Global Selection 149
CEO, an American CPO, and a Chinese CFO, and it will be listed
on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange’’ (p. 210).
Another reason to think hard about global selection processes
is that there are employees in MNCs who may be based locally
but act globally—that is, interact extensively (beyond just on the
phone) with other cultures in terms of both internal and external
clients. This may be, for example, the French national who is
responsible for the Southern Hemisphere of an energy company
and spends much of her time on the road. She will deal extensively
with Asians, South Americans, and Africans, including many of
the different cultures in those regions. Regardless of where she is
based, she will need to have experience with, and work well with,
many different nationalities.
Clearly, this will require significant travel. Indeed, Welch
and Worm (2006) indicate that the issue of IBTs (International
Business Travelers) has been under researched. They quote an
Australian executive as saying: ‘‘On average, I would go to Asia
for two weeks and come back, go to the U.S. for two weeks and
come back, go to Europe for two weeks and come back. And the
next time I went to Asia [I would] probably go to a different
part of it. I guess I was away—if you accumulated it—for 8 to
9 months of the year’’ (p. 283). Such a lifestyle will certainly
involve dealing with other nationalities and cultures on a regular,
if short-term, basis. One of the authors worked with a director
who manages a country in Asia by flying from the United States
every two weeks to spend two weeks ‘‘in country.’’ This went on
for years.
Aside from the IBTs, however, there are people in many, if not
most, MNCs, who travel routinely and are thus required to deal
with many different cultures. In regions like Asia where countries

the high costs of those types of postings. Moreover, he notes
that they are realizing that they don’t necessarily get better jobs
when they come home and often have trouble readjusting. In fact,
he says, the requirements for globe-trotting international man-
agers are so harsh that very few even have the psychological vigor
to deal with ‘‘the personal and professional disruption that reg-
ular international relocations would entail’’ (p. 138). The result
of all this, he claims, will be shorter postings, more videoconfer-
encing, and less need for the ‘‘old type of continual ‘hands-on’
assignments’’ (p. 138). Although the expats of the future will be
endangered, he holds, TNs are already so rare that they may not
even exist.
However, nine years after this study was published, the
numbers of expats are higher than ever and there is indeed
evidence that their presence is still required (Brookfield Global
Relocation Services, 2008). In Hong Kong, though the numbers
of expats dropped from a high of 9.6% of the total population
to 6.7% in 2001, they are again rising, reaching 7.1% in 2007
Global Selection 151
(Kingsbury, 2009). The dips in the early 2000s may reflect both
the economy at the time and the fact that ‘‘hardship postings’’
have decreased—companies are less willing to pay large amounts
for expats to move to countries that are no longer considered
difficult to live in, such as China (Brookfield, 2008). It is clear,
however, that the trend is toward more, rather than fewer expats.
In addition, indirect evidence for the growth in numbers of
TNs can be found in the observation that many people do not
do well when they return home (see Forster, 1994). This suggests
that staying abroad might be the antidote to the reverse culture
shock experienced by some expats. If they lack the challenge and

than one country or culture’’ (Briscoe & Shuler, p. 232). It should
be clear that TNs are also expatriates in the traditional sense, as
they live outside their home country. However, only a subset of
expatriates are TNs, as most expats go home after one overseas
assignment, whereas TNs go on to further overseas assignments,
possibly throughout their careers. Suutari (2003) notes that their
careers often involve short stays at home in between international
assignments and that these managers often were interested in
international careers from the early stages of their working lives.
Given these differences, global selection may be different from
the more straightforward expat selection. In the latter, a person
is selected from the home country to spend a limited time period
in the (single) host country (Caliguri, 2000) after which she is
expected to return to the home country. An employee is sent
abroad for a variety of reasons. Caliguri and Paul (2010) note
that this can be for: (1) filling a technical skill gap in the host
country, (2) development of high potentials where the goal is to
develop not only technical, but also intercultural and professional
competencies, and (3) strategic or executive assignments where
senior leaders are sent to the host country to either fill a functional
gap, such as running a joint venture, or to further develop them
as global leaders.
With these goals in mind, narrowing the field of candidates
for expat roles becomes relatively easy. For the first issue, all
technical experts in the parent company should be considered.
For the second and third reasons, the pool of candidates to choose
from should be fairly circumscribed—companies generally have
relatively few HIPOs and senior executives, as noted. For each
group, those who have no interest in going abroad can quickly
be weeded out. Once the pool is narrowed to a few candidates,

