Background and Rationale
International assignments (IAs) are an integral part of global staffing activities in multinational enterprises (MNE) due to pressures firms are confronted with to manage complex foreign operations (Brewster et al., 2014). In recent times the rise of short-term international assignments (SIAs) has occurred, often replacing, and/or working, alongside traditional long-term IAs. SIAs are non-traditional types of assignments and are growing more significant largely due to the risks associated with traditional expatriation, such as family problems, candidates’ unwillingness to relocate and high company costs (Scullion et al., 2007).
SIAs may face many of the same challenges as traditional expatriates such as adjustment issues, social separation and mental/physical anxiety (Suutari et al., 2013). SIAs also come with their own specific challenges, including increased stress due to time constraints, issues of family separation and poor relationships with local colleagues (Tahvanainen et al. 2005). It is unclear whether HRM practices used for long-term assignments are relevant for SIAs, but it would appear there are idiosyncrasies that are likely to mean a need for focused policies.
We know from the traditional expatriation literature that insufficient organisational support is a major cause for assignment failure (Cole and Nesbeth, 2014) and cross-cultural training (CCT) constitutes an essential aspect of such organisational support (Black and Mendenhall, 1990). CCT involves a company’s formal and informal effort to improve the participants’ intercultural competence (Cardel Gertsen, 1990), pre- as well as post-departure. Despite this, the specific types of CCT most beneficial to SIAs, and how these differ from traditional expatriate assignments, are largely underexplored (Forster, 2000; Littrell et al., 2006). As such our study aims to explore how cross-cultural training is developed for SIAs and the perceptions of utility and effectiveness of it?
Method, Findings and Contribution
We employed a qualitative study consisting of semi-structured interviews with 9 German SIAs. Interviews were between 30-40 minutes and conducted in German with 8 via Skype and 1 over the phone. Interviews were recorded, translated and transcribed with data analysis undertaken in English.
A significant contribution of our study lies in the development of a conceptual framework that identifies the various forms of CCT for managing SIAs. These forms of CCT consist of formal and informal training mechanisms in pre and post departure contexts. Our findings point to the significance of formal pre-departure training, though this appears quite limited in practice, but how this needs to be complemented by informal support pre- and post-departure in response to SIAs’ specific challenges. Formal post-departure training was non-existent in our sample.
Our study answers calls for a greater understanding of the particular support mechanisms organisations may develop in managing SIAs (Suutari et al., 2013). In so doing, we build on existing studies within expatriation and CCT (Tung, 1982; Cardel Gertsen, 1990) and apply these constructs to existing work on SIAs (Mayerhofer et al. 2004; Tahvanainen, et al. 2005). Thus, this research provides first insights in this area, emphasising the need to develop CCT programmes to the specific challenges associated with SIAs.
