Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ ... · Southern Business Review. Winter 2012 19...

Southern Business Review Southern Business Review

Volume 37 Issue 1 Article 4

January 2012

Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ—Contextual Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ—Contextual

Intelligence Quotient Intelligence Quotient

Robert W. Service Brock School of Business

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr

Part of the Business Commons, and the Education Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Service, Robert W. (2012) "Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ—Contextual Intelligence Quotient," Southern Business Review: Vol. 37 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr/vol37/iss1/4

This article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for inclusion in Southern Business Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact [email protected].

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr/vol37

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr/vol37/iss1

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr/vol37/iss1/4

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr?utm_source=digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu%2Fsbr%2Fvol37%2Fiss1%2F4&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/622?utm_source=digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu%2Fsbr%2Fvol37%2Fiss1%2F4&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/784?utm_source=digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu%2Fsbr%2Fvol37%2Fiss1%2F4&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/sbr/vol37/iss1/4?utm_source=digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu%2Fsbr%2Fvol37%2Fiss1%2F4&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

Southern Business Review Winter 2012 19

Robert W. “Bill” Service,Ph.D., is professor ofmanagement andleadership, Brock School ofBusiness, Samford University,Birmingham, AL 35229.

Recipient, Best PaperAward, 32nd AnnualInternational IndustrialRelations and HumanResource Conference(IIRHRC), Athens StateUniversity, Athens, AL 35611.

Leadership and InnovationAcross Cultures: The CIQ—Contextual

Intelligence Quotient

Robert W. “Bill” Service

The literature unam-biguously says thatinternational experience is amust for the leaders oftomorrow (Mendenhall etal., 2008). And, people withthis experience are, at best,difficult to find or develop(Potoker, 2011; Shinn,2011). The purpose of thisresearch is to identifyawareness, knowledge,skills, abilities, andattitudes necessary toeffectively lead acrosscultures. The goal is todevelop those of whom itcan be said, “[t]he skills amaster seaman has tonavigate the oceans, they[have] to navigate the world”(Brooks, 2011:p.x).

Humans build institu-tions, religions, academicdisciplines, technologicalwonders, loving families andthe complex frameworks ofcivilizations called cultures.The importance ofdiscovering cultures andinfluencing within differingcultures is complicated.Fitting order into thiscomplexity so that we candevelop individuals who caninnovatively lead in vastlydiffering context is our goal.A broad ranging use of theextant literature integratedwith Appendix 1 question-naire responses will be thefoundation of a “straw-man”CIQ-contextual intelligencemeasures model.Supporting this broadranging use of research andwriting. Porter says,

Researchers in manyfields of study arejust beginning torecognize thattraditionalboundaries betweenfields are limiting. Itshould be possible tocut across disciplineand examine morevariables in order to

understand howcomplex and evolvingsystems work (1990:29-30).

In my publications over thepast 10 years I have usedhistory, science, psychology,religion, fiction and more.Bringing together diversethoughts, concepts andtheories from any and alldisciplines is the way toinnovate. We academiciansneed to tear down ourtraditional mired-in-the-pastsilos and move from whosaid it, to is it useful.

Seven Pinker said,

the expansion ofpeople’s . . . worldsthrough literacy,mobility, education,science, history,journalism and massmedia . . . canprompt people totake the perspectivesof people unlikethemselves and toexpand their circle ofsympathy (Pinker,2011: C2).

Ridley adds to this bystating,

20 Winter 2012 Southern Business Review

collaboration isnecessary for societyto work. . . . Humanprogress waxes andwanes according tohow much peopleconnect andexchange (Ridley2011: p A15).

Pinker and Ridley join manyothers in showing howhumans advance, how wedepend greatly on eachother with our inability toproduce and survive on ourown in a complex modernworld.

More effectiveexpatriates capable ofhandling major contextualchanges are the foundationsto cross cultural leadership.The best leaders continue tobe the most innovative andthe best learners (Kouzes &Posner, 2010).

Initial ResearchQuestions

There is an “emergentsystem” dynamic complexityin meeting and handlingmajor contextual changes.This article is directed atcapturing that and makingit useful.

What is important isthat researchfindings do notoversimplifyphenomena, butrather capture someof the complexity . . .conditions/consequences do not exist in avacuum p. 91). . . .[and,] the primarypurpose of doing

qualitative researchis discovery, nothypothesis testing . .. . not trying tocontrol variables, butto discover them(Corbin & Strauss,2008: 317).

The current researchquestions are

1. What differentiates themore influential fromthose with less impact(leadership)?

2. How to becomeinnovative personallyand organizationally(successful intelligence)?

3. What are principles thatcan be of use inidentifying where one isand where one needs tobe in order tostrategically “mind thegaps” in contextualintelligence?

A CIQ formula whichmight include independent,mediator and moderatorvariables is beyond thisinitial article; however,classification of variableswill be of concern for futuremodel testing. Some CIQprecepts could prove to bedirectly causal independentvariables, others mediatingcatalyst and still others willmoderate relationships.

Literature Review-Culture and Context

All forms of adaptabilityrequire some level of selfdiscovery. Yet,

we must admit thateveryone elseprobablyunderstands usbetter than we doourselves (Jung,1933: 77).

And, there are numerousmodels, frames, metaphors,and filters that we all use tomake sense of our world.Moreover,

The fact is thatpeople do notactually go empty-handed but takewith them variousframeworks. . . .[T]he choice is notbetween a frameworkand not taking one,but between takingone that is implicitand unconsidered,and one that isexplicit andsusceptible toconscious thoughtand challenge (Bate& Child, 1987; p.37).

Further, effectiveleadership, innovation,cultural, etc., are aboutcommitment and necessitydirected towardaccomplishment:

[A] common series of. . . . processesseems required . . .sensing needs,amplifyingunderstanding,building awareness,creating credibility,legitimizingviewpoints,generating partial


solutions,broadening support,identifying zones ofopposition andindifference,changing perceivedrisks, structuringneeded flexibilities,putting forward trialconcepts, creatingpockets ofcommitment,eliminatingundesired options,crystallizing focusand consensus,managing coalitions,and finallyformalizing agreed-upon commitments(Quinn, 1980: 146).

To succeed in thesebig adjustments, weneed to go beyondseeing and observingto immersing.[Fi]gure out whatsort of environment[we live] in and carvemental maps thatwould help [us]navigate it. . . .[developing]sophisticatedmodels, which arethen used toanticipate, interpret,and navigatethrough life (p. 46). .. . Our thoughts areprofoundly moldedby this long historicflow, and none of us exists, self-made, inisolation from (p.32). . . . the essentialfeature of a humanbeing, a culture, or asociety (p. 108-109).

. . . Cultures areemergent systems.There is no oneperson whoembodies the traitsof American orFrench or Chineseculture (all boldingis mine unlessotherwise noted;Brooks, 2011: 110).

Brooks’s words ring truefor this CIQ effort indeveloping a morecomprehensive modeldirected at helping leadersimprove cultural capital.Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’scalled

“cultural capital”—the tastes, opinions,cultural references,and conversationalstyles that willenable you to rise inpolite society (p.146). . . . We absorbethnic cultures,institutionalcultures, regionalcultures, which domost of our thinkingfor us (p. 149). . . .society is a layeringof networks. . . .Most relationshipsare bound by trust. .. . Trust reducesfriction and lowers transaction costs (p.155).

Klopf and McCroskey inIntercultural CommunicationEncounters (2007) providesome thoughts that canhelp in this CIQ endeavor

[i]gnorance ofanother’s culture isa major factorcausinginterculturalmiscommunications(p. 9). . . . cultureis that complexwhole whichincludes knowledge,belief, art, law,morals, custom, andany other habitsacquired by humanswho are members ofa society (p. from E.B. Taylor in 1871:20). . . . All culturesare characterizedby distinctiveattributes. Wereviewed seven: [1]pervasiveness, [2]learned behavior,[2] shared behavior,[4] adaptability, [5]explicit/implicitbehavior, [6] changeand [7]ethnocentricity (p.26).

Klopf and McCroskey’sseven common culturaldistinctives along with whatmakes up culture must beaccounted for in their CIQ.Likewise, Americans need torealize the global extent andimpact of their wealth andmilitary might relative totheir small percent of worldpopulation (Rue & Byars,2005).

Storti in The Art ofCrossing Cultures (2001)says clearly that,


cultural effective-ness comes at thecost of vigilanceand sustained effort(p. 106). . . . [Y]oueither open yourselfup to the experienceand are greatlyenriched by it, oryou turn away—andare greatlydiminished (p. 115).. . . in the era ofglobalization . . . Ifthere’s one thingnearly everyone wholives and worksabroad has to getright, it is this: theymust be able to getalong with the localpeople. . . .[W]hatever theirgoals andresponsibilities, it isdifficult to imaginehow they cansucceed if they can’tinteract effectivelywith people from thelocal culture . . . (p.xv). ; . . . [If youdepend on luck] yourchances of having areally satisfyingexperience livingabroad would beabout one in seven(p. xvi). . . .Becomingculturally effectivedoes not meanbecoming a local; itmeans trying to seethe world the waylocals do and tryingto imagine howthey see you. . . .life is to knowwhen to give wayand when not to . .

. So too the art ofcrossing cultures(p. 96). . . . Anotheradvantage of beingculturally aware isthat the better youunderstand the localculture, the harder itis for the locals tohide behind it (p.107). . . . The abilityto see situations,problems,practices—the waywe do things—frommultipleperspectives, fromthe way other peoplesee things, is atremendous benefitto you and to yourcompany when youget back home. . .Thinking outside thebox, changingparadigms,reinventing theorganization—overseas, you do it everyday. . . convictionsand certainties aretoo often theconcomitants ofignorance (p. 111).

Storti further warns that

often you get sentabroad because youare bright and at thetop of your game.That changes whenyou get there,culture shock isprecisely this state ofdebilitation,exhaustion, andsusceptibility todisease (p. 19). . . .You have to be ableto sustain reversals,

upsets, accidents (p.21). . . . get beyondthe temptation towithdraw from thelocal culture (p. 63).. . . culturaldifferences are notthe only reasoncross-culturalencounters sometime go wrong.People from differentcultures can fail toget along with eachother for anynumber of reasons(p. 45). . . . Thecapacity of theaverage person tofully conceive of the“other” has alwaysbeen greatlyexaggerated (p. 70). .. . [Too often] ourexpectation, nottheir behaviour, isthe real stickingpoint (p. 75). . . .Become aware ofyour emotionalreactions (p. 77). . . .[for indeed]perceptual responsesare influenced by theindividual’s expecta-tions (2001: 82).

Lists of do’s anddon’ts can’t cover allcontingencies, ofcourse, and tend togreatly oversimplifycross-culturaleffectiveness (p. 87).

Our CIQ has to beaware of this need toshow thecomplexities, yet,simplify “things” onemust consider when


developing thecorrect mind-set forcrossing cultures ormajor contextsuccessfully. I tell allmy students they areabout to face themove from the “I’llwait until I’m told;you didn’t tell me”excuser mentalityto the professional“I’ll figure it out andprove my value”contributor mind-set.

Dorner’s excellenttreatment of The Logic ofFAILURE (1996) said,

Studying theconsequences of ourmeasures gives usexcellentopportunities forcorrecting ourincorrect behavioraltendencies andassumptions aboutreality. If ourmeasures yieldunexpectedconsequences, theremust be reasons. Byanalyzing thosereasons, we canlearn what weshould do better ordifferently (p. 177).

Modern culturalresearchers study culture asbeing transmitted throughsymbols that representpatterns of behavior;however, we must be awarethat when we attempt totests our more Westerntheories on non-Western

cultures we can obtainerroneous conclusionsabout capabilities orconditions (Sternberg,2003). My own experiencesindicate that in America wetend to value speed whereasin more Eastern culturesspeed is looked uponsuspiciously. Anotherexample is the value ofcreative thinking anddisagreeing with a professorwhich is common in myAmerican classes; accordingto my Chinese students,creativity is not sought anddisagreeing with a professoris not done in China.Likewise, the Chinesestudents said they could notbelieve that I said I did notknow! You should see thepattern of often subtle andseemingly simple differ-ences. If we try to obtain ortest creativity or the value ofdialogue in a class, it maybe misleading. This issimply a caution abouttesting our theories in othercultures. The act of testingcan change the dynamics ofrelationships and distortresulting measures.

An Extreme Example of aCultural Aspect ThatProved Useful!

American LieutenantFiske Handley, II,experienced a culturallesson in March of 1945after being captured by theJapanese of whom he knewnothing as a people.Handley said the Japanesedoctor warned him,

It is a death offensefor a barbarian tomention theEmperor’s name. Allnon-Japanese arebarbarians. I wasgrateful for hisadvice and glad tohave learned aboutthis “capital offense”the easy way. . . . Iheeded the doctor’sadvice religiouslyand warned otherprisoners (Hanley,1997: 94).

On why some do andsome don’t. In theremarkable story ofOlympian Louis Zamperiniand his years of torturouscaptivity and mistreatmentas a Japanese WWIIprisoner of war, we can seenatural and nurturedreasons for survival.

It remains a mysterywhy these threeyoung men, veteransof the same trainingand the same crash,differed so radicallyin their perception oftheir plight. Maybethe difference wasbiological; some menmay be wired foroptimism, others fordoubt. . . . Perhapsthe men’s historieshad given themopposing convictionsabout their capacityto overcomeadversity (Hillen-brand, 2010: 147).


One quickly gave up anddied. Of the two whosurvived, one was deeplyreligious, and the other notso much so. But, thesurvivors both had humor,hope and rebellion withtruly resilient minds, bodiesand spirits that keepsurvival in the forefront oftheir minds. In anotherbook, Victor Frankl (1992)describes how as aHolocaust survivor he hadto adapt to the mostdehumanizing treatment.Frankl said, when youcannot change yourcircumstances, you have torealize you can change yourreactions to them. Facedwith unbelievablecircumstances, he saidsome men act like swineand others like saints. Muchcan be learned about thedifficulty of fitting to newand very tryingcircumstances from suchbooks. We can learn asmany have said, greatleaders have exhibited theStockdale Paradox: Theyconfronted the brutal facts,but believed they wouldprevail in the end (Collins,2001).

Difficult is notimpossible. Our premise isthat many of thecircumstances that seem toblock us in our daily livesmay only appear to do sobased on a framework ofassumptions we carry withus. Draw a different framearound the same set ofcircumstances and newpathways come into view (p.1). . . . Our joint conviction

is that much, much more ispossible than peopleordinarily think” (p. 2). Weall seek confirming evidencebased on our limitedassumptions and framesand seldom really listen toor see dissenting views. Forexample, think about whatPicasso said about why hedid not paint people “as theyreally are: show me apicture of her. Isn’t sherather small and flat?”(Zander & Zander, 2000:11).

From a Business Weekbook of the year, we seeconcepts that can help usall understand more aboutwhy we should study suchdifficult concepts asleadership, culture andinfluence:

All people haveuntapped leadershippotential, just as allpeople haveuntapped athleticpotential. There areclear differences dueto nature andnurture, that is,genes anddevelopment, as tohow much untappedpotential there maybe. But no matterwhat level of athleticor leadershipperformance aperson currentlyexhibits, he or shecan make quantumimprovements. Noteveryone can be theCEO of a multi-billion dollarcorporation. . . . Theimportant teaching

point is: leadershipis there in you(Tichy, 2002, p. 8).

Likewise, as Smolin saidin Three Roads to QuantumGravity (2001) we learnmore all the time andconstantly revise what wethink science is and what itsrelated prescripts recom-mend. Smolin makes it clearthat until 100 years ago itwas thought that Newton’stheory of physics gaveacceptable answers to thesequestions. Then cameEinstein’s theory of relativityand then quantum theoryfrom Neils Bohr and others.As Smolin said relativity andquantum theory were thefirst steps to look at therelationship between theobserver and the observed.The new theory, calledquantum theory of gravity,is complex and beyondanything I understand wellenough to write about. Yet,generalizable lessons thatapply to our development ofthe CIQ are shown inSmolin’s words,

the world is nothingbut an evolvingnetwork ofrelationships (p. 19and 20). . . . Time isnothing but ameasure of change(p. 24). . . . In the‘softer’ socialsciences there is noway around the factthat the scientistthemselves areparticipants in thesocieties they study.. . . when we are


dealing with aperson or a culturewe are dealing witha process thatcannot becomprehended as astatic object,independent of itshistory. How it isnow isincomprehensiblewithout knowinghow it came to be. . .. What makes a storya story is theconnection betweenthe events (p. 50). . .. One lesson wehave learned fromthis experience isthe extent whichscience progressesquickly whenpeople withdifferentbackgrounds andeducations joinforces to push backthe frontiers (p.139). . . . the hardestthing about scienceis what it demandsof us in terms of ourability to make theright choice in theface of incompleteinformation (p. 146).. . . the world we seeprovides only asparse and narrowsampling of allpossible physicalphenomena . . . .most of thedimensions andmost of thesymmetry of theworld are hidden (p.161). . . . there isnow the problem of

making sure thatyoung people havethe freedom towander acrossboundariesestablished by theirelders without fearof jeopardizingtheir careers. . . . Inmany areas ofscience we arepaying theconsequences of anacademic systemthat rewardsnarrowness of focusover exploration ofnew areas. . .climate of mutualignorance andcomplacency (p.183).

From this emergentscience, we see severalapplicable lessons for ourCIQ. First, everythingrevolves aroundrelationships. Second, timeand change are equated.Third, by observing the“measured” is changed.Cultures are more likeclouds than clocks. Fourth,people and cultures arenever static: again, cloudsnot clocks. Fifth, culturesare more like clouds thanclocks in that one can bebroken down to understandand the other simply canonly be observed as is. And,finally, Smolin’s call to joinforces and warder acrossdisciplines and views, andstart addressing issues nomatter their complexity: CIQdoes this.

Tyson’s thoughtprovoking Death by Black

Hole (2007), calls us tonever admit defeat becausewe will keep on discoveringif we just keep looking, “Idon’t want students whocould make the next majorbreakthrough in renewableenergy sources or spacetravel to have been taughtthat anything they don’tunderstand, and nobody yetunderstands, is divinelyconstructed and thereforebeyond their intellectualcapacity. The day thathappens, Americans willjust sit in awe of what wedon’t understand, while wewatch the rest of the worldboldly go where no mortalhas gone before” (p. 362). Iam clearly not saying youhave to believe there is not aGod. What Tyson and I aresuggesting is that perhapswe simply do not know thelimits God will allow us todiscover. Or, how Godaccomplished His task, orhow long it took Her to do it!Too often religion has beenused as an excuse forremaining ignorant andeven letting a child diebecause God could preventit, just as could a man-mademedicine. Einstein said, noteverything that ismeasurable is meaningful,nor is everything that ismeaningful measurable; healso said that omnipotent isGod, but tricky He is not(Isaacson, 2007). Orpossibly as Einstein alsosaid, how are we to knowthat God did not put ushere to discover why we arehere and how we got here(Aczel, 1999). And, if our


placement took 13.8 billionyears to be realized onlyafter trillions of randomevolutionary events, howcan we think we know Godcould not do it that way?

The Research in BusinessSocial Sciences

Society is able to valueand promote rules ofbehaviour that serve toproduce citizenship. Just asthe market was driven by aninvisible hand these rulesexert an invisible force ofsocial standards andcustom. Custom, accordingto Adam Smith (1790[1976]: 194), is that habit ofmind that is generated bythe “habitual arrangementof our ideas.” We are borninto a society and nurturedby that society in a processof socialization. Individualsare

familiarized with itfrom their infancy,custom has renderedit habitual to them,and they are very aptto regard it as, whatis called, the way ofthe world . . . (p.201).

As individuals wemake judgments butthe judgments wemake are based inpart on the socialnorms which haveevolved throughtime. Thesejudgments alsoimpact the evolutionof future norms(Marshall, 2011: 8).

We have beenstudying societalcustoms for a longtime and see thathumans usecustoms to shapejudgments. And,existing customs of asociety frame theevolution of newcustoms. Moreover,when mores’ aresufficient, you do notneed laws; whenmores’ areinsufficient, lawscannot be enforced(Covey, 1991 and2004).

An article aboutexpatriate spousaladjustment covers relativelywell the topic of interactiveand general adjustments(Andreason, 2008). Bakerand Roberts help one thinkabout internationalassignments and allowancesfor housing, clothing, andfood, and finding schools forchildren and how these veryreal items relate to a CIQ(2006). Bhaskar-Shrinivaset al., is a comprehensivemeta-analysis that foundexpatriate adjustment had apositive relationship withwork performance (2005).Other research found thatsocial support from theexpatriate’s spouse had anaccelerated influence onexpatriate adjustment andperformance (Lee & Sukoco,2008). A positiverelationship betweenadjustment and theorganization’s bottom linewas noted in Harrison,

Shaffer, and Bhaskar-Schrinivas (2004). While notnecessarily new, recentstudies have re-enforcedthat there is a link betweeninternational assignmentadjustment and workperformance. Therefore, aCIQ could lead to higherlevels of adjustment, higherlevels of performance andhigher cost-to-benefit ratios.Kleinschmidt (2009) showsthat cross companynetworking can help inmany efforts and that surelywill be a part of any initialCIQ.

Practitioners andresearchers recognize theimportance of spousalsupport and adjustment onthe well-being of anexpatriate (Kupka & Cathro,2007; Lee, 2007; 2008).Because positives andnegatives influences crossdomains (Kahn, 1964;Madjar, Oldham, & Pratt,2002), any difficulty onefamily member experienceswill correspondingly affectothers (the expatriate orotherwise). Moreover, someof the research looks atexpatriate adjustmentthrough family systemstheory (families are culturalsystems that attempt tomaintain a sense ofequilibrium-Caligiuri,Hyland, Joshi, & Bross,1998). Premature return ofexpatriates is all too oftenlinked to the inability of thespouse and family membersto adjust (Fischlmayr &Kollinger, 2010). Shaffer,Harrison, and Gilley (1999)do give some clear


determinants related tosuccessful adjustments (orrisks) that are useful to ourCIQ. Shen and Hall (2009)have an article in HumanResources Management thatdiscusses retraining intoand out of crossing cultures.An article in the Journal ofManagement provides acritical review of relevantexpatriate research frommultiple stakeholder views(Takeuchi, 2010). Takeuchiand others (2002) in an“expatriate success” articlehighlight psychologicalaspects of cultural adjust-ment. Weeks and others(2010) get us into the realmof teenagers and supportthe need for varying views tobuild a useful CIQ. Lee’s(2009) article about, settinga social capital researchagenda, also proved usefulin the CIQ.

Articles in BizEdstressed MBA skills andknowledge of: globalization,leadership development,innovation and creativity,critical thinking and allforms of self-presentationand communication. Thesearticles also include muchabout personal reflectionand crossing cultures (“BestPractices;” Phan; Bisoux;and Shinn all 2011). More-over, all of these articlessuggest that when youexperience a major con-textual chance go with theflow. Then don’t get stuck inwhat you know and don’tknow or correcting theothers involved. You’ll figureit out when you simplymust.

The intent of this sectionis to demonstrate examplesof the types of researchused in the CIQ develop-ment. Because of journaland conference spacerequirements, a compre-hensive review is prohibited.But clearly, influence andinnovative leadership arecharacterized byrelationships, values,communications,motivations, missions andvisions (Service & Arnott,2006; Service & White,2011). These humaninfluence activities center onsolving interrelatedambiguously-complexproblems quickly. And, thisis all complexified whenmany varied constituentscommand your attentionshouting mutually exclusivedemands.

Conscious processes arebetter at solving problemswhen the factors areconcretely defined. Uncon-scious processes are betterwhen everything is ambig-uous (p. 243). . . . [acquire]a set of practical skills thatenable [you] to anticipatechange (p. 249). . . . the artof being wise is the art ofknowing what to overlook(p. 264). . . . Behavior doesnot exhibit what theresearchers call “cross-situational stability.”Rather, it seems to bepowerfully influenced bycontext (p. 282). [More-over,] [w]e are born withcertain muscles that we candevelop by going to the gymevery day. In a similar way,we are born with moral

muscles that we can buildwith the steady exercise ofgood habits (p. 290). . . .[Learn about yourself.] Howpathetically scant my self-knowledge is comparedwith, say my knowledge ofmy room (Brooks, 2011:371).

Competing in a GlobalContext

International experienceis a must that deserves abook of its own; but start byunderstanding thatinternational leadership-management-influence ismore a matter of attitude thanof experience. The literatureshows the chief reason fordifficulties in globalbusinesses is the lack ofmanagers with appropriateskills to relate to people fromdifferent cultures andcountries. The followingmanagement-interpersonalskills will help you be moreeffective in internationalleadership:

01) Establishing credi-bility with actionsthat back up yourwords—notappearing boastfulor arrogant.

02) Take care in givingand receivingfeedback—level ofdirectness and error on the side ofhumility.

03) Obtaining informa-tion—don’t equateperceptions with


facts; other’s percep-tions = their realities.

04) Learn to evaluatepeople withoutoffending—askingversus telling isalways a good start.

05) When working on aglobal team, watchyour tendency todefend nationalinterest.

06) To handle trainingand development—realize that trainersmust traindifferently in manycultures.

07) When selling is agoal, learn to speaktheir language: learnto introduceyourself, say thankyou.

08) When negotiatingseek a native to helpyou—confidentialitydiffers from cultureto culture.

09) Get native supportfor strategicplanning— strategicmindsets aredifferent fromculture to culture.

10) Remember whentransferringknowledge—acceptwhat host countryexperts give you anduse it.

11) Be innovative whereever you are—set up

systems thatencourage: differentin differing cultures.

12) Managing change—requires tremendousmomentum-simplygo slow (12 adaptedfrom Gundling,2003).

Speed and consensusdiffer in differing cultures.In more “Americanized”cultures you can often movequickly accomplishingchange and let others catchup; in a more Easterncultural mindsets you mayhave to wait for totalconsensus beforementioning the change.

When faced with anunknown, especially aboutanother culture or country,the first step is to “knowwhat you don’t know;” thenread, study, focus, ask, andaccept, to learn and thenuse what you have learnednon-judgmentally. Seek fistto understand beforeseeking to be understood(Covey, 1990).

Only a leader whoexemplifies a culture ofcreativity and values will beable to realize a sustainablecompetitive advantage(Peters, Porter, & Pritchettall dates [read their work];Service, 2006).

As CIQ grows, onemoves from unconsciouslyincompetent to consciouslyincompetent, then toconsciously competentbefore arriving at their finaldestination of unconsciouslycompetent.

The Rest-of-usLeadership Model

Everyone from coaches,athletes, military leaders,business and investmenttyphoons, and politicianssay they have somethingsignificant to teach us aboutbecoming more effectiveleaders. Consequently theywrite a book describing howthey did it and give youtheir five-plus-or-minus-twosecrets. Additionally, theacademic literature is asreplete with leadership andmanagement material as isthe popular press. Most ofthese reflections result inbloviating about leadership.After having worked tobecome an effective leaderand researched the topicexhaustively for the past 40years, I have developed auseful model that can be ofvalue to those willing towork and challengethemselves to reach theirfull leadership potential(Service & White, 2011).Unfortunately, as a sociallycomplex human interactioninfluence phenomenon,leadership, is not easy:understanding beyondlabeling.

Leadership ModelResearch Question andMethods

The extensivelyresearched work on LQ© TheLeadership Quotient (Service& Arnott, 2006, more than500 sources and 1,100questionnaires), otherempirical academic andpopular press work and 40years of experience and


research, are the basis forformulating models thatdepict the understandingneeded to develop into thebest leader possible. Thatsaid, academicians mustbegin to accept models ofleadership and managementfrom logic, not just becauseof who said or found it. Nonempirical research can bean innovative directionsetter. Cohen in is work onthe leadership lessons of thefather of modernmanagement Peter F.Drucker shows that Druckercame to realize leadership isa life-long self-developmentactivity or it is worthless(Cohen, 2010).

Do not be deterred bythe sourcing used here, themodels are rooted in theoryand logic, capturing thecomplexity of leadershipnecessary for improvementthrough solid qualitative

research and analysis(hundreds of sources inService & Service and othersare foundational to themodel).

The Model-Figure 1As you study Figure 1

keep in mind that the idealsweet-spot of leadershipeffectiveness “Wisdom” is anamalgamation of sweet-spots. Leadership “Wisdom”is a balance of what fits thecombination andpermutations of circum-stances and people at theappropriate time and in theproper manner. Wisdom isnot knowledge but how andwhen to use knowledge. Thekey is to know what itdepends on and to developyour own insights as towhat it takes to Be, Knowand ultimately Do as youanalyze yourself, others and

situations in order to applynew found knowledge toimprove leadership.

Below are briefdescriptions of the fourbasic sub-models of theinclusive model. A big partof the CIQ model entails thisnew leadership model’sconceptualizations.

Individual realism-professionally: history anddiscipline. Each individualis an amalgamation of allthat has ever happened tothem. Who we interact with,and what we see, hear andread as well as much thathas happened to all ofmankind, particularly ourmore immediate ancestors,make us all. “Our thoughtsare profoundly molded bythis long historic flow, andnone of us exists, self-made,in isolation from it” (Brooks,

Figure 1Be-Know-Do Leadership-Life Effectiveness Model


2011: 32). The preceptscontained within the heartof this sub-model have beendiscovered and cultivated,as the current author hasdissected the historicalaccounts and recollectionsof events of leadership andmanagement in order todiscover the true underlyingcausal variables (Corbin &Strauss, 2008). Theobjective of this quadrant ofthe Model centers on theability of self reflection.

Two thought experimenthabits are significant intheir impact on learning andapplying. First, is reflectionwhere one thinks backthrough what they just did,saw, heard or read andponders its lessons. Second,is the ability to apply whatyou pick-up throughreflection by generalizingthe lesson/s to similarsituations. History seldomrepeats itself exactly, but itprovides a useful baseline(Isaacson, 2007; Service2009).

The abilities. In thestudy of leadership nothinghas been so overly analyzedand abused as the natureversus nurture debate. Thedebate offers a falsedichotomy for every singlething in the world is easierfor some than for others andall things humans docontain elements of natureand nurture. Nature versusnurture and leadership aremore than adequatelycovered scientifically,theoretically and antidotalin Drucker (all dates),Gladwell (2002; 2008),Isaacson (2007), Mintzberg

(2004; 2009), Pink (2009),Pinker (2002), Ridley (2003),Service (2005c), Service andArnott (2006); Sternberg(1996); and many others.

The knowledge. Gainingthe knowledge for leader-ship effectiveness requiresan ability to learn, payattention, recognize,imagine, and keep up todate on technologies as wellas worldly directions (Li,2010; Service, 2005a). Withthese foundations one canimprove adaptability,innovativeness, andcontinue to evolve.Churchill tells us why aleader must be decisive yetseek more knowledge aswell,

To wait tilleverything was readywas probably to waittill all was too late(p. 203). . . . thingshardly ever happenthe same way twiceover, or if they seemto do so, there issome variant whichstultifies unduegeneralization (1948-1954; 1949-VI: 374).

You must read, study andunderstand what level ofknowledge is needed in yoursituation, industry, culture,etc. to develop appropriatelyuseful skills (Blair, 2010;Charan, 2007; Collins,2003; Drucker, 1967;Mintzberg, 2004; Service,2009; White & Lean, 2008;among many others).

The skills. LQ© providesa framework of leadershipskills as described through

the following 12 quotientswhich entail 192 “skills” asstrengths and weaknesses(Service & Arnott, 2006). DQ – Desire Quotient is

the willingness to dowhatever it takes-passion.

RQ – Reality Quotient isidentifying correctobjectives, futureprojections andvisions.

EQ – Emotional Quotientis validity ofemotional assess-ment and control forself and others.

IQ – IntelligenceQuotient is amalleable successfulintelligence replacingthe IQ of old.

CQ – CommunicationsQuotient is level ofverbal, written, bodylanguage-mutualunderstanding.

PQ – People Quotient isrelating with people-reflecting on theperceptions ofothers.

BQ – BehavioralQuotient isexhibited external focus anddependability.

AQ – AppearanceQuotient ismanifestation of thecorrect level ofconfidence.


XQ – eXperienceQuotient is learnedthrough exposureand reflection-accomplishments.

KQ – KnowledgeQuotient is findingand learning the newand different.

SQ – SituationalQuotient isinterpreting cuesand developingstrategies foraddressing.

MQ – ManagementQuotient - isplanning, organizing,leading-managing,controlling, staffing,teaming, motivation,efficiency, TQM,strategy andmentoring.

This is a lot to digest, butremember for every complexproblem (becoming a moreeffective leader) there existsa simple explanation that iswrong! Study the LQ©

thought experiment article(Service, 2009) and the LQ©

book (Service & Arnott,2006) to understand themeasures and skills.

The experience.Experience is a distinctivethat taken alone can predictleadership success (Service,Smith, & Boockholdt, 2006;Sowell, 2008; 2009). Thereis one caveat: experience isnot what happens tosomeone, but what they dowith what happens. Wedefine leadership wisdom as

the understanding,adaptability, balancing, andfit-ability that comes as onegrows and matures as aleader. Useful experiencecomes with time andexposure, but only whenrecipients pay attention andfocus over time in a wayhelpful to improvement. Thefive simple keys to andresults of good experienceare: 1) appropriate; 2)balance; 3) fit; 4) it depends;and 5) not exactly. If youhave the wisdom to addresseach of these five correctlyall the time you are amongthe super experienced!

Csikszentmihalyi’s(1990) Flow and Pink’s Drive(2009) demonstrate we allspend our lives driving tobuild and rebuild models,our operating systems, overand over to improve our flowin work, fun and all matterof relationships.

Individual Realism-Personally: Philosophyabout Self and Psychologyabout Others

Leadership is humaninfluence that moves peopleinto the unknown; mostimportantly, it is neededand an improbablerecognizable skill. Being allyou “might, can, ought,want” to be as a leader forthe rest-of-us is about howto understand ourselves,others, situations andprinciples that guide us intousing more of our potentialand avoiding ourweaknesses: introspectionplus work. When youcontemplate in an

introspective way thesevariables about yourself youare being philosophical; butwhen you help others, youuse psychological skills ofinfluencing throughreflective questioning andlistening.

The might. If there is nomarket for the type ofleadership you seek, youcan try to enact your futureor you can seek to change(Peters, all dates; Service &Dance, 2011).

The can. Simply put noteveryone can become aColin Powell, BarackObama, Hillary Clinton,Tony Blare, Pat Summitt,Bear Bryant, MargretThatcher, Warren Buffet,Michael Jordon, the lateSteve Jobs, or so on, even ifwe desired it with all ourheart and soul. Thesepeople are truly the outliersamong us and in many waysare poor examples or“comparison others.” All“greatest leaders” are madeby circumstances as well astheir unique combination ofnature and nurture

The want. You’ve simply“gotta” want it to get it.Leadership is a lifetimecommitment to “being” notjust “doing”; decide youwant it carefully or be afailed leader. Yes, weaccomplish the very difficultthings in life because wevalue and want them withour very souls (Levitt &Dubner, 2005; 2009). It isabout time and attention.

The ought. We all knowcommon human values ofrespect of life, liberty and


the pursuit of happiness.Simply always exhibit aselfless attitude of win-winfor all parties and society.“Well done beats well said,”(Ben Franklin, sourceunknown).

Collective Realism-Perspectives: Sociologyand Culture

Leadership is movingpeople into the unknownwhere it requires leaps offaith. The collective humaninfluence nature of leader-ship crosses into the realmof sociology as we determinewhat it takes to motivateand move “groups” ofpeople. Cultural norms andunderstanding underliedesirable leadership stylesand methods that have anychance for success. Under-standing the who, what,where, when, why, and howof people and situationsrequires a realization ofdiffering perspectives.

The leader. There areno pills, magic solutions, orsimple secrets. The keys arefoundational under-standings of leaders,followers, and all levels ofenvironments, and how theyinteract as influence occurs(all Service-LQ). People wantdirection, inspiration,validation, and relationships(Clawson, 1999). In today’sturbulent environment,organizations want leadersto guide them to the nextlevel. General NormanSchwarzkopf said,

Leadership is acombination ofstrategy and

character. If youmust be without one,be without thestrategy (Corsini,2006: 33).

The follower. Withoutfollowers that can be stirredto act there is no leadership.Emotional Quotient (EQ) asdefined by Daniel Golemanis a hallmark of what ittakes to be a great follower(Goleman & Goleman andothers, all dates; Service &Fekula, 2008). Followersmust be capable ofaccomplishment andpersuadable if they are tofollow: IQ and EQ appro-priate with missions andneeds. Leaders can directpeople but they cannotchange the basic make-upof intellect, emotions andphysical capacities; andleaders must understandthe cultural orientations ofthose they wish to makefollowers (Service & Carson,2009).

The situation. Under-stand the situation as itarises and develop astrategy for it. Situationalawareness and analysis isbest understood andultimately accomplishedthrough the notion ofstrategic intelligence(Service, 2006). Strategy is ajourney of planning,implementing, evaluatingand adjusting while payingattention and focusing onthe right things: what thesituation is and what it isbecoming. First andforemost, strategy is aboutunderstanding the situationthat encompasses the

people. It is through people,leaders, followers, cus-tomers, other stakeholders,and the public at large, thatgoals get accomplished(DeKluyver & Pearce, 2003;Hunger & Wheelen, 2011). Aresponse to Colin Powell’squestion does a good job ofdefining correct situationalanalysis, strategy andleadership: “Why would youfollow somebody around acorner?” (Harari, 2002:203).

The context. Perhapspeople are incapable ofunderstanding total reality(Gladwell, 2008; Levitt &Dubner, 2009; Peters, 1987;Pink, 2009). The key is foryour perception to be asclose as possible to realityand to manage the othersinvolved to get them toenact the situation as youwant it to be. Following area sampling of thecomplexities of culturalsubsystems:

1) The psychologicalsystems of individuality.

2) The subsistencemethods system-how wemake a living.

3) The cultural, religious orman-made systemsaspects of interrelatedlife.

4) The social systems-define interactions,roles, and laws.

5) An ecological system-allaspects of differingphysical environments.


6) The inter-individualside-sociology.

7) The projective aspects ofmyths, fantasies, andreligion.

Other “thinking framework”descriptors include eco-systems, demographics,economic systems andconditions, internationalcommunities, resourceavailability, political andgovernmental issues, legal,competitive flatteners andaccelerators, family,technological andorganizationalcultures. These “classifica-tions” overlap the sevencultural subsystems above,but taken together allow formany combinations andpermutations of complexitythat form a realistic view ofour complicated contextualworlds (Barney, 1991; 1995;Friedman, 2005; 2008;Gardner, 1993; Pinker,2992; Service, Service &Smith, 2009; Sternberg, alldates). With so many variedviewpoints to choose from itis amazing that there is anyagreed-upon version ofcontextual reality. Anyonewishing to lead must reachan understanding of thecollective contexts thatexists in environmentswhere they will lead.Moreover, the principle ofequifinality, which indicatesthere are numerous ways toachieve goals in complexsituations, must beadequately covered. In otherwords, a CIQ will not be thatsimple.

Work hard to not belimited by your frames orfilters. Watch ignoringarguments that don’t fityour mental models andseeking models that fit youropinions and preferences.Our CIQ is being developedto provide a new paradigm-frame of fit to a muchbroader conceptualizationthan each of us can knowseparately. When studyingCIQ and its impact onleadership improvement, itis not solving problems thatcounts, but being open tonew ideas (Blair, 2010;Charan, 2007; Collins,2003; Drucker, 1967;Mintzberg, 2004; Service,2009; White & Lean, 2008).

Collective Realism-Practices: Organizationand Fitting in Before YouStand Out

One situation might callfor management-doingthings right or moreefficiently in a systemicmanner; or it might call forsimple relationship building;or it might require that youinnovate and do somethingtotally new and different toyou or your organization; orindeed it might require thatyou lead—move people intonew and different directions.This requires an “extrospec-tion” of situations andpeople within given contextand can be tricky.

Management-leadership is managementdone well. There are morethan enough managementprimers that start by saying“Know thyself—and be ready

for re-invention” (Lublin,2010: D4). And yes,management is gettingthings done through others,that is, accomplishment ofgiven objectives throughtasks and people. Itsfunctions center onplanning, organizing,directing-leading,controlling, and staffing.However, most businesswritings are simply moredescriptive thanprescriptive. At some pointyou need to understand theprescriptives for doing theright things right. Two mustreads are Drucker’s 1973classic Management, andWren and Bedeian’s 2009History of ManagementThought. These two booksbring it all together. Aneffective manager must beable to show employees theycare.

Contemplate what HenryMintzberg (2004) says aboutmanagement. The practiceof management ischaracterized by its ambi-guity. . . . That leaves themanagers mostly with themessy stuff—the intractableproblems, the complicatedconnections. And that iswhat makes the practice ofmanagement so funda-mentally ‘soft’ and whylabels such as experience,intuition, judgment, andwisdom are so commonlyused for it (p. 13).

Mintzberg says thatmanagers and leaders needmindsets for 1)reflection—managing self(knowing others isintelligence; knowing


yourself is wisdom), 2)analysis—managingorganizations, 3)worldliness—managingcontext (get into otherpeople’s worlds), 4)collaboration—managingrelationships, and 5)action—managing change.Effective managers operateat an interface betweenreflective thinking andpractical doing.

To manage is tobring out the positiveenergy that existsnaturally withinpeople. Managingthus meansengaging based onjudgment, rooted incontext (p. 275).

The relationships.Relationships are at thecenter of humanness. Forrelationships to be enduringthey must be based onmutual benefit and mutualtrust. Think win-win andalways ask but be willing togive as well as take. Start bybuilding a relationship with. . and . . and . . and . . .before you try to . . . Fill inthe blanks.

