Thesis: The Change of Stereotypical Thinking of US-Expatriates in Austria

INSTITUT FÜR INTERNATIONALES MANAGEMENT

The change of stereotypical thinking of expatriates in Austria

Diplomarbeit

zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Magisters der

Sozial und Wirtschaftswissenschaften (Mag.rer.soc.oec.)

Verfasser:

Stefan Öhner

[email protected]

Betreuer: a.Univ.Prof. Dr. Werner Auer-Rizzi

Linz, am 17. August 2010

2

For my parents


i

Declaration in lieu of oath

Ich erkläre an Eides statt, dass ich die vorliegende Diplomarbeit selbstständig und

ohne fremde Hilfe verfasst, andere als die angegebenen Quellen und Hilfsmittel nicht

benutzt bzw. die wörtlich oder sinngemäß entnommenen Stellen als solche kenntlich

gemacht habe.

I hereby declare that I produced the submitted thesis with no assistance from any other

parties and without the use of any unauthorized aids, and that all passages reproduced

verbatim or nearly so, from any publication whatsoever have been clearly identified as

quotations and all the relevant bibliographical references have been provided.

Linz, am 17. August 2010 ___________________

Stefan Öhner


ii

Table of Contents

Declaration in lieu of oath i

Table of Contents ii

List of Figures iv

List of Tables v

List of Abbreviations vi

1. Introduction 01

2. Literature Review 03

2.1. Stereotyping 04

2.1.1. Definition of stereotyping 04

2.1.2. The process of stereotyping 10

2.1.3. Ways to reduce stereotyping 14

2.2. Expatriation 20

2.2.1. What is expatriation? 20

2.2.2. Selection of expatriates 24

2.2.3. The cycle of expatriation 27

2.2.4. Cultural adaptation 34

2.3. Expatriation and stereotyping 42

2.3.1. Satisfaction in the host country 42

2.3.2. Developing social competence 46

2.3.3. Questions to be targeted 48

3. Empirical study 50

3.1. Design and methodology of the empirical study 50

3.2. Interview samples 55

4. Results of the study 57

4.1. The image of Austria before expatriation 58

4.2. Change of stereotypical thinking 63


iii

4.3. The influence of certain experiences 74

4.4. Identified patterns that change stereotypical thinking 79

5. Limitations of the study 83

6. Conclusion 85

7. Bibliography 88

8. Appendix 96

8.1. Interview guideline 96

8.2. Coding list 100


iv

List of Figures

Figure 1: The Frenchman 05

Figure 2: The German 05

Figure 3: The US-American 05

Figure 4: The dual process model 12

Figure 5: Possible results of stereotype-inconsistent information 17

Figure 6: The purpose of expatriation 22

Figure 7: The cycle of expatriation 27

Figure 8: Cross cultural training approach 29

Figure 9: Stages of cultural adaptation 35

Figure 10: Intercultural adjustment 39

Figure 11: From cultural knowledge to satisfaction 43

Figure 12: Developing the competence to manage diversity 47

Figure 13: Global mindset 72

Figure 14: Three phases of stereotypical competence 78


v

List of Tables

Table 1: Understanding differences versus stereotyping 18

Table 2: Reasons for expatriate assignments 21

Table 3: Expatriation selection criteria 24

Table 4: Tasks of the study 50


vi

List of Abbreviations

MNC Multinational Company

IHRM International Human Resource Management

HCN Host Country National

US United States of America


1

1. Introduction

The cultural adaptation of expatriates in the host country is an essential element of

successful business performance and a sense of well being. A well adapted expatriate

is psychologically and emotionally satisfied, and owns social competence. Contrarily,

unsuccessful adaptation may lead to a lowering of mental health, identity confusion,

feelings of marginality and alienation. If an individual is fully adapted to the new

culture, they not only accept the new culture but live like natives and enjoy their state

of being (Jun et al., 2001).

Stereotyping or prejudice can be a major problem for an expatriate to deal with and

overcome in a foreign country. As a common phenomenon, stereotypes basically

develop because people are not able or willing to obtain the necessary information

about a different cultural group (Grobman, 1990). Subsequently, generalizations about

these groups form, which most of the time leads to the creation of wrong assumptions,

discrimination and judgments.

This thesis deals with the change of stereotypical thinking of expatriates during their

stay abroad as step to further investigation. Hardly any studies exist that show changes

of stereotypical thinking while being abroad either privately or while doing business as

an expatriate. Do experiences in a foreign country influence the stereotypes of this

country and, if yes, how does this affect the expatriate?