relationships between
HQ and other country
Understands worldwide
business environment from
a global perspective
Local
responsiveness
Expert on one culture Expert on various aspects
of many cultures
Transition and
adaptation
Works with people from
given foreign cultures
sequentially
Works with people from
many cultures
simultaneously
Cross-cultural
interaction
Adapts to living in a
foreign culture
Adapts to living in many
foreign cultures
Collaboration Uses cross-cultural
interaction skills when
on assignment
Uses cross-cultural skills on
a daily basis throughout his
career
Foreign

want to go abroad and whether they would be willing to brave
the challenges they would face; a more formal self-selection helps
those who do not have their minds made up.
Candidates for transnational positions would certainly have
to think about all the issues considered by an expat, such as the
impact of constant travel on their careers, their families, and their
post-work life. In addition, beyond what expats will have to face,
TNs will have to deal with a multitude of nationalities as they move
from country to country as noted above and must fit into each
country well enough to manage the locals (that is, host country
nationals) and expats (who may be from the same or different
countries from that of the TN). This would put additional strain
on the family as well as the person himself. For example, moving
between countries every few years makes it difficult for the children
to fit into schools (particularly when there is a language gap and
international schools are unavailable) and for the trailing spouse
Global Selection 155
who has to adjust the household to new cultural mores, possibly
while finding a job himself. In addition, if the TN has to travel
often from the host country, the comings and goings can upset
the rhythm of the family life.
When selecting TNs, instead of approaching it from the tradi-
tional HRM way of seeing who will ‘‘make it’’ over there without
failing and coming back early, it might be worthwhile to consider
who will bring the most value back. Cerdin and Bird (2008) out-
line three types of knowledge generated through international
careers: knowing how, whom, and why. Knowing why refers to
understanding the reasons the organization has made key moves
in the past (such as locating a factory in one country versus
another). Knowing how and knowing whom are both aspects of the

and strong language skills.
Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2008) review a number of
characteristics that have been researched regarding success
of expats. These include the Big Five factors of personality,
views of the host country managers, and general mental ability
(GMA). The latter is expected to be more important as job
complexity increases—as an expat position is likely to be much
more complex in terms of the variables to consider for success
than a similar domestic position. For a TN, the complexity should
be greater, given the higher number of cultures to navigate, so it
is likely that TNs will need a higher level of GMA as well.
Selecting Transnationals
In terms of the processes needed to select TNs, several consid-
erations must be noted. First, when considering selection for a
particular role, considerations of what special skills that role might
entail should be investigated. This can be done through a job anal-
ysis or competency modeling process. Job analysis is defined by
Gatewood and Feild (2001) as ‘‘a purposeful, systematic process
for collecting information on the important work-related aspects
of a job’’ (p. 269). It should be noted that one of the authors’
experience in Asia is that very few companies do job analyses in the
region. The process is either not understood, not valued, or seen
as taking far too long for jobs that may change at any moment.
Currently even in countries where the utility of job analysis as it
is now practiced is being questioned, the issues are around the
changing nature of jobs and the increasing need for aspects such
as teamwork or personality variables (Gatewood & Feild, 2001). It
is recognized that for lower-level jobs such as manufacturing line
positions, job analysis may be relevant. But as one goes up the
managerial ladder, jobs are harder to quantify in job analysis terms

outside contractors from different regions to assist with global
assessment processes as a way to show their employees that there
is at least an awareness of the need to represent different cultural
groups (J. Stempfle, personal communication, August 6, 2009). In
any case, the assessors must be able to interpret behaviors based
on cultural context and ensure that those selected will be able to
successfully deal with people in a number of different cultures.
Third, the tools must be cross-culturally relevant and fair
(Sparrow et al., 2004). The following section will focus on develop-
ing and using tools that fairly assess competencies across cultures.
Designing Fair Tools—Testing
Although there are a variety of activities that can be used to assess
and select TN candidates, from sending them to the host country
158 Going Global
to doing a clinical assessment, to talking with their families (see
Vance and Paik, 2006; Briscoe and Schuler, 2004; Perkins and
Shortland, 2006), we will focus here on two methods of selection,
standardized testing and assessment centers. The reasons for this
are twofold: both are used extensively as part of international
human resource consulting firm selection systems, and each has
been shown to be valid in domestic contexts through voluminous
research over the years.
Testing, first of all, is used widely as a selection method. As
Oakland (2004) puts it: ‘‘Test use is universal. Tests are used in
virtually every country, with newborns through the elderly ’’
(p. 157). Oakland estimates there are some 5,000 standardized
tests in use today.
There have long been guidelines for creating and using tests,
with the bar being set by the standards for educational and psy-
chological testing, created by the American Educational Research

of the pitfalls he faces. The following passage is based on this
discussion (S. Keely, personal communication, March 22, 2009).
Typically the first step in developing a new test is to determine
the goal. Often that will be to develop a test for an MNC that
wants to select 20 entry-level managers in 14 different countries.
These managers should be able to eventually advance in the
company, possibly even out of the country, so they should be
relatively equivalent to each other when selected. Making the test
equivalent across cultures is the challenge, so the following steps
should be considered:
1. Write the test in English (the MNC is based in an English-
speaking country, but as English is spoken by more managers
across the world than any other language, this is the norm
anyway).
2. Translate the test into the local languages for each country,
verbatim.
3. Revise the test to fit the local culture with the aid of an HR profes-
sional and a psychologist from that culture. Since there are many
differences between languages and cultures, there are always
problems here. First, some terms do not exist in some languages.
Even figuring out the Mandarin characters for words like ‘‘exec-
utive coaching’’ was difficult a few years ago when the term was
not common. Also in China, mentioning a personal checking
account in a numerical test will confuse people, so this terminol-
ogy must be avoided. Second, some concepts are simply under-
stood differently across cultures. For example, there is no such
thing as a ‘‘good loser’’ in Italian—a loser is a loser. Thus, a scale
measuring competitiveness may need revision to reflect that.
4. Back-translate the test. Using a bilingual (and ideally bicultural)
translator, translate the test back into English. This is best done

able number for selection purposes.
These steps are summarized in Table 6.2.
Some of the problems faced when going through this process
include:
1. Technical problems—the script requires special programming
on the computer (for example, it is read up and down versus
side to side, or right to left, or it is created in characters or
script different from those of English).
2. Equivalence in dialects—is the MNC interested in Central
American Spanish or Spanish spoken in Spain? Kuwaiti or Saudi
Arabian Arabic? Traditional or Simplified Chinese characters?
Each dialect requires a different norm to be created as it cannot
be said that the speakers of that language are equivalent across
countries.
Global Selection 161
Table 6.2. Steps for Developing Culturally Valid, Standardized
Selection Tests.
#Step Notes
1 Write the test in English This is the global language of business
2 Translate the test into the
local language verbatim
Usually with the help of a local HR
professional or translation vendor
3 Revise the test to fit the
local culture
Usually with the help of a local HR
professional or psychology professor
4 Back translate the test Using a (different) local HR
professional or psychology professor
5 Obtain local norms for the