Innovation-foundational to CIQ. PeterF. Drucker, the manage-ment guru of gurus,continually stresses that “tonot innovate is to die”.Friedman’s 2005 and 2008books are great reads thatclarify our “new” competitiveworlds that require thisinnovate or die mindset.Friedman’s said that theworld is flat and we are nowcompeting against everyone

in the world; and we shouldnot build walls, but dig ourway out by acting small ifwe are big and acting big ifwe are small. He pushesinnovation as a goal whilereminding us thatimagination can never beoutsourced.

Similarly, Freaknomics’and SuperFreaknomics(Levitt & Dubner, 2005;2009) present entertainingconclusions that could beuseful when interpretedproperly. Freaks’ six themesare instructive for our CIQ:1) Realize that what wevalue, and how we value it,is not necessarily related towhat others value or howthey value them. 2)Common sense isuncommon. 3) There aremany simple explanationsthat are wrong. 4) Look atwhat the advice giver has togain (this is a principle thatoften debunks experts). 5)Measure it and it willimprove—be sure what “it”is. 6) Unintendedconsequences will runramped over the best laidplans regardless of“righteousness “ofintentions.

These books makereaders realize that allleaders and good mangersneed to grow as intellects,repositories of informationand guides of behavior,basing their development onderived wisdom (Blanchardet al., 2002; Tichy & Bennis,2007).

Successful, leaders mustrealize two organizationalimperatives: 1) how tobecome and remain

innovative, and 2) whysomeone would dobusiness with theirorganization (Service,2005c). First, becoming andremaining innovative isprimarily a function of aninnovative leaderemphasizing the need toinnovate. Second, someonedoes business with anorganization because it canprovide something of valuethat has no substitutes,cannot be imitated, and israre (Barney, 1991; 1995).

Highly effectiveorganizational leaders haveshifted emphasis frommanagement of stability andcontrol to leadershipdirected toward speed,empowerment, flexibility,and continuousimprovement, all directed atorganizational innovation(Service, 2005c). Failure toinnovate results inorganizational decline andthe only truly sustainablecompetitive advantagecomes through continuousimprovements (Barney,1991, 1995; Drucker, 1985-more Drucker before itstime; Imai, 1986; Porter &Porter and others, all dates;Service & Service andothers, all dates). Muchmore could be said on thistopic.

The leadershipcomponent. Leadersinfluence followers in adesired direction (Gardner,2003). They can use manystyles and ways to do this(McIntosh, 2011; Monarth,2010). Leadership wisdom isknowing when to tell, sell,ask, collaborate, back off,


jump in, research, shootfrom the hip, become afollower, create a newcontext or enact a newsituation, get new followers,get the old followers back,jump up and down, be still,you get the drift. The onething leaders normally mustavoid is inaction asChurchill said, “I shouldhave made nothing had Inot made mistakes,” (Sourceunknown). For if you wantto avoid leadershipmistakes, stand still, bequiet, do nothing and youwill be nothing.

Pop psychology theoriesof leadership are aleadership lottery for peoplewho do not want to acceptthat leadership developmentis tough, mentallychallenging work. We canequate leadership fads todieting fads, some of whichwork, but all of which havea cost. In dieting, some ofthe costs have been deadly;others have actually helpedfor a while; but most ofthem delayed the realchange that was needed,and produced a roller-coaster effect. Leadershipdevelopment is much likeweight control: at somepoint you have to practicethe basics. Then youcontinuously practice thefundamentals in your newlyacquired lifestyle. Inpersonal leadership develop-ment, you have to learn thebasics of leadership with abalanced perspective. Thereare no simple secretanswers. There is onlybalanced hard work and

discipline behind yourbecoming an effective leaderwho can fit the leaders,followers, and environmentsfacing you so that you canindeed stand out as aneffective leader who hashonor and lasting respect(Peters & Austin, 1985;Peters & Waterman, 1982;Service & Arnott, 2006).Following leadership fads islike dieting by switchingFrench fries for doughnuts!

The leader must beable to self-diagnoseand have a highdegree of self-awareness. . . . theleader must be anexpert observer ofothers. . . . theleader must be ableand willing tointervene, coach,and influence. . .[the] leader’sultimate task is tobuild organizationalcompetence (Runde& Flanagan, 2007:83).

In most organizations inAmerica today, a simpleprinciple must be applied.FISO (fit in before youstandout) is a truism inpractically all cultures.

Rest-of-us ModelConcluding Remarks

This model representsyears of thought and workand it stresses the notionthat leadership can NOT bereduced to principles orsecrets presented by therich and famous. Likewise,

it debunks the thought thatempirical evidence of limitedprinciples will enable one toimprove someone else’s ortheir own leadershipeffectiveness. The modeluses as much as possiblefrom “principles andsecrets” and combines thatwith solid research andexperience to show thatleadership effectiveness is alifetime commitment or it isrelatively worthless. Theleadership “wisdom”objective is continuousimprovement. An interestedlearner will see that wisdomrevolves around 1) under-standing self, others andsituations; 2) balancing goalachievements from manyand varied perspectives; and3) seeking “the commongood through balancing ofintrapersonal, interpersonaland extrapersonal interestsover the short and longterms” (Sternberg, 2003:188). Rest-of-us principlesguide you into becoming theentire leader you canbecome.

To improve yourcapabilities as a leader andachieve desired results,accept the call to a lifetimecommitment to leadershipexcellence. And, from Figure1 understand the fourpillars of overall leadershipeffectiveness and theirindividual sweet-spots: 1:Reflection; 2) Perspective; 3)Introspection; and 4)Extrospection. Once youfind out what each one ismade-up of, and find yourleadership sweet-spot withineach of these four building


blocks, then complete yourleadership you by findingthe sweet-spot amongsweet-spots of leadershipwisdom.

SuccessfulIntelligence as aGuide for ContextualIntelligence

Gardner (1983) in hisseminal work on IQdemonstrated thatintelligence is not one thingbut many. Likewise,Sternberg in his classicwork asks the question “Isintelligence one thing ormany? [Sternberg likeGardner says clearly], it ismany,” (Sternberg, 1988:72). Take specific note of thewarning and realize there isa special intelligence, a verymalleable intelligence, thatcan help one continue towork successfully acrossvarying cultures (differentcontexts) in our evershrinking world.

Though IQ is important,it does not take as muchintelligence as you mightthink to have high intellectin other areas. In my fieldsof leadership andmanagement the literatureis replete with theoriesespousing IQ, EQ, or acombination of both aspredictors of successfulleadership. Most havefound, as Drucker said:

There seems to belittle correlationbetween a man’seffectiveness andintelligence. . . .Brilliant men are

often strikinglyineffectual; they failto realize that thebrilliant insight isnot by itselfachievement (inHenninger, 2002:A16).

Likewise, none of the majorleadership theories—behavioral, trait, situational,contextual, or contingentapproaches, fully answersour need to understandcontextual intelligence as adefinable, teachable, andimprovable component ofcrossing cultures.

We must extend ourunderstanding of IQ andhow it is a building block forsuccess in most professionsthat require crossingcultures (contexts) at anever increasing pace.Sternberg (1996) discardsthe total importance oftraditional IQ and replacesit with “successfulintelligence,” which he saysis the kind of intelligencethat matters in reachinglife’s important goals. Andhere we want to extend thateven further into acontextual intelligence thatcan insure cross culturaland differing contextual fiteffectiveness.

Successful intelli-gence is not anaccident; it can benurtured anddeveloped . . . It ismy contention thatsuccessful intelli-gence should betaught, because it isthe kind of intelli-

gence that will be themost valuable andrewarding in the realworld after school—both in our work andin our personal lives(p. 269). . . . Suc-cessful intelligence . . . involves analyti-cal, creative, andpractical aspects (p.47). . . is primarilyan issue not ofamount but balance,of knowing when andhow to use analytic,creative, and practi-cal abilities. . . .Successfullyintelligent peoplefigure out theirstrengths and theirweaknesses, andthen find ways tocapitalize on theirstrengths— . . . andto correct for orremedy theirweaknesses—findways around whatthey don’t do well, ormake themselvesgood enough to getby (p. 47-49).

One of the mostenduring lessons ofsocial psychology is that behavior changeoften precedeschanges in attitudeand feelings (Brooks:129).

Don’t do this:

He ignored argu-ments that didn’t fithis mental frame-work (Brooks, p.163).


Both quotes point todifferent approaches weshould try in changingattitudes and expandingunderstandings. Remember,

[IQ] is surprisinglymalleable (p. 164). . .. IQ predicts onlyabout 4 percent ofvariance in jobperformance (p.165). . . . Wisdomdoesn’t consist ofknowing specificfacts or possessingknowledge . . . Itconsists of knowinghow to treat know-ledge: being confi-dent but not tooconfident; advent-urous but grounded.It is a willingness toconfront counter-evidence and tohave a feel for thevast spaces beyondwhat’s known (p.168-169). . . . peoplewho succeed tend tofind one goal in thedistant future andthen chase it throughthick and thin (p.177).

Sternberg lists the commoncharacteristics and attri-butes that are found amongsuccessfully intelligentpeople. Successful intelli-gent people 01. motivate themselves.

. . . By letting stu-dents lead me, I haveentered areas that Inever would haveexplored had I

insisted on theirdoing exactly what I,not they, wanted.

02. learn to control theirimpulses.

03. know when topersevere.

04. know how to makethe most of theirabilities.

05. translate thoughtinto action.

06. have a productorientation. . . . Theywant results. . . . Ifwe demand thatstudents merely“consume” informa-tion and feed it backon tests, once againwe are deprivingthem of the kind oflearning experiencethat will be ofgreatest benefit inthe real world, andthat is not how touse theirintelligence.

07. complete tasks andfollow through.

08. are initiators.

09. are not afraid to riskfailure. . . . makemistakes, but notthe same mistaketwice.

10. don’t procrastinate. .. . We found thatfewer seniorexecutives had a

variety of strategiesfor fightingprocrastination.More senior andmore successfulexecutives did nothave them, for thesimple reason thatthey had no need forsuch strategies.

11. accept fair blame.

12. reject self-pity.

13. are independent.

14. seek to surmountpersonal difficulties.

15. focus andconcentrate toachieve their goals.

16. spread themselvesneither too thin nortoo thick.

17. have the ability todelay gratification.

18. have the ability tosee the forest andthe trees.

19. have a reasonablelevel of self-confidence and abelief in their abilityto accomplish.

20. balance analytical,creative, andpractical thinking

(The list is a quote, butexcludes the explanationafter each item: Chapter 8).


Successfully intelli-gent people . . . .Eventually, come tolead it (p. 189). . . .Thus, the truemeasure of yourintelligence is not ina test score; it is inyour willingness todevelop your owntalents (1996: 150).

Guilford, in his 1967seminal work, gives 120measures of intellectpresented in a 3-dimen-sional cube figure. Couldour CIQ could possibly bethis complex?

The purpose of this IQbackground is not to limit ortoo closely frame ourcontextual intellectmeasure. It is to gain anunderstanding of traditionalmethods of measurementand what they mightbecome in order that ourCIQ will not duplicate, yet,not fail to recognizeimportant precepts. As afinal note, current researchcited throughout this article(Brooks, 2011; Hall, 2011;Sternberg, all dates; andothers), shows clearly thatthe traditional IQ is muchmore malleable thanpreviously thought and lessimportant for leadership.

Successful IntelligenceConcluding Remarks

History is filled withexamples of leaders whohave improved their ownsuccessful intelligence by

identifying their short-comings and working toimprove them, albeitwithout the specific formulastated in this article.Abraham Lincoln, ThomasEdison, Condoleezza Rice,Woodrow Wilson, MotherTeresa, and TheodoreRoosevelt—who was neverwithout a book—are exem-plars of both formallyeducated and uneducatedleaders who worked toimprove their IQs in the wayof successful intelligence.

Successfully intelli-gent people areflexible in adapting tothe roles they need tofulfill. They recognizethat they will have tochange the way theywork to fit the taskand situation athand, and then theyanalyze what thesechanges will have tobe and make them (p.153). . . . All of usknow people whosucceed in school butfail in their careers(Sternberg, 1996:220. ItalicsSternberg’s).

IQ is a factor that can helpleaders, successfulintelligence extends that,and the CIQ can become aguide to self-assessment,teaching, growth andlearning how to improvecross cultural effectiveness.

CIQ and Examples ofUseful Models,Figures and Concepts

Shown below are modelsused in much of myresearch, teaching andwriting to describe whatpercepts are involved insuccess in a given area.Then one can analyzethemselves and develop aplan for improvement. Westart this section describingthe max-min principledepicted in Figure 2.

A management andeducation truism is: if you“measure it and it willimprove.” The key is beingsure what “it” is. Here “it” iscontextual intelligence (CIQ)or the intellect that directsone to correctly read situa-tions, discover importantknowledge and identifyskills and abilities useful inhandling new and differentsituations. Yes, this is thehabit of first understandingbefore being understood(Covey, 1990).

Those wishing to beinfluential in any areashould not be dissuaded bylack of CIQ knowledge, skillsor abilities when theypractice the Max-Min princi-ples depicted in exampleFigure 2. As Figure 2demonstrates one identifiesprecepts related to their CIQand then works to maximize,minimize, hone or deflect asappropriate in a balancedstrategic manner using theguide proved in Figure 3.


Figure 2Max-Min Principle Matrix

Figure 3Improvement Planning Guide

1. Clearly and honestly assess yourself vs. precepts.2. Set doable goals that you will measure.

a) Clearly express in specifics–events and behaviorsb) Define as SMART objectives

3. Make goals under your control—professional help?4. Develop a program–strategy that insures you accomplish objectives.5. Establish who will support your development.6. Create accountability for progress—rewards–punishments.

Care ID-ing controllable and not. Skills ID-ing, limiting distractions, studying, learning,relearning, internalizing, and using CIQ will serve you well.

1. List and acknowledge all CIQ shortcomings.2. Describe how you will improve on the shortcomings.3. Establish measures of progress.4. ID and use people in our change support group.

As an example Figure 3shows a general improve-ment plan where youidentify where you are inCIQ and where you need tobe for a more effective CIQ.Then you mind your gapsusing the outline above.

Remember that eachindividual on earth has thepotential to improvethemselves as an X (leader,influencer, manager, or hereCIQ). This article can helpits readers be all theinnovative leader they can

in new and differingcontexts through using allthe prior Figures’ principlesas well as developing thenotion of CIQ. Our CIQ willhelp teachers, mentors,trainers and so on helpothers in self-improvement.


It goes beyond the mediahype of so many feel good,self-help articles and booksand tells it reader how tounderstand and measurethe components ofleadership or otherwiseaimed at improving thehuman influence that mostoften plays out asleadership.

Do not forget the firststep of understanding whereyou are in any context foroften we do not understandthe culture within which wehave worked and lived all ofour lives. That lack ofunderstanding makes onethink maybe you’ll have atough time understanding aculture that is totally new.“To understand the world,you must first understand aplace like Mississippi,”(Words of famed authorWilliam Faulkner in Gibbs,2010: 187.)

Acquiring facts ormeasuring against preceptsdoes not prove leadership inpart because measuringoften kills a livingphenomenon: leadershipshows living influence hasoccurred. Leadership inaction contains manyintangibles. To be of usemeasures must get at theright things or the resultsare meaningless. Though weend up putting leadership’sCIQ component intocategories, you mustremember that,categorization must neverwin out over understanding. Clearly simplisticclassifications do not work(p. 9). . . . The world is verycomplex. There are no

simple explanation forthings. Rather, events arethe result of multiple factorscoming together andinteracting in complex andoften unanticipated ways. . .. it is important to captureas much of this complexity .. . as possible. . . . Obtainmultiple perspectives (p.8). .. . . something occurs whendoing analysis that isbeyond the ability of aperson to articulate orexplain. . . . Interpretation isan art that cannot beformalized (Corbin andStrauss, 2008: 9). This warning has to betaken very seriously in ourdevelopment of such acomplex notion as CIQ.

A Straw-Man CIQInitial CIQ precepts

came from the models andliterature reviewed in thisresearch. Then they wereextended by adding theresults of my interpretiveanalysis of fifty usable andcompleted preliminaryQuestionnaires (shown inAppendix 1-for this initialpaper a convenience samplewas taken from workingMBAs and fellowprofessors). Using methodsdescribed in Corbin andStrauss (2008), Eisenhardt(1989) and Ropo and Hunt(1991) the CIQ preceptsshown below weredeveloped-coded from theQuestionnaire narratives. Itwas rather difficult to codevaried statements intomeaningful concepts thatcould be defined andresearched. And of course,the “coding” as percepts-

labels is subject to my ownbiases and knowledge. I didnote my own biases andasked the perspectives ofothers to improve thevalidity of the derived CIQprecepts.

Encouragingly, therange of nationalities andsituations represented inthese completedquestionnaires was broad.For example, it includedpeople with experiences inAmerica that are fromGermany, Vietnam, China,South Africa, Sweden, Cubaand Spain that I canidentify; and American’swho have worked or lived inmany countries. A next stepis planned for a much largerand more inclusive sampleto be analyzed with severalexperts in a predefined anduniform fashion.

Figure 4 is the resultingproposed initial guide todeveloping a CIQ capable ofbeing further refined. Therefined CIQ can then beempirically tested.

There is much in thismodel that needsexplaining, but the purposehere is not to totally explain,but to forward a beginningmodel. First, one familiarwith the so called big five inpersonality will notice thenarcissism and opennessfactors. Second, for thosethat study cultures we seeethnocentricity (degree ofbelief in the superiority ofone’s ethnic group), adispassionate view ofhumanness and the powerdistance factor which isclose in more open societiesand far in more closed


societies. Third, locus ofcontrol, where an internallocus indicates a feeling ofself-control and externalindicates the opposite.Lastly, we see many itemsthat indicate the need toknow your own frames,mindsets, views andtendencies in order that youmight know in which areayou need to change or dootherwise. The reader mustrealize that most preceptsshown here are not eitheror, but a continuum and consequently most do nothave to change totally to beimproved. The intent is forone seeking improvement tostudy the CIQ in light of theleadership model depictedin Figure 1and discovertheir strengths and

weaknesses. Then Figure 2directs one on how tohandle strengths andweaknesses to improve.Next Figure 3 directsdevelopment of a plan tomind their gaps. That is,here is where I am byprecept shown in Figure 4,and here is where I need tobe for a more effective CIQ.

Those items listed asnatural are precepts thatare established early in lifeand unlikely to changewhen one reaches mid-to-early teenage years. In mostcases, someone is born witha tendency toward a certaintype of behavior and that is amplified early in life. Forexample you hear someonesay of their first femalechild, “She is so sensitive.”

Consequently the child istreated as being sensitive and therefore, a trait thatappeared early in life issolidified and oftenembedded in personality.

In a recent conference acurrent author wasdiscussing the topic ofcrossing cultures with apsychologist who consultedwith large internationalorganizations. In thiscapacity the consultantevaluated candidates forexpatriate assignments. Thepsychologist said the keyfactor that predictedsuccess in her experienceover the years was curiosity(Saba, 2011). Additionally,in a recent paper onadaptation in expatriatesituations identified both

Figure 4CIQ-Cultural Intelligence Quotient

Strengths–advantages that are enables in contextual adaptive developmentNatural–more uncontrollable “good” traits

1. Openness–to limits of self and values. 2. Dispassionate view of human nature.3. Solutions–Equifinality. 4. Locus of control–ambiguity friendly.

Nurtured–more controllable “good” traits1. Mindsets–known–considered–adaptable 2. Social intelligence.3. Degree of ethnocentricity. 4. Attentiveness–learning via observation

Weaknesses–disadvantages and derailers to leadership developmentNatural–more uncontrollable “bad” traits

1. Exhibited country–national affiliation. 2. Narcissism.3. Change avoider. 4. Large power distance.

Nurtured–more controllable “bad” traits1. Disdain for other views. 2. Confirming self-mindset.3. Pervasiveness of learned behavior. 4. Unwillingness to accept differences.


psychological hardinessand cultural distance as keyfactors predictive ofexpatriate success (White,Absher and Huggins, 2011).These factors, though notdiscovered for ourpreliminary testing, areworthy of consideration.Our expectation is thatcuriosity and psychologicalhardness would bemediating variables betweenthe 16 CIQ percepts shownabove as independentvariables (IV) and thedependent variable (DV) ofsuccess in cross culturalassignments. That is,curiosity and psychologicalhardness could both beshown to be necessarycatalysts in a regressionequation where the DVexpatriate success is afunction of the restated IVsfrom the CIQ model.

This is a very briefoverview of how one mightevaluate themselves andwork toward improvementin the ability to adapt tocultural or major contextualchanges. Please do not beput off by this brevity of thedescription of this CIQstraw-man model, just geton with knowing yourselfbetter and developing a“wisdom” improvement plan.Hall (2011) in his discussionof wisdom from views ofphilosophy to neuroscience,stresses a key point thatrelates back to the rest-of-us leadership model. Thatpoint is that wisdom onlyoccurs when one can dealeffectively with uncertaintyand complexity under their

known values andjudgments.

Conclusions To quote Churchill,

Now this is not theend. It is not thebeginning of the end.But it is, perhaps,the end of thebeginning (Mintz-berg, 2009: 195).

This article is not intendedto be the final work on CIQ,but the beginning. Thecurrent author fully realizesit is very limited. However,the reader should not let thelimitations stop them fromgetting the value of theamalgamation of wisdomand linking of concepts andideas. If one is willing towork and study leadership,successful intelligence,innovation and what it takesto work in different culturesunder the various knocksand crannies of differingcontext they will be moresuccessful. Few shoulddoubt that the world willbecome more open andrequirements for handlechange in new and variedcultures will increase:doubters will pay. And payyou will, now or later forCIQ improvement is workand effort that leads tosuccess; or tentativenessand laziness that leads toregrets.

When working tounderstand self, others andsituations alwaysremember,

It would be narrow-minded for us tobelieve that ourpicture of the worldis the definitive one.. . . Experiments inpsychology supportthe idea that peopleautomaticallyassume theirsubjective experienceto be a faithfulrepresentation of thereal world. . . .Immanuel Kantpostulated [in 1781]that the reality weexperience is onethat has beenconstructed andshaped by ourminds, minds limitedby our beliefs,feelings, experiences,and desires (Chopra& Mlodinow, 2011:279).

An awakening is oftenrequired for one tounderstand their narrow-mindedness and to acceptKant’s pronouncement.Only continued epiphaniescan provide a renewableevolving CIQ: remain opento the unexpected, new ordifferent.

ReferencesAczel, A. D. (1999). God’s

equation: Einstein,relativity, and theexpanding universe. NewYork: MJF.

Andreason, A. W. (2008).Expatriate adjustment of


spouses and expatriatemanagers: An integrativeresearch review.International Journal ofManagement, 25 (2),382-395.

Baker, W. M., & Roberts, F.D. (2006). Managing thecosts of expatriation.Strategic Finance, 87(11), 35-41.

Barney, J. (1991). Firmresources and sustainedcompetitive advantage.Journal of Management,17(1), 99-120.

Barney, J. (1995). Lookinginside for competitiveadvantage. Academy ofManagement Executive,9(4), 49-61.

Bate, P. & Child, J. (1987).Paradigms andunderstanding incomparativeorganizational research.In Child, J. & Bate, P.(Editors). Organization ofinnovation east-westperspective, New York:Walter de Gruyter, 19-49.

Best Practices in curriculumredesign. (2011). BizEd.September/October. 48-50.

Bhaskar-Shrinivas, P.,Harrison, D., Shaffer,M., & Luk, D. M. (2005).Input-based and time-based models ofinternationaladjustment: Meta-analytic evidence and

theoretical extensions.Academy of ManagementJournal, 48 (2), 257-281.

Bisoux, T. (2011). Re-Envisioning the MBA.BizEd, September/October, 22-30.

Blanchard K., Lacinak, T.,Tompkins, C. , &Ballard, J. (2002). WhaleDone! The Power ofPositive Relationships.New York: The FreePress.

Blair, T. (2010). A journey:My political Life. NewYork: Alfred A. Knopf.

Brooks, D. (2011). The socialanimal: The hiddensources of love,character, andachievement. New York:Random House.

Caligiuri, P. M., Hyland, M.M., Joshi, A., & Bross,A. S. (1998). Testing atheoretical model forexamining therelationship betweenfamily adjustment andexpatriates’ workadjustment. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 83(4), 598-614.

Charan, R. (2007). Know-how: The 8 skills thatseparate people whoperform from those whodo not. NY: CrownBusiness.

Chopra, D. & Mlodinow, L.(2011). War of

Worldviews. New York:Harmony Books.

Churchill, W. S. (1949). Thesecond world war (6Volumes). London:Cassell & Co. LTD.

Cohen, W. A. (2010).Drucker on leadership:New lessons from thefather of modernmanagement. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Collins, J. (2001). Good togreat: Why somecompanies make the leap. . . and others do not.New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Collins, J. (2003). The 10greatest CEOs of allTime. Fortune. July 21,55-68.

Corbin, J. & Strauss, A.(2008). Basics ofqualitative research:Techniques andprocedures fordeveloping groundedtheory (3rd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Corsini, M. A. (2006). Dowhat you do better.Birmingham, AL: DoWhat You Do BetterPublishing.

Covey, S. (1990). The habitsof highly effective people.New York: Simon &Schuster.


Covey, S. (1991). Principlecentered leadership. NewYork: Summit Books.

Covey, S. (2004). The 8th

habit. New York: FreePress.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990).Flow: The psychology ofoptimal experience. NewYork: Harper Perennial.

Dorner, D. (1996 transla-tion). The logic ofFAILURE: why things gowrong and what we cando to make them right.New York: Henry Holtand Company.Translated from 1989German Version.

Drucker, P. F. (1967). Theeffective executive. NewYork: Harper & Roe.

Drucker, PF. (1973).Drucker, P. F. (1973).Management: Tasks,responsibilities,practices. New York:Harper & Roe.

Drucker, P. F. (1985).Innovation andentrepreneurship. NewYork: Harper & Roe.

Drucker, P. F. (1986). Thepractice of management.New York: Harper &Row.

Drucker, P. F. (1989). Thenew realities. New York:Harper & Row.

Drucker, P. F. (1991). Howto be competitive thoughbig. The Wall StreetJournal, February 7,A14.

Drucker, P. F. (1996). Theshape of things to come.Leader to Leader, PremierIssue, 12-18.

Drucker, P. F. (1998). PeterDrucker on theprofession ofmanagement. Boston,MA:Harvard Business.

Drucker, P. F. (2001). Theessential Drucker. NewYork: Harper CollinsPublishers.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989).Building theories fromcase study research.Academy of ManagementReview, 14(4), 532-550.

Fischlmayr, I. C., &Kollinger, I. (2010).Work-life balance - aneglected issue amongaustrian femaleexpatriates. InternationalJournal of HumanResource Management,21 (4), 455-487.

Friedman, T. L. (2005). Theworld is flat: A briefhistory of the twenty-firstcentury. New York:Farrar, Straus andGiroux.

Friedman, T. L. (2008). Hot,flat and crowded. New

York: Farrar, Straus andGiroux.

Gibbs, C. (2010). God &football. Grand Rapids,MI: Zondervan.

Gladwell, M. (2002). Thetipping point: How littlethings make a bigdifference. Boston: Little,Brown.

Gladwell, M. (2008).Outliers: The Story ofsuccess. New York:Little, Brown andCompany.

Goleman, D. (1995).Emotional intelligence.New York: Bantam.

Goleman, D. (2000).Working with emotionalintelligence. New York:Bantam.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., &McKee, A. (2001). Primalleadership: The hiddendriver of greatperformance. HarvardBusiness Review,December, 42-51.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., &McKee, A. (2002). Primalleadership: Realizing thepower of emotionalintelligence. Boston:Harvard BusinessSchool.

Gundling, E. (2003).Working globesmart. PaloAlto, CA: Davies-Black.


Hall, S. S. (2011). Wisdom:from philosophy toneuroscience. New York:Vintage.

Hanley, F, II. (1997).Accused American warcriminal: “specialprisoner” of the Japanese1945. One of Fewsurvivors of JapaneseKempei Tai military policebrutality. Austin, TX:Eakin Press.

Harari, O. (2002). Theleadership secrets ofColin Powell. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Harrison, D. A., Shaffer, M.A., & Bhaskar-Shrinivas,P. (2004). Going places:Roads more and lesstravelled in research onexpatriate experiences.In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.),Research in personneland human resourcesmanagement (Vol. 23,199-247). US: ElsevierScience/JAI Press.

Hesselbein, F., Goldsmith,M., & Bechhard, R.(Editors). (2002).Leading for innovation:And organizing forresults, The Peter F.Drucker Foundation.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hillenbrand, L. (2010).Unbroken: A World War IIstory of survival,resilience, andredemption. New York:Random House.

Hunger, J. D. & Wheelen, T.L. (2011). Essential ofstrategic management(5th edition). UpperSaddle River NJ:Prentice Hall.

Isaacson, W. (2007).Einstein: His life anduniverse. New York:Simon & Schuster.

Jung, C. G. (1933). Modernman in search of a soul.New York: HarcourtBrace & Company.

Kahn, R. L. (1964).Organizational stress:Studies in role conflictand ambiguity. NewYork: Wiley.

Karl, K., Peluchette, J., &Schlaegel, C. (2010).Who’s posting facebookfaux pas? A cross-cultural examination ofpersonality differences.International Journal ofSelection andAssessment, 18 (2), 174-188.

Kleinschmidt, J. (2009).Cross-companyknowledge sharing; howenterprise socialnetworking transformsthe workplace.Information Management,19, 56.

Klopf, D. W. & McCroskey,J. C. (2007). Interculturalcommunica-tionencounters. Boston, MA: Pearson Education,Inc.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B.Z. (2010). The truthabout leadership: The no-fads, heart-of-the-matterfacts you need to know.New York: Josey-Bass.

Kupka, B., & Cathro, V.(2007). Desperatehousewives—Social andprofessional isolation ofgerman expatriatedspouses. InternationalJournal of HumanResource Management,18 (6), 951-968.

Lee, H.-W. (2007). Factorsthat influence expatriatefailure: An interviewstudy. InternationalJournal of Management,24 (3), 403-413.

Lee, L., & Sukoco, B. M.(2008). The mediatingeffects of expatriateadjustment andoperational capability onthe success ofexpatriation. SocialBehavior & Personality:An International Journal,36 (9), 1191-1204.

Lee, R. (2009). Social capitaland business andmanagement: Setting aresearch agenda.International Journal ofManagement Reviews, 11(3), 247-273.

Levitt, S. D. & Dubner, S. J.(2005). Freaknomics.New York: WilliamMorrow.


Levitt, S. D. & Dubner, S. J.(2009). SuperFreako-nomics. New York:William Morrow.

Li, C. (2010). OpenLeadership: How socialtechnology can transformthe way your lead. NewYork: Jossey-Bass.

Lublin, J. S. (2010).Managing your career:They [sic] keys tounlocking your mostsuccessful career. TheWall Street Journal, July6, D4.

Madjar, N., Oldham, G. R.,& Pratt, M. G. (2002).There’s no place likehome? Thecontributions of workand nonwork creativitysupport to employees’creative performance.Academy of ManagementJournal, 45 (4), 757-767.

Marshall, J. B. (2011).Adam Smith explainedit, however we fail toteach - that the ethicalmaturity of the citizenryis a necessary conditionfor economic growth.Presented at the AnnualMeeting of The Academyof Economics andFinance in Jacksonville,FL.