This research paper examines the question of whether the stereotypical thinking of

expatriates changes during their stay in a foreign country and, if yes, in what way and

for what reasons this change evolves. Due to the lack of literature and knowledge in

this field, an empirical study will be carried out and taken into account.


2

The participants of the empirical study are expatriates from the United States of

America working and living in Austria. People of different ages living in Austria for

different lengths of time were asked to participate in the interview in order to see the

change of stereotypical thinking over time. The interview will focus on the “image of

Austria” the expatriates had in their head before they arrived in Austria, about critical

incidents, their experiences, difficulties and problems they encountered, and how they

mastered them, as well as their current image of Austria.

Through qualitative research, interviews can be created in which the following

research questions are targeted. First, the image of Austria the expatriates had before

going abroad and what their stereotypes were before their stay in the host country will

be ascertained. The second set of questions targets expatriates that lived in Austria,

asking them if those stereotypes changed and, following, if there were certain

experiences that had an effect on them. The set of questions above points to whether

certain patterns or factors can be identified and, if yes, in which direction these

patterns run. Basically, through these interviews I will analyze the differences in the

expatriates’ “pictures” of Austria and how they evolved during their stay. I will try to

find patterns in their development.

The thesis is divided in three main sections. First, there is a literature review about the

issues of stereotyping and expatriation. The process of stereotyping, as well as ways to

reduce it, will be discussed in the first part. Additionally, the term “expatriation” and

the meaning behind it will be analyzed. Further, the question of available literature that

shows an immediate connection of stereotyping and expatriation will be targeted. It

will show if there are patterns concerning prejudices expatriates have and, how these

change over the years. Finally, the questions to be targeted will be asked, leading into

the third major part of this paper. There, the empirical study will be analyzed and, in

conclusion, the findings presented.


3

2. Literature Review

This chapter covers the theoretical basis of the terms “stereotypes” and “expatriation”,

as well as their connection.

The first section defines stereotyping and deals with the process and development of

stereotypes, as well as the question of why people tend to think in stereotypical

manners. Additionally, the changes in stereotypical thinking in combination with in-

groups and out-groups will be analyzed. Finally, ways to reduce stereotypical thinking

in general will be shown through different theories.

The second section is about the increasingly important issue of expatriation. After a

definition and the causes of business expatriation, a short input about the selection

process of business expatriates is given. The part about the cycle of expatriation deals

with tasks before, during, and after expatriation, as well as several cultural training

approaches. Finally, a section will focus on the cultural aspect. The process of cultural

adaptation is essential for successful expatriation, and, therefore, several steps have to

be taken into account to accomplish this goal. Cultural shock has to be dealt with and

kept to a minimum.

The final part of this chapter deals with the theoretical connection between

stereotyping and expatriation. The theory of cultural knowledge leading to satisfaction

of the expatriate in the host country will be shown and discussed. Theoretical

knowledge about the host culture seems to be just one part of many in order to be

satisfied and able to rethink certain stereotypes. Finally, the questions to be targeted in

the empirical chapter will be raised.


4

2.1. Stereotyping

“For the most part we do not first see, and then define, we define and

then see. In the great blooming, buzzing confusion of the outer world

we pick out what our culture has already defined for us, and we tend

to perceive that which we have picked out in the form stereotyped for

us by our culture” (Lippmann, 1998, p. 81).

2.1.1. Definition of stereotyping

The term stereotype originally derived from printing. Stereotyping was the process of

forming an exact duplicate of a letter combination on a metal, rigid plate used to create

almost unlimited prints. This duplication method was used in basically every magazine

print office. The journalist and owner of the magazine The New Republic, Walter

Lippmann (1998), started to use the term in a socio-scientific way (Lippmann, 1998).

Through the impressions of World War I, he had the idea that people formed a rigid

idea of another culture via mass media news coverage, and, therefore, had a certain

picture of other cultures in their minds although they never had contact and actual

experience with them (Petersen & Schwender, 2009, p. 8).

Stereotyping, as a central phenomenon of life nowadays, basically biases the judgment

of groups or individuals (Gill, 2004, p. 620). It is a generalization about these groups

or individuals resulting from a lack of knowledge about them. It basically can be

measured by asking quite direct or subtle questions, in order to make it harder for

people to hide their prejudices. The following pictures in figures 1 to 3 are examples of

existing stereotypes. Figure 1 shows a cartoon of a French person, holding a baguette

and bottle of wine, with a snail on the floor. In figure 2, there is a “typical German”,

which non-Germans believe a German looks like. Figure 3 shows a “stereotypical”

US-American. However, these images, or ideas of images, should not be deflected

from tangible facts, but are simply opinions (Graff & Schaupp, 2009).


5

Figure 1: The Frenchman (Gentleman, 2007)

Figure 2: The German (Graff & Schaupp, 2009)

Figure 3: The US-American (Datter, 2008)

According to Anton Pelinka, an Austrian political scientist, Austrians are considered to

be…

“… friendly and harmless, a great power only in the past – nowadays only

as regards culture; and then the beautiful landscape: the Austria of the four

M’s: Mountains and Mozart, Maria Theresia and Music” (Kordon & Uitz,

2006, p. 3).”


6

Very often, Austria is associated with the “Sound of Music”, a music-filled Hollywood

production of the glory Austrian past. This is meshed with visions of tomorrow’s

world, Mozart, or Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis (Kordon & Uitz, 2006, p. 3ff).

Furthermore, stereotypical Austria contains the so-called “Kaffeehauskultur” (Blattner,

2005, p. 90), or a visit to the “Heurigen”, a wine tavern, where winegrowers offer their

newest creations (Blattner, 2005, p. 88). However, negative stereotypes contain anti-

Semitism, its participation in the 2nd World War’s holocaust, and the current pseudo-

innocent rhetoric of quite important politicians (Kordon & Uitz, 2006, p. 11).

Stereotypes develop because people are not able or willing to obtain the necessary

information about another culture, and often create false fixed ideas leading to

insecurity and fear towards this other culture, as well as discrimination (Grobman,

1990).

However, stereotyping does not necessarily mean to be purely negative, as seen in the

Austrian example. They clearly can contain positive attributes about a certain group, or

culture, too. An example would be the stereotypical fact that women are caring, or

black people are good athletes. Yet, this might bring up the significance that they lack

in some other important qualities. Therefore, the evaluation of stereotypes into positive

or negative has to be done very carefully (Lippmann, 1998, p. xxix).

Nevertheless, there are three guiding socio-psychological principles explaining

stereotyping. First, stereotypes are explanatory aids; second, they are energy-saving

tools to reduce the effort explanation requires; and, third, they are shared group beliefs

(Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 2).

Explanatory aids: Stereotyping is a cognitive categorization process where differences

and similarities between groups become visible. Every group has certain

characteristics that set it apart from others. This accentuation is important to the group

to be able to be recognized, responded to and remembered. It is also essential for the


7

individual to categorize those groups. However, if there is too much information about

a specific group, the recipient tends to reduce the input by filtering or ignoring most of

the given information, as the next part describes (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 2f).

Energy saving tools: Stereotyping, on the one hand, is very efficient, because it does

not take long to gather some information about a group. This is important since

nowadays life is very complex and fast-paced. Considerable amount of data are

compromised in order for a person to have an overview of the different things

happening, and to categorize them roughly. However, on the other hand, the

memorized information is not very accurate. The main purpose is to be able to deal

with the overload of information that is available. The problem is, however, that in

addition to verbal information also non-verbal, visual data is included. Every

stereotype is then associated with not verbalized data, and, therefore, stereotypes

sometimes are not the actual, realistic images of a group (Petersen & Schwender,

2009, p. 9).

The condensing of complex information and the simultaneous consideration of

unverbalized data very often lead to negative stereotyping due to wrong assumptions

and misunderstandings. Over the years, stereotyping was associated in a negative way.

They have often been made responsible for false accusations and errors in getting an

accurate picture of a group (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 4). Additionally, stereotypical

manners were often developed by isolated, negative behavior of a member of a group

or culture which then was wrongly generalized as a representative of the whole group

(Grobman, 1990). Recent examples of wrongly generalized stereotypes are migrants

seeking for a new life. They are often seen as being a certain danger to public safety,

as costly to society or as individuals that do not fit in. Koch (2002) argued that visual

stereotypes strengthen this generalization due to constantly negative reporting about

migrants in newspapers. This standardized, mostly belittling picture of migrant people

leads to a negative stereotype in general (Koch, 2002, p. 58).


8

However, this does not necessarily mean that stereotyping is bad, as already mentioned

above. It is a way to form an opinion of another group of individuals, and, unless it

leads to dangerous things like race discrimination, it helps to learn about other cultures

as a whole. Furthermore, people tend to judge because their “brains are simply wired

to stereotype others, and […] categorize people every day by race, gender, religion,

ethnic background, and the like” (Moore, 2007).

Shared group beliefs: Individual stereotypes hardly ever attract attention. Only if a

group shares the same beliefs do stereotypes become important. Mc Garty et al. (2002)

discovered two different approaches that affect individual minds. First, a common

environment offers a common stimulus to different people, and, therefore, those

individuals develop similar stereotypical patterns. The second approach, which is more

plausible, says that there is a shared culture or ideology which individuals get more

similar to, or, contrarily, