with Singaporean sojourners (N = 8). Together, we collected the data of 47 Indonesians, 26 Chinese and 8 Singaporeans. Foreign assignment duration. The length of stay in the host county and the duration of the working assignment with coworkers of different cultures play an important role in shaping sojourners’ levels of cultural and psychological adjustment. We required that the sojourners had lived in their host country for at least one year to ensure that they had the proper time for an initial adjustment. We also required that participants had worked with their foreign partners for at least one year so that they had a sufficient number of experiences with which to answer the interview questions. All sojourners in this study met these criteria. Job title. The participants should hold managerial positions (at least a senior manager level) to represent a sufficient level of authority. A majority of participants (83.9%) were at least middle managers; however, a small number of co-workers were below senior managers (see Table 2). Nevertheless, we decided to include them because their job titles misrepresented their authority level, either due to a flat organizational structure (e.g., consulting firms) or a long tenure that led to a sufficient authority level and valuable intercultural experiences. Participating organizations. We considered three important organizational features: ownership, business scale, and business field. Accordingly, we included both state-owned and private multinational companies as well as large, medium, and small enterprises. We also included manufacturing, service, and trading companies. Participating organizational profiles are presented in Table 3. The business fields covered included financial services, telecommunications, trading, education, shipping, consumer goods, human resource consultants, oil, and gas, and pharmaceuticals. Business field profiles are not presented due to space limitations. Ethnicity. Our Singaporean participants consisted of four Chinese, two Malayans, and two Indians. This distribution reflects Singaporean ethnic demographics. Obtaining ethnic representativeness for the Indonesian sample was more complicated, not only because its society has more than three hundreds ethnic groups but also because the Indonesian business community has a different demographic profile than the rest of the country. Although ethnicity demographics are considered to be critical to the fragile unity of Indonesia, this issue is rarely thoroughly studied or discussed in this country, which makes obtaining an ethnicity database difficult. However, Indonesian business observers (e.g., Brandt, 1997) have indicated that two groups characterize the Indonesian business community’s social behavior: the Indonesian Chinese and the Indonesian Natives (i.e., non-Chinese ethnic groups). We decided to use this categorization and recruited 22 Indonesian Natives and 25 Indonesian Chinese. 3.2. Interview guide The interview guide consisted of open-ended questions that focused on five domains (see Appendix 1 for more details): (a) the positive and negative cultural encounters that have served as anchor experiences; (b) the culture-specific attributes of Chinese, Indonesian and Singaporean sojourners in target accomplishment situations; (c) the key challenges and competitive Table 3 Organization types. Organization type

Number

Multinational private Multinational state-owned National private National state-owned Small- and medium-sized businesses Total

21 7 9 3 11 51

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

91

advantages for Chinese, Indonesian and Singaporean sojourners; (d) the personal insights and reflections from intercultural experiences that generate self-growth or personal transformations; and (e) the culturally specific leadership styles of Chinese, Indonesian, and Singaporean sojourners. 3.3. Grounded theory We applied grounded theory based on the procedures suggested by Glaser and Strauss (1967) to analyze the data. This approach fits nicely with our study purposes due to its explorative nature. Furthermore, this method focused on multiple levels of analysis; thus, the strong link between theory and data was ensured. Following Strauss and Corbin’s (1998) procedures, the data were analyzed using three types of coding: open, axial and selective. The interview transcriptions, along with the researchers’ memo and comments, were examined in the first level of analysis (open coding). Concepts were developed from the data, and they were grouped together to form categories. The second level of analysis, axial coding, linked the open coding categories to develop more abstract categories. These axial coding categories were related to the research topic using paradigms or relevant concepts to form the central categories. At this point, logical conceptual networks were developed around the central categories. In the third level of analysis, selective coding, the central categories were organized around the identified central concepts. Finally, the identified central concepts became result models by refinement and validation via comparisons with the raw data or memo reviews. Data analysis techniques were conducted with the qualitative analysis software atlas.ti. Fig. 1 presents an example of this coding analysis. Finally, a bilingual coding book was developed in English and Mandarin to gather the concepts that were identified along with verbatim accounts and theoretical support (see Appendix 2 for a sample of coding book). 3.4. Quality assurance and ethics This research applied the following steps to ensure credibility and meet ethical concerns: Peer-coaching interviewers. Because the interviews were conducted in two locations, the interviewers needed uniform interview procedures to ensure a standardized data collection process. In the initial phase, each author conducted an interview and exchanged feedback to establish a standard interviewing procedure. Training for interview assistants. An assistant interviewer, who developed an interview summary and transcribed the data a few days after the meeting, accompanied each interviewer. Working checklists and manuals, interview briefs, supervised interview trials, and subsequent feedback were used to train these assistants. The main interviewers conducted all interviews.

Fig. 1. Coding analysis procedure.

92

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

Communicative validation. This validation step aimed to minimize the biases that might occur in writing down the interview results, which would corrupt the objectivity of the data. This step was conducted by sending the written transcriptions to the interviewee for confirmation. Confidentiality agreement. All team members complied with the research confidentiality agreement and were bound by contract to preserve this information. The principle investigators will coordinate any publication initiatives that require information or data release. 4. Results and discussion Given the richness of these data, we divided results according to the RQs. 4.1. RQ1: What are the intercultural competences of Indonesians who work with Chinese and Singaporean co-workers? The following model displays the core nature of Indonesian leaders’ intercultural competences in Indonesian-Chinese and Indonesian-Singaporean work groups. We provide a global overview of the key competences before furnishing a more detail description (Fig. 2). 4.1.1. Motivating leadership Indonesian sojourners performed their leadership roles by motivating others as indicated by their consultative behaviors and readiness to empower. They believed that encouraging acts would create positive working motivations, which would lead to highly committed and productive workers. They refrained from harsh punishments in target-failures and preferred to tolerate the failures. An Indonesian businessman in China described his attitude in accepting target failures below: Yes, it is being discussed in the monthly meeting. . . what is the cause of failure and what needs to be done so that it will be achieved next year. . . And even when we haven’t reached the exact numbers, we still keep the target. It is to motivate them, that this company is improving, and people see this company is improving.

Fig. 2. Intercultural competence of Indonesians in Asian work groups.

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

93

A lenient attitude towards failure was perceived as a sign of weak leadership by Chinese co-workers. The Chinese expect their leaders to be strong as indicated by firm control and sanctions (Chao & Yueh, 2008; Li, Tsui, & Weldon, 2000). Conversely, Indonesian co-workers described their Chinese sojourners as “too demanding”, “too controlling”, and complained about their dissatisfactory working relationships. Indonesian responses indicated a preference for a more consultative leadership style (Brandt, 1997; Taormina & Salvarajah, 2005). We also identified that a cultural overlap had occurred (Thomas, 2003) in which individuals valued or evaluated others based on their own cultural parameters, thereby ignoring cultural relativism (Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen, 2002; Pedersen, 1994). Consequently, other cultures placed less value upon culture-specific virtues. Specifically, a behavior that is judged as adequate in one context may not be judged so in another (Spitzberg, 2000). Indonesian sojourners used a consultative leadership style by encouraging empowerment, strong readiness for consultative behavior and by providing support. They mentioned numerous situations in which they had involved their local co-workers in their decision-making process. These acts seemed to be highly appreciated by the Chinese co-workers who repeatedly mentioned their managers’ openness, as following response indicates: They have two advantages: one is they dare to delegate and empower, the other is that they will discuss with you about other possible solutions after you finish the job (Chinese subordinate) They [Indonesian leaders] will discuss with subordinates, such as a line manager; basically, they won’t make decisions without notice (Chinese subordinate) Indonesian sojourners perceived their leadership roles as “the Head of the Family,” whose ultimate responsibility was to provide direction, nurture, and support. In most situations, Indonesian sojourners presented calm behaviors (alus) such as a controlled temper, peaceful actions, and the readiness to provide support. Strong control and strict discipline were perceived as signs of mistrust and was therefore avoided. In this sense, this style resembles the people-oriented leadership styles frequently discussed in leadership studies (e.g., Yukl, 2006) with the paternalistic touch that is prevalent in non-western organizations (Pellegrini & Scandura, 2008). This paternalistic style has been recognized as bapakism a typical Indonesian leadership characteristic (Brandt, 1997). In bapakism, a leader is a paternalistic role model who places emphasis on noble values such as honesty, responsibility, caring, and forgiving. Power is recognized, yet it must be displayed in a smooth and delicate manner (alus). Although this style is strongly top–down, Indonesian paternalism differs from an autocratic leadership because it only functions with high acceptance from followers. The Chinese and Singaporean co-workers mentioned several valuable points (valued business relationship). Chinese agility across multiple challenges was identified as their most admirable characteristic. This value also has been repeatedly mentioned in previous research on Chinese working values (Li & Madsen, 2009; Wang, Zhang, & Goodfellow, 2003). The importance of face in building credibility was also mentioned, which clearly indicates the strong role of mian-zi in Chinese social behavior (Ting-Toomey & Kurogi, 1998). A top Indonesian manager shared that he let his Chinese staff create the first presentation to an important client as an act of giving face; by doing so, he earned his staff’s trust. Singaporean partners were highly appreciated for their highly competitive nature, which is related strongly to the kiasu attitude (Kirby & Ross, 2007). Indonesians shared two commonalities with Singaporeans and Chinese regarding their business relationships. First, they admired their technical expertise; secondly, they found that building trust was crucial. When you work with the Chinese, if you can gain their trust, they will protect you in whatever way (Indonesian sojourner). Low loyalty is closely linked to leadership problems because you cannot let [a disloyal employee] trust you and follow your direction (Chinese subordinates). The trust building process has been studied in organizational contexts, and the results suggest that trust serves as strong capital for organizational effectiveness (Kramer & Tyler, 1996). This concept plays an important role in Chinese business networks (Guanxi) with close-knit relationships that have high mutual understanding (Jacobs, 1979) and lead to powerful connections (Hackley & Dong, 2001). Chinese business people invest time and effort in trust building while developing Guanxi (Dunfee & Warren, 2001; Park, 2001), and they expect the same from their business partners. 4.1.2. Personable mediator The competence of personable mediator was indicated by attitudes and behaviors with strong relationship-orientation actions. Furthermore, it was displayed by warm and sincere behaviors, a willingness to share and understand others, and the readiness to respect others. Respectful behavior (hormat) is a strong virtue in Indonesian interpersonal relationships that is displayed in acts of appreciating others and face-saving behaviors. In Indonesian hierarchical society, the act of respect is expressed with reference to both the self and others’ roles in specific contexts. Consequently, expressing hormat involves sensitivity, which results in becoming an important behavioral reference for society (Magnis-Suseno, 1996). Asian co-workers perceived Indonesians as skillful at controlling their negative emotions in such a way that they would usually present themselves as calm and peaceful; moreover, they seemed less likely to lose their temper. The following responses from a Chinese subordinate and an Indonesian CEO, respectively, confirmed this competence: Basically, they (Indonesians) seldom become angry even when we confronted with serious problems (Chinese subordinate)

94

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

I think we don’t normally raise our voice. We don’t scream. It is hard (for them) to accept that only when (we are) extremely, extremely, extremely angry, do we raise our voice (Indonesian CEO) The strong affective nature of Indonesian ICS that leads to several ICS dimensions is reflected in their strong focus to manage emotions to assess situations and convey meanings (Panggabean, 2004a; 2004b). The affective nature manifests in intuitive sense to create and maintain group harmony, in observant, distanced, and initial cautiousness in acquiring suitable implicit communications (Panggabean & Suryani, 2008). Controlled emotional expressions and calm behaviors are nurtured in Indonesian culture as indicators of the refined rasa (Geertz, 1964). Direct conflicts, strong emotional expressions, and straightforward manners when conveying messages (as opposed to speaking softly, acting tenderly (alus), and using indirect communications) risk harmony, and are therefore shunned (Geertz, 1964; Magnis-Suseno, 1996).

4.1.3. Climate management Indonesian sojourners believed that a positive atmosphere at work is a key factor in improving performance. This belief developed into the strongest point of Indonesian leadership style. Chinese co-workers highly appreciated the attempts to create and manage a positive working climate. In general, Chinese co-workers’ positive comments on Indonesian leadership focused on their climate-management skills. Creating a cohesive team, maintaining good relationships, and caring about one’s co-workers achieved a positive working climate. In this sense, foreign co-workers perceived the Indonesian working climate as comfortable and characterized by casual interactions and an absence of strict rules. We also considered the relative meanings of cultural concepts. These three Asian cultures emphasize good relationships; however, they perceive them differently. Chinese and Singaporean cultures view guanxi as a means to build trust that focuses on instrumental aspect of relationships (Dunfee & Warren, 2001). On the other hand, the Indonesian concept of harmony views relationships as the ultimate goal and the purpose of any social behavior (Magnis-Suseno, 1996; Mulder, 2001). These contrasting views on the same core cultural concept might lead to intergroup stereotypes as one Chinese sojourner in Indonesia admitted: I invite you for lunch today, most probably because I need you for something else. This is why Indonesians perceive Chinese as calculative-manipulative in nature. This result shows that Indonesian leaders shared a climate of management with other Asian leaders. The strong leadership focus of helping behaviors and satisfying interpersonal relationships, termed the “humane style,” was found to be the most expected and practiced approach in Southern Asia (i.e., Indonesia, India, the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, and Iran; House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, Gupta 2004); however, Taormina and Salvarajah (2005) suggested that it is more frequently practiced by Indonesian leaders compared with the those of other ASEAN founder countries (i.e., Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and the Philippines). Indonesians consistently favored this style in both domestic and international contexts (Panggabean, 2004b; Sihaloho, 2008). Kekeluargaan (family-like) is a specific approach used to develop a satisfying climate in which staff members are treated as family members. Almost all Indonesian sojourners mentioned that they intentionally apply kekeluargaan. This approach covers acts such as trust, unconditional acceptance and personal care. Personal care refers to the acts of investing time and effort in knowing one’s co-workers’ families, treating co-workers as close relatives, and displaying caring behaviors for them. Unconditional acceptance is associated with forgiving mistakes and having a high tolerance for target failures. This attitude was not common in Chinese co-workers who were more accustomed to failure sanctions as an indication of a strong leadership (Chao & Yueh, 2008; Li, Tsui, & Weldon, 2000). A highly ranked Indonesian officer at a state-owned company explained kekeluargaan: I run this company as if it were a family. I am the head of the family. I take care of them (employee). If they are ill, I need to know why. I took them and their family for a company trip. . .But they must not deceive me, they do not need to do that as they can talk about everything to me. If they need to come late (for work) or do not meet their targets, just come and tell me. It is very comfortable and enjoyable for me to manage the company this way..” Similar views of the family as a model for an organization and authority figures as fathers are mentioned in Confucian teachings that discuss interpersonal trust factors and conflicts in Chinese organizational contexts (Tan & Chee, 2005; Yan & Sorenson, 2004). Nevertheless, the perceived meanings of these symbols seem to be different for Indonesians compared with Chinese because these cultures view the role of the father differently. As much as co-workers appreciated it, Indonesian harmony is perceived as more favorable in Chinese compared with Singaporeans. In general, the Chinese co-workers’ positive comments regarding Indonesian leadership focused on their climate management skills. However, the Singaporean co-workers were more critical of Indonesians’ high tolerance for failure and tended to associate this attitude with a standard of mediocrity. The following comment from a Singaporean expatriate exemplifies this view: The problem is that the perception of quality, the understanding of quality in everything, in general.. it’s not that good. They (Indonesian co-workers) accept mediocrity; mediocrity is okay for them. The quality standard is low