McIntosh, F. (2011). Therelational leader: Arevolutionary frameworkto engage your team.Boston MA: CourseTechnology.

Mendenhall, M. E., Osland,J. S., Bird, A., Oddou,G. R. & Maznevski, M. L.(2008). Globalleadership: Research,practice anddevelopment. New York:Routledge.

Mintzberg, H. (2004).Managers not MBAs: Ahard look at the softpractice of managing andmanagementdevelopment. SanFrancisco: BKPublishers.

Mintzberg, H. (2009).Managing. UK: PearsonEducation.

Monarth, H. (2010).Executive presence. NewYork: McGraw Hill.

Peters, T. J. (2003). Re-imagine! New York:Dorling Kindersley.

Phan, P. (2011). Buildingthe 21st centurycurriculum. BizEd.September/October, 38-45.

Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive:The surprising truthabout what motives us.New York: Penguin.

Pinker, S. (2002). The Blankslate: The modern denialof human nature. NewYork: Viking.

Pinker, S. (2011). Violencevanquished. The WallStreet Journal,

September 23-24, C1-C2.

Porter, M. E. (1990). Thecompetitive advantage ofnations. New York:Macmillan.

Potoker, E. S. (2011).International humanresource development: Aleadership perspective.Routledge: London andNew York.

Quinn, J. B. (1980).Strategies for change:Logical incrementalism.Homewood, IL: RichardD. Irwin.

Ridley, M. (2003). The Agilegene: How nature turnson nurture. GreatBritain: Fourth Estate.

Ridley, M. (2011). FromPhoenecia to Hayek tothe ‘cloud.’ The WallStreet Journal,September 23-24, A15.

Ropo, A. & Hunt, J. G.(1991). A dynamic casestudy perspective formanagement andorganizational research.An unpublished reportfrom Professor J. G.Hunt Institute forManagement andLeadership Research,College of BusinessAdministration TexasTech University,Lubbock, Texas:December, 48 pages.


Runde, C. E. & Flanagan, T.A. (2007). Becoming aconflict competent leader.New York: John Wiley &Sons.

Saba, A. S. (2011). Roll thedice: Are we gamblingwith global employeeselection? Areassessment ofcompetitive alternatives.Proceedings of TheInternational Academy ofBusiness and PublicAdministrationDisciplines, Memphis,TN. October 27-30, 388(abstract only published)

Service, R. W. (2005a). CQ:The communicationsquotient for ISprofessionals. Journal ofInformation Science31(2), 99-113.

Service, R. W. (2005b).Measuring and teachingfor success: Intelligenceversus IQ. TheInternational CollegeTeaching Methods &Styles Journal, 1(1), 5-24.

Service, R. W. (2005c). SQversus IQ: Successfulintelligence matters. TheInternational Journal ofBusiness Disciplines,16(1), 81-96.

Service, R. W. (2006). Thedevelopment of strategicintelligence: a managerialperspective. InternationalJournal of Management,23(1), 61-77.

Service, R. W. (2009a). Theleadership quotient:Measuring towardimprove. BusinessRenaissance Quarterly,4(1), 125-158.

Service, R. W. (2009b).Leadership quotient©’sthought experiment: Aframework for leadershipand management.International Journal ofBusiness and PublicAdministration, 6 (3), 74-90.

Service, R. W. (2010).Management: “Is versus“should be.” Problemsand Perspectives inManagement, 8(2), 21-43.

Service, B. & Arnott, D.(2006). The leadershipquotient: 12 dimensionsfor measuring andimproving leadership.New York: iUniverse.

Service, R. W. & Carson, C.M. (2009). Managementand leadership: ReligionThe “mother of allcontext.” InterbeingJournal, 3(1), 37-43.

Service, R. W. & Carson, C.M. (2010a). Becoming amore effective manager:Reality versus hype.China-USA BusinessReview. 9(11), 21-41.

Service, R. W. & Carson, C.M. (2010b). Discrimina-tion, diversity and an

HRM model. BusinessStudies Journal. 2(1), 29-47.

Service, R. W. & Cockerham,D. (2007). The manager-ial MBA: Classroom Labexperience. The Journalof Learning in HigherEducation, 3(1), 1-14.

Service, R. W. & Dance, J.W. (2011). IAM quotientfor impressionmanagement: A guide toappearance andbehavior for youngprofessionals.Proceedings of AmericanInstitute of HigherEducation. April:Charleston, SC.Received one of five bestpapers award.

Service, R. W. & Fekula, M.J. (2008). Beyondemotional intelligence:The EQ matrix as aleadership imperative.The BusinessRenaissance Quarterly,3(2), 23-58.

Service, R. W. & Ledlow, J.(2007). Academic andpractitioner realities ofmanagement: Onreligion and politics inparticular. InternationalJournal of BusinessDisciplines, 18(2), 1-22.

Service, R. W. & Lockamy,III, A. (2008). Managerialpromotions formulasand a human resourcemanagement model.


Management ResearchNews, 31(4), 245-257.

Service, R. W. & Loudon, D.L. (2010). The “is” versusthe “should be” ofperformance appraisals:Do not confuse them!Business RenaissanceQuarterly, 5(3), 63-84.

Service, R. W. & Maddux, H.S. (1999). Buildingcompetitive advantagethrough IS: Theorganizationalinformation quotient.Journal of InformationScience, 25(1), 51-65.

Service, R. W., Smith, D, L.& Boockholdt, J. L.(2006). An empiricalinvestigation ofeducation, workexperience, and ethicalvalues. Review ofBusiness Research,VI(3), 202-212.

Service, R. W. & White, D.(2011). Leadershipeffectiveness for therest-of-us. Accepted forPresentation andProceeding Publicationat the Academy ofBusiness and PublicAdministrationDisciplines in Memphis,TN, October 27.

Shaffer, M. A., Harrison, D.A., & Gilley, K. M.(1999). Dimensions,determinants, anddifferences in theexpatriate adjustmentprocess. Journal of

International BusinessStudies, 30 (3), 557-581.

Shen, Y., & Hall, D. T.(2009). Whenexpatriates explore otheroptions: Retaining talentthrough greater jobembeddedness andrepatriation adjustment.Human ResourceManagement, 48 (5),793-816.

Shinn, S. (2011). Thecustomizable curricu-lum. BizEd, Septemer/October, 32-37.

Smith, A. (1976). An inquiryinto the nature andcauses of the Wealth ofNations. P. H. Campbell& A. S. Skinner generaleditors. Indianapolis, IA:Liberty Classics.

Smolin, L. (2001). Threeroads to quantum gravity.New York. Basic Books

Sternberg, R. J. (1996).Successful intelligence:how practical andcreative intelligencedetermine success in life.New York: Simon &Schuster.

Sternberg, R. J. (2003).Wisdom, intelligence, andcreativity synthesized.New York: CambridgeUniversity Press

Storti, C. (2001). The art ofcrossing cultures (2nd

edition). Yarmouth, ME:Intercultural Press.

Swaim, B (2011). AnEnglishman lights out: Abook review of J.Raban’s Driving Home.The Wall Street Journal,September 17-18, C6.

Takeuchi, R. (2010). Acritical review ofexpatriate adjustmentresearch through amultiple stakeholderview: Progress, emergingtrends, and prospects.Journal of Management,36 (4), 1040-1064.

Takeuchi, R., Seakhwa Yun,R., & Tesluk, P. E.(2002). An examinationof crossover andspillover effects ofspousal and expatriatecross-culturaladjustment onexpatriate outcomes.Journal of AppliedPsychology, 87 (4), 655-666.

Tichy, N. M. (2002). Theleadership engine. NewYork: HarperCollins.

Tichy, N. M. & Bennis, W.G. (2007). Judgment: How winning leadersmake great calls. NewYork: Portfolio.

Tyson, N. deGrasse, (2007).Death by black hole: Andother cosmic quandaries.New York: W. W. Norton& Company.

White, D. W., Absher, R. K.& Huggins, K. A. (2011).The effects of hardiness


and cultural distance onsociocultural adaptationan expatriate salesmanager population.Journal of PersonalSelling & SalesManagement, XXXI(3),325-337.

White, D. W. & Lean, E.(2008). The impact of

perceived leaderintegrity onsubordinates in a workteam environment.Journal of BusinessEthics, 81, 765–778.

Wren, D. A. & Bedeian, A.G. (2009). The evolutionof management thought

(6th edition). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Zander, R. S. & Zander, B.(2000). The art ofpossibility: Transformingprofessional andpersonal life. New York:Penguin.

Appendix AThe Questionnaires

Cultural Experience Questionnaire – Date ___/___/___ Complete if you have CrossedCultures

Interviewer name: _________________________________

Describe a cross cultural experience you have had. i.e., I taught Leadership and Managementin the Kiev Business School’s MBA program three separate times over three years. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What was the key to success as you think back to the experience? i.e., Learning to slowdown and wait for the interpreters; American humor was of little use and; I needed mostly listenand ask._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Can you think of any negative “things” you did or do you have any other advice? i.e.,They could not believe that the financial statements that are made public in the U.S. could possiblybe valid. I challenged them too hard in this area and they stopped listening to me. They simply didnot trust government or the press. I would say I learned not to argue so strongly._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Your nationality: _____________________________________________ Your home country: __________________________________________Your ethnicity: _______________________________________________

Other Country (Countries) where event occurred__________________________________________.


Contextual Change Experience Questionnaire – Date ___/___/___ Complete if you havehad a major non-society-cultural change

Interviewer name: _________________________________

Describe a cross cultural experience you have had. i.e., I obtained a Ph.D. at the age of 48and began anew as a professor in a religious University in the South with a strict Baptist tradition.In my prior job I worked for a 72,000 employee multinational hard drinking, hard playing, cursing,Corporation in Dallas, Texas. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What was the key to success as you think back to the experience? i.e., I basically quitetelling everyone what and how to do things and shut up and listened. The key to politics inUniversity is listening; the key in a competitive organization is more “blustery.” ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Can you think of any negative “things” you did or do you have any other advice? i.e., Iseemed to support the wrong people and had too little respect for the need to talk things out beforeacting. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Age_________ Educational level ___________ Sex __ (M/F)

Type of organization ______________ (governmental, religious, educational, serviceindustry, manufacturing industry, logistic, other-please specify)

______________________________________________________________________________ (optional your name and organization name)

Thank you very much for your time and attention

Copyright of Southern Business Review is the property of Georgia Southern University, College of BusinessAdministration and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without thecopyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles forindividual use.

Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ ... · Southern Business Review. Winter 2012 19...

Documents

Transcript of Leadership and Innovation Across Cultures: The CIQ ... · Southern Business Review. Winter 2012 19...