7 countries that were not represented may contain some of the
best candidates—they just did not do as well on the tests. Though
there is no easy answer on how to address this problem, another
tool that may help is assessment centers.
Designing Fair Tools—Assessment Centers, Context
and Culture
As testing is generally used for lower-level managers or entry-level
candidates, other tools are generally used for more senior can-
didates. Or, when testing is used, it is part of a larger process—
often an assessment center. An assessment center comprises
a number of different activities, usually including testing, an
interview, and various simulations. The simulations may include a
meeting with a direct report, a work group, a customer, or a boss,
along with an ‘‘inbox’’ or series of e-mails and memos to deal
with as part of a case study (Fisher, Schoenfeldt, & Shaw, 2003;
Gatewood & Feild, 2005).
The issues with transporting an assessment center across cul-
tural lines, largely involve the cueing for behaviors that either do
not exist in the second culture or behaviors that do exist, but
are evinced differently, as alluded to in the section above. For
instance, expecting negative feedback in a direct report meeting
in a Western, individualistic society is not out of the ordinary. An
effective manager in that scenario will give the negative feedback,
even if it is the first time she has met her ‘‘subordinate.’’ If she
shies away from doing that, it likely indicates a lack of managerial
skills. But to expect the same behavior in an Asian context, such
as in China, is to look for behavior that does not often appear
in real life. One of the authors has gotten consistent feedback
while assessing hundreds of managers in Greater China that the
first few times one meets a direct report (or just about anyone

will have problems even finishing it. Again, this results in less
data available for assessment and generally a lower score on the
exercise. And even if he does finish, the recommended actions
which may work in an Asian culture may not make sense (and
therefore receive lower ratings) to Western raters. It should be
noted that in some cases, where it is obvious that the candidate had
problems with the language, the IB can be judged on the quality
ofworkdone,evenifitisasmallamount.Thiscansomewhat
mitigate the issue of the lack of data.
The interview may be problematic as well. Assuming the lan-
guage ability of the candidate is good enough to answer the
questions, an unfamiliarity with the process may hinder him from
giving useful answers to behavioral questions. This will likely disap-
pear as the use of behavioral interviews becomes more widespread.
However, the problem around appropriate behaviors for the cul-
ture may still remain; because the questions are written and scored
164 Going Global
by Westerners, behaviors that are proper in the local culture may
be scored lower than more Western-appropriate ones.
Other cultural issues may also have a negative impact on the
assessment center process. One is power distance(Hofstede, 2004)
which can be roughly thought of as the amount of hierarchy in a
cultural group. In cultures where there is a high power distance,
one might find that candidates are especially hard on their direct
reports and more subservient to their superiors. This will obviously
result in skewed findings in direct report meetings, IBs, and boss
meetings when compared to Western standards.
Context and culture. When companies enter emerging markets,
often local selection systems based on research studies are not
readily available. One possible reason for a lack of research-

This type of tribal loyalty extends into major corporations
as well, including a well-known Middle Eastern energy company
where two of the authors consulted. There, a multiyear attempt
to replace tribal and familial nepotism with a meritocracy has
been undertaken. Previously workers rose within the organization
based on a combination of personal influence and the influence
of individuals to whom they were related directly or via tribal
affiliation.Replacing such a systemwith tests and othermeasures of
merit isno smalltask. Administrators are literallyasking individuals
to change cultural norms and expectations while they are at work,
then return to them when they make their way home for the
night. Clearly this effort can impact interpersonal relationships
after work, which is a large obstacle to success in the project.
Another aspect of culture which may impact selection is level
of context. According to Hall (1976) cultures run on a continuum
between high and low context (see Table 6.3). This categorization
of cultures helps to determine how peoplerelateto one another on
dimensions such as social orientation, commitment, responsibility,
confrontation, communication, and dealing with new situations.
Social bonds refer to how deeply involved people are with each
other. High-context cultures promote social bonds that imply
commitment, expectations, good will, conformity to group norms,
and greater distinctions between in-groups and out-groups (Hall,
1976, in Kim, Pan, & Park, 1998). Commitment is the degree to
which people do as they say in a culture. People in high-context
cultures consider their word to be their bond and therefore are
very reluctant to give it freely (Kim, Pan, & Park, 1998). However,
when they do give their word, it is, for all practical purposes,
as good as a written contract in Western culture. Responsibility
refers to how hierarchical and centralized decision making is in a

systems and are therefore very creative even when dealing with
novel stimuli. Individuals from high-context cultures work well at
being creative within their contextual system, yet when confronted
with a situation outside of that system they must create a new one
before their innovation reaches its fullest potential.
China, Korea, and Japan tend to be high-context cultures;
Switzerland and Scandinavian countries such as Norway and Swe-
den tend to be low-context cultures; and France, Spain, Africa,
and the Middle Eastern countries all fall somewhere in the middle
(Kim, Pan, & Park, 1998).
Cultural context and effect on selection. When it comes to paper-
and-pencil job skill assessments there does not seem to be any
kind of link between context and score. Whether people are
from a high- or low-context culture, they will likely interpret
the questions the same way on a given test, all other things
being equal. However, in assessment center situations, such as
interviews and the assessment of softer skills or aspects such
as personality, context may play a key role in how individuals
Global Selection 167
Table 6.3. High-Context Versus Low-Context Cultures.
Issue High-Context
Cultures (HCC)
Low-Context
Cultures (LCC)
Result/Problems
Commitment Word is bond Written contract
necessary
Agreements can
be sealed verbally
with HCC

precise; anyone
can understand
it regardless of
culture
Those outside the
HCC miss a lot of
what is
communicated
Creativity Need a system
to be creative
within; may
have to create a
new system
Potentially very
creative even
with novel
stimuli
HCC may have to
create a new
system to be truly
innovative
Source: Compiled from Hall, 1976, in Kim, Pan, & Park, 1998.
answer questions. For example, should an interviewer ask a job
candidate to critique a piece of work as part of a skills assessment,
the lack of context in such a situation may lead the job candidate
to keep quiet for fear of appearing sassy, abrasive, or causing a loss
of face for a superior who may have done the work. In simulations,
the person from a high-context culture may view the situation
from his own cultural context and respond accordingly. Where
the simulations are created in a low-context culture, then, they

because that person is able to avoid making errors and conform
to group requirements. As a result, these individuals may be more
likely to be rewarded for their loyalty than others who do not act in
this way. This has little to do with merit but everything to do with
what is prized in a good (that is, docile) worker. In fact, it usually
results in little challenging of the system, because avoiding errors
and not speaking up against bad ideas from others does not allow
for it. In addition, in cultures where nepotism and familial or
tribal loyalty are high, it is even less important how well a person
does in their current job so long as they are properly connected at
the next level and do what they need to do to fit in (Brett, 2007).
Global Selection 169
Thus, the entire concept of merit may be turned on its head.
A high-context assessment center may be better off measuring
who ‘‘gets’’ the cultural mores most effectively to ensure those
candidates are promoted. However, as Friedman (2005) suggests,
those cultures may also be left behind in the flattening world:
‘‘What is the motto of the tribalist? ‘Me and my brother against my
cousin; me, my brother and my cousin against the outsider.’ And
what is the motto of the globalist ? ‘Me and my brother and my
cousin, three friends from childhood, four people in Australia, two
in Beijing all make up a global supply chain’’’ (p. 326). This is
an argument for merit-based assessment, regardless of which local
culture is involved. As such, it is a step toward equal measurement
of TN capabilities.
What to Do?
To ensure that cultural factors do not negatively affect assessment
results, there are a number of steps that can be taken. First,
there must be a competency modeling project completed to
clarify what is to be measured, both for the position in the home