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

95

4.1.4. Diversity exposure: Indonesian multiculturalism Diversity exposure was initially included as a part of the personable mediator competence; however, we decided to discuss it separately due to its important role. This competence is displayed in mindsets, attitudes, the readiness to adjust to local cultures and the actions of being aware of and accepting cultural differences. Indonesian sojourners and their local coworkers strongly accentuated this competence. Indonesian respondents viewed cultural differences to be inherently natural in their team members and were the most likely to accept it. Furthermore, their ability to manage cultural differences in an international context was perceived as important to their working performance. A few Indonesian sojourners shared this awareness of national/cultural differences by identifying in-group/out-group fair treatment as crucial for the Chinese workers; hence, they tried to manage this issue delicately. Responses of cultural difference recognition and understanding were frequent among Indonesian respondents as the following example shows: We have to really understand their character, not only the Chinese character as a whole but also as an individual, because they have different characters in different provinces The culture is different so we cannot force [our own culture] Accordingly, Indonesian respondents expected similar treatment from their foreign co-workers, which did not happen in many cases. Coming from a similarly multicultural society, the Singaporeans were more aware of Indonesian diversity than the Chinese; however, they did not recognize it at the same level that the Indonesians did, nor did they regard diversity as a significant aspect of teamwork. Chinese respondents were the least aware of cultural differences; yet, those who recognized them displayed respectful behavior toward Indonesian cultures and religions. Multicultural awareness was mentioned as an important ICS dimension in previous work on Indonesian ICS (Panggabean & Suryani, 2008). An initial readiness to accept and recognize cultural differences as well as a high ability for cultural difference discrimination served as one of the key competences of the Indonesian diversity management style. The profiles of Indonesian ICS from various target groups presented this ICS dimension as the second most practiced by Indonesian, in terms of both domestic and international diversity (Panggabean & Suryani, 2008; Sihaloho, 2008). This fact suggests that cultural contexts influence cognitive schemes with regard to how they provide a mental orientation to direct thoughts, emotions, and actions (Martin & Thomas, 2002; Thomas, 2003). Moreover, this result shows that cultural differences are a salient category for Indonesians to differentiate in-group members from out-group members. Consequently, Indonesian respondents were more likely to consider cultural differences in their actions compared with their foreign co-workers. This study showed that Indonesian leaders performed in-group/out-group fair treatment more readily than the leaders of other nationalities„ and the Indonesian staff workers strongly expected fair treatment from their supervisors. 4.2. RQ2: What were the challenges and the potential synergy for Indonesian multinational workgroups? 4.2.1. Meaning of ‘work’ Conflicting basic perspective on the meaning of ‘work’ in life emerged as a serious challenge in Indonesian-Chinese workgroups. The Chinese respondents perceived work as the utmost importance of life whereas the Indonesians tended to put emphasis on the harmonious balance between work and life in which work is but one aspect of life among others (e.g., family, religious life). The two perspectives lead to different values on working performances. The Chinese highly valued hardworking, agility and endurance whereas the Indonesian appreciated comfort and enjoyment in working as can be seen by two responses below. The Chinese [individual] has to sacrifice a lot for his career, even sacrifice his family, his personal time, just in order to finish all tasks (Indonesian co-worker on his Chinese boss) His (Indonesian’s) life is diverse and work is only one small part of it. He has children, family and friends. It is ok that his working performance is not excellent or his salary is low, he still can enjoy time with family (Chinese boss on his Indonesian co-worker) Typical challenges between these groups included negative stereotypes regarding work ethics: the Chinese complained about their Indonesian co-workers’ work pace and effort, whereas Indonesians complained about their stressful work life due to continuous overtime. These intergroup stereotypes reflect the meaning of work from each cultural perspective. Indonesian social harmony suggests that one should pursue a balanced life in which work and other life demands (e.g., family and religious obligations) are treated as equally important (Magnis-Suseno, 1996). On the other hand, the Chinese view work as a central aspect of life (Li & Madsen, 2009; Westwood & Lok, 2003; Wong, 2007). The meaning of life is work success. Moreover, work serves as a means for upward mobility and identity pursuit (biao xian zhi ji; Wong, 2007). These conflicting cultural values evidently contributed to the problematic relationships in both groups. 4.2.2. Communication Work communication was a great challenge for both Indonesian-Chinese and Indonesian-Singapore workgroups. Language barriers were apparent in both workgroups, yet these barriers had different implications. A lack of knowledge of Mandarin among Indonesians resulted in communication hurdles and problems in building group trust. Indonesian

96

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

respondents noted that language served as a way to increase group acceptance among their Chinese co-workers. One Indonesian co-worker shared: (The) Chinese like it when Indonesians (co-workers) can speak their language. It helps to simplify communication because not all senior managers in China can speak English. Another communication challenge is finding an adequate level of directness. Although Indonesia and China are widely known to use implicit communication (Geertz, 1964; Magnis-Suseno, 1996; Yum, 1988), finding the level of implicit communication that is accepted by these cultures is challenging. A Chinese co-worker admitted that it is difficult to convey dissatisfaction to an Indonesian superordinate because the latter will not accept the message in a straightforward manner; yet, he might not understand it if conveyed implicitly. Language differences have been recognized as one of the most crucial issues in international workgroups; therefore, host country language proficiency is recognized as one of the most important intercultural competences (Adler, 2008; Hammer, 1989; Martin & Thomas, 2002; Vulpe et al., 2001). Language problems cover not only structural aspects such as grammar and vocabulary but also meaning and style. The indirect communication style is a typically problematic area for Indonesians in international workgroups (Fremerey & Panggabean, 2004; Tjitra, 2001) and can lead to friction and conflict. McGrath, Berdahl, and Arrow (1995) argued that language superiority creates an asymmetric power structure in international teams, which plays a role in competition. Language superiority also arose as a problem for Indonesian-Singaporean work groups. Singaporean respondents were more fluent in English than Indonesians, and they were perceived by their Indonesian co-workers as having a superior position. Interestingly, Indonesian co-workers exclusively viewed language as power. Very few Singaporean sojourners mentioned this issue as a problematic area with regard to the Indonesians. This finding might reflect Indonesians’ inferior roles in the work groups. To overcome these communication barriers, our respondents commonly agreed that proficiency in the language of one’s’ co-workers is required. Applying information communication technology (ICT) channels evidently increases communication quality because they allow for longer response times and are less personal; thus, they are more likely to create self-confident and equality. 4.2.3. The perception of competition versus harmony Indonesian co-workers held the strong impression that Singaporeans have a competitive nature. Indonesians expressed this characteristic with both admiration and resentment. On one hand, Indonesian co-workers highly admired Singaporeans’ competitive nature because this obvious persistency allowed them to go beyond their comfort zones and resulted in a willingness to learn new things. On the other hand, this competitive nature engenders perceptions of secretive acts, “sore loser” reactions, and destructive rivalries. A strong drive to excel in every way via competition and a fear of losing (kiasu) is recognized as a prominent cultural aspect of Singapore (Ho, Ang, Loh, & Ng, 1998; Kirby & Ross, 2007). A Singaporean respondent shared her views on kiasu below: In Singapore, there is a slogan called “kiasu”. That means we are too afraid to lose. We are too afraid of risk. So in everything we do we want to make sure that everything is right, even if I have to look at it over and over again. . . if you are not the best, then there may not be a chance for you. Highly competitive situations were uncomfortable and intolerable for the Indonesians who placed heavy emphasis on social harmony and good relationships. On a positive note, kiasu also refers to a desire for excellence to ensure success (Kirby & Ross, 2007). Kiasu demands a level of excellence, which was the ultimate target of the Singaporean respondents; however, Indonesians did not expect this same level of work quality. These conflicting expectations of quality made target accomplishments a challenging issue for Indonesian-Singapore workgroups. To overcome the issue, most Singaporean sojourners admitted that they had to apply strict mentoring and coaching to maintain a quality of excellence while improving the quality standard of their Indonesian staff. Indonesian respondents highly appreciated their Singaporean supervisors’ skills and willingness to develop others, and Singaporeans highly valued Indonesians’ willingness to learn new things. 5. Conclusions The present study developed a preliminary model of Indonesian intercultural competences based on the integrative perspectives of sojourners and co-workers. Moreover, it highlights the challenges to and potentials of synergy among Asians in international contexts. This study contributes to the small body of research on the intercultural competences and workplace effectiveness of Asians. In particular, this study makes a valuable contribution to the limited body of research on applications of Indonesian cultural concepts in global workplace behavior. Our results revealed that international Indonesians are highly skilled at developing and mediating interpersonal relationships; managing team diversity is critical in increasingly globalized workplaces. Although the present study acknowledged Indonesian strengths, it also identified critical challenges for Indonesian global leaders regarding task-oriented effectiveness (e.g., providing directions, initiating structures and developing discipline and endurance for target accomplishments). Additional areas of development for Indonesians to consider include the highly

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

97

valued behaviors of their foreign co-workers: strong discipline, agility, competitive natures and assertive communication styles. These results contribute to the development of programs that promote intercultural effectiveness among Indonesian, Chinese and Singaporean sojourners. A holistic approach is beneficial for Asian diversity mapping. Seemingly identical cultural concepts were perceived differently across the three cultures studied, which may result in cultural misunderstandings. For example, the Confucian concept of harmony that encourages convergent solutions to cultural differences to find common ground is different from the (Javanese) Indonesian concept of harmony that encourages social accord and balancing cultural differences. More importantly, a holistic approach allows for a better understanding of critical incidents and situations with regard to indigenous views. The present study has several limitations. First, Singaporean culture is underrepresented in this study due to its small sample size. To obtain a better picture of this culture, we are currently collecting data in Singapore. Second, this study is still preliminary with regard to theory building. The proposed model must be validated because the qualitative nature of the present study makes establishing causal relationships and patterns impossible. Because we are currently in the next phase of the study, we are beginning to confirm our model by conducting case studies of Indonesians to provide insight concerning their critical success factors in international contexts. Future research should use quantitative approaches for additional validation. An exploration of culture-specific values in Asia illuminates the investigation of these values’ relative meanings in work group situations. Future research should also explore the role of ethnicity in the intercultural competences of these three cultures, which is not accomplished in the present study. 6. Role of the funding source This work is based on the joint research project, Global Competence of Asian Leaders, between Zhejiang University, China and Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia. Human Capital Leadership Institute (HCLI), Singapore, provided funding support for data collection, and was involved in decisions regarding research dissemination (e.g., article publications and conferences). Acknowledgments We thank the Atma Jaya Learning Language Center for their comments and input regarding language refinement and Zheng Jiewei, B.Sc, MSc from Tjitra and Associates for her assistance in data collection and analysis.