be done by examining results of the center for individuals against
the later progress of those individuals in the company. Of course,
this is not an ideal solution because in the vast majority of cases,
companies use the data to make selection decisions (as is the
goal here). Thus, the data used to validate the center is clearly
biased and thus not entirely useful (Gatewood & Feild, 2005).
Most companies, moreover, will not put the data aside for a few
years to determine the validity of the center; such action would be
too costly and would not help the organizations make selection
decisions, which again is the point of the exercise. Nonetheless, a
validation effort should be attempted.
Fifth, a consistent reevaluation of the assessment process
should take place periodically. Even national cultures now are
changing as globalization gathers steam, and the needs of com-
panies often change as quickly. It is imperative that the process
measure accurately and according to the needs of the organi-
zation. To risk assessing the wrong person for the wrong job
in the wrong culture may be extremely expensive, not only in
cash, but also in negative publicity and the loss of a valuable
resource—namely, some of the organization’s talent.
Finally, it is possible that as national cultures change, peo-
ple are even choosing their own culture (Tipton, 2009). This
may complicate the development of tests and assessment centers
but also may make it easier. If companies can create a culture
that draws people in, perhaps like those of some of the dot-
coms, then the assessment tools can simply be made to reflect
the company culture and a person’s fit with that culture, rather
than having to determine fit with the local and corporate cul-
tures, along with any other cultures in which a TN might find
himself.

Bartram, D. (2001). The development of international guidelines on
test use: The International Test Commission project. International
Journal of Testing, 1(1), 33–54.
Bernardin, H. J. (2009). Human resource management: An experiential
approach (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Brand, V., & Slater, A. (2003). Using a qualitative approach to gain
insights into the business ethics experiences of Australian mangers
in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 167–182.
172 Going Global
Brett, J. M. (2007). Negotiating globally: How to negotiate deals, resolve disputes,
and make decisions across cultural boundaries (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Wiley.
Briscoe, D. R., & Schuler, R. S. (1995). International human resource
management (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Brookfield Global Relocation Services, National Foreign Trade Council
(2008). Global relocation trends: 2008 survey report. Brookfield Global
Relocation Services, LLC, Woodridge, IL.
Caligiuri, P. M. (2000). Selecting expatriates for personality characteris-
tics: A moderating effect of personality on the relationship between
host national contact and cross-cultural adjustment. Management
International Review, 40, 61–81.
Caligiuri, P., & Paul, K. B. (2010). Selection in multinational organiza-
tions (Chapter 34). Refereed book chapter in James L. Farr and
Nancy T. Tippins (Eds.), Handbook of employee selection. Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Caligiuri, P., & Tarique, I. (2006). International assignee selection and
cross-cultural training and development. In Gunter K. Stahl &
I. Bjorkman (Eds.), Handbook of research in international human
resource management. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Cerdin, J. L., & Bird, A. (2008). Careers in a global context. In Michael

tionship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement,
and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
87(2), 268–279.
Harzing, A. (2004). Composing an international staff. In A. Harzing &
J. Van Ruysseveldt (Eds.), International human resource management.
New Delhi: Sage.
Hewitt Associates (2004). Research brief: Growing great leaders key to
double digit growth. Retrieved from www.hewittassociates.com/
MetaBasicCMAssetCache /Assets/Articles/DDGLeadershipfull
.pdf.
Hofstede, G. (2004). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (2nd
ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors,
institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
International Test Commission (2000). International guideless for test
use, version 2000. Retrieved from www.intestcom.org/Downloads/
ITC%20Guidelines%20Download%20Version%204.doc.
Kim, D., Pan, Y., & Park, H. S. (1998). High- versus low-context cul-
ture: A comparison of Chinese, Korean, and American cultures.
Psychology & Marketing, 15(6),507–521.
Kingsbury, K. (2009, August 8). Hong Kong 1997–2007. Time.com.
Retrieved from www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,
28804,1630244
1630282 1630193–1,00.html.
Lievens, F., & Thornton, G. C. (2005). Assessment centers: Recent
developments in practice and research. In A. Evers, N. Anderson,
&O.Voskuijl(Eds.),The Blackwell Handbook of Personnel Selection.
UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lowe, K. B., Milliman, J., de Cieri, H., & Dowling, P. J. (2002). Interna-