References Adler, N. (2008). International dimensions of organizational behavior. Mason: Thomson South-Western. Albert, R. D. (1983). The intercultural sensitisizer of culture assimilator: a cognitive approach. In D. Landis, & R. S. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training: vol. II. Issues in training and methodology (pp. 186–217). New York: Pergamon Press. Anwar, I. (2011). Gambaran sumber stress akulturatif dan coping style pada tenaga kerja professional Indonesia di Singapura. (Acculturative stress factors and coping style of Indonesian professionals in Singapore). Master thesis, Fakultas Psikologi Unika Atma Jaya, Jakarta. Avolio, B., & Ong, P. (2010). Accelerating the growth of the Asian leaders. Retrieved from http://www.singaporehcsummit.com/files/Research/Resource Asian Leadership Report Gallup.pdf. Bennett, M. J. (1993). Toward ethno relativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (pp. 1–51). Yarmouth: Intercultural Press. Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (2002). Cross-cultural psychology: research and application. Cambridge: University Press. Bhawuk, D. P. S., & Brislin, R. (1992). The Measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 413–436. Bilateral relations between Indonesia and Singapore (2007). Retrieved from http://www.kbrisingapura/bilateral investment.php?lang=eng. Bond, M. H., & Hwang, K. K. (1986). The social psychology of Chinese people. In M. H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 213–266). Hong Kong: Oxford University Press. Brandt, T. (1997). Kunci budaya’ business in Indonesia: the cultural key to success. Goasia Verlag: Bad Oldesloe. Chao, C. C., & Yueh, T. L. (2008). Leadership and management in China: philosophies, theories and practices. London: Cambridge University Press. Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1998). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 1, 1–6. Cui, G., & Van den Berg, S. (1991). Testing the construct validity of intercultural effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 227–241. Dibanding mitra ASEAN Lain, Hubungan dengan Tiongkok paling efisien. (In comparison to other ASEAN partner, relation with China is the most efficient). (2011). Retrieved from http://www.cic.mofcom.gov.cn/ciweb/cci/info/Article.jsp?a no=282970&col no=509. Dinges, N. (1983). Intercultural competence. In D. Landis, & R. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training: Vol. I. Issues in theory and design (pp. 176–202). New York: Pergamon Press. Dinges, N., & Baldwin, K. (1996). Intercultural competence: a research perspective. In D. Landis, & R. Bhagat (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 106–123). London: Sage Publication. Dunfee, T. W., & Warren, D. E. (2001). Is Guanxi Ethical? A normative analysis of doing business in China. Journal of Business, 32, 191–204. Fremerey, M., & Panggabean, H. (2004). Between difference and synergy: cultural issues in an international research scheme. In G. Gerold, M. Fremerey, & E. Guharja (Eds.), Land use, nature conservation and the stability of rainforest margins in Southeast Asia (pp. 523–532). Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. Geertz, C. (1964). The religion of Java. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Gunawan. (2011). (February 14). Kekerasan merusak demokrasi. (Violence destroys democracy). Kompas, 1. Hackley, C. A., & Dong, Q. W. (2001). American public relations networking encounters China’s Guanxi. Public Relations Quarterly, 46, 16–19.

98

H. Panggabean et al. / International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37 (2013) 86–98

Hammer, M. (1989). Intercultural communication competence. In Asante, & Gudykunst (Eds.), Handbook of international and intercultural communication (pp. 247–274). Newbury Park: Sage Publication. Ho, J. T., Ang, C. E., Loh, J., & Ng, I. (1998). A preliminary study of kiasu behaviour – is it unique to Singapore? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 13(5 (6)), 359–371. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683949810220015 Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: software of the minds. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hoopes, D. S. (1980). Intercultural communication concepts and the psychology of intercultural experience. In M. D. Pusch (Ed.), Multicultural education: a cross-cultural training approach (pp. 10–38). Yarmouth: Intercultural Press Inc. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Hwang, A., Ang, S., & Fransesco, A. M. (2002). The silent Chinese: the influence of face and kiasuism on student feedback-seeking behavior. Journal of Management Education, 26, 70–98. Retrieved from http://www.ibam.com/pubs/jbam/articles/vol11/no3/3 Kirby 5 2010.pdf Hwang, K. K. (2001). The deep structure of Confucianism: a social psychological approach. Asian Philosophy, 11, 179–204. Jacobs, J. B. (1979). A preliminary model of particularistic ties in Chinese political alliances: kan-chi’ing and kuan-hsi in a rural Taiwanese township. The China Quarterly, 79, 237–273. Kealey, D., & Ruben, B. (1983). Cross-cultural personnel selection criteria, issues, and methods. In D. Landis, & R. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training: vol. I. Issues in theory and design (pp. 155–175). New York: Pergamon Press. Kirby, E. G., & Ross, J. K., III. (2007). Kiasu tendency and tactics: a study of their impact on task performance. Texas: Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management-Texas State University. Retrieved from http://www.ibam.com/pubs/jbam/articles/vol8/no2/JBAM 8 2 2.pdf. Kramer, R. M., & Tyler, T. R. (1996). Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research. New Delhi: Sage Publishing. Latif, M. (2011). Studi ke luar negeri: ternyata, pilihan utama adalah Australia. (Studying abroad, it turns out that Australia is the number one choice). Retrieved from http://edukasi.kompas.com/. Leung, K., Koch, P. T., & Lu, L. (2002). A dualistic model of harmony and is implications for conflict management in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 19, 201–220. Li, J. T., Tsui, A., & Weldon, E. (2000). Management and organizations in the Chinese context. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Li, J., & Madsen, J. (2009). Chinese workers’ work ethic in reformed state-owned enterprises: implications for HRD. Human Resource Development International, 12, 171–188. Magnis-Suseno, F. (1996). Etika Jawa: Sebuah analisa falsafi tentang kebijaksanaan hidup Jawa. (Javanese Ethics: a philosophical analysis of Javanese life wisdom). Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Martin, J. (1993). Intercultural communication competence: a review. In R. L. Wiseman, & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence (pp. 245–260). USA: Sage Publication. Martin, M., & Thomas, A. (2002). Beruflich in Indonesien: Trainingsprogramm fuer Manager. In Fach-und Fuehrungskraefte (Working in Indonesia: Training program for manager and practitioner). Goettingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. McGrath, J. E., Berdahl, J. L., & Arrow, H. (1995). Trait expectations, culture and clout: the dynamics of diversity in workgroups. In E. Jackon, & M. N. Ruderman (Eds.), Diversity in workteams (pp. 17–45). Washington: American Psychological Association. Mulder, N. (2001). Mistisisme Jawa: Ideologi di Indonesia (Javanese Mysticism. An ideology in Indonesia). Yogyakarta: LKIS. Nisbett, R., Peng, K. P., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291–310. Panggabean, H. (2004a). Characteristics of intercultural sensitivity in Indonesian-German Work Groups. Jakarta: PT Fatoklesar. Panggabean, H. (2004b). Characteristics of Indonesian intercultural sensitivity in multicultural and international work groups. In B. Setiadi, A. Supratiknya, W. Looner, & Y. Poortinga (Eds.), Ongoing themes in psychology and culture. Selected papers from the 16th Congress of International Association of Cross-cultural psychology (pp. 565–595). Yogyakarta: IACCP. Panggabean, H., & Suryani, A. (2008). Penyusunan alat ukur model perkembangan intercultural sensitivity Indonesia dan China (Development of Indonesian and Chinese intercultural sensitivity models). In Proceedings of Atma Jaya Catholic University Research Competition. Jakarta: Lembaga Penelitian & Pengabdian Masyarakat Unika Atma Jaya. Park, S. H. (2001). Guanxi and organizational dynamics: organizational networking in Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 455–477. Pedersen, P. (1994). A handbook for developing multicultural awareness. Alexandria: American Counseling Association. Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: a review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 34(3), 566–593. Ruben, D. B., & Kealey, D. J. (1979). Behavioral assessment of communication competency and the prediction of cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3, 15–47. Sihaloho, D. (2008). Profil intercultural sensitivity Indonesia pada perawat Indonesia di Indonesia dan Belanda (Profiles of Indonesian ICS of Indonesian nurses in Jakarta and the Netherland). Bachelor thesis, Fakultas Psikologi Unika Atma Jaya, Jakarta. Spitzberg, B. (2000). A model of intercultural communication competence retrieved from http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu. Strauss, A., & Corbin, L. J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage Publication. Tan, H. H., & Chee, D. (2005). Understanding interpersonal trust in a Confucian-influenced society: an exploratory study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 5(2), 197–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1470595805054493 Taormina, R. J., & Salvarajah, C. (2005). Perception of leadership excellence in ASEAN nations. Leadership, 1, 299–322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1742715005054439 Thomas, A. (2003). Theoretische Grundlagen interkultureller Kommunikation und Kooperation (Basic theories of intercultural communication and cooperation). In E. Thomas, E. Kinast, & S. Schroll-Machl (Eds.), Handbuch Interkulturelle Kommunikation: Band 1. Grundlagen und Praxisfelder, [Handbook of intercultural communication, vol. 1, Basic and fields of application (pp. 204–216). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Ting-Toomey, S., & Kurogi, A. (1998). Facework competence in intercultural conflict: an updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 22(2), 187–225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(98)00004-2 Tjitra, H. W. (2001). Intercultural synergy: an Asian perspective. In R. D. Reineke, & C. Fussinger (Eds.), Intercultural management: Conception, consulting, training (pp. 147–167). Wiesbaden: Gabler (in German). Triandis, H. C. (1975). Culture training, cognitive complexity and interpersonal attitudes. In R. Brislin, S. Bochner, & W. Lonner (Eds.), Cross-cultural perspectives on learning (pp. 237–259). Beverly Hills and New York: Sage and Wiley/Halstead. Vulpe, T., Kealey, D., Protheroe, D., & MacDonald, D. (2001). A profile of the interculturally effective person (2nd ed.). Centre of Intercultural Training, Canada: Canadian Foreign Service Institute. Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock. East Sussex: Routledge. Wang, Y., Zhang, K. S., & Goodfellow, B. (2003). China business culture: strategies for success. Singapore: Talisman Press. Westwood, R., & Lok, P. (2003). The meaning of work in Chinese contexts. A comparative study. International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management, 3(2), 139–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/14705958030032001 Wong, G. (2007). Meaning of work among young graduates in urban China. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong. Retrieved from http://hub.hku.hk/handle/10722/52683 Yan, J., & Sorenson, R. L. (2004). The influence of Confucian ideology on conflict in Chinese family business. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 4(1), 5–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1470595804041521 Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Yum, J. O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 78–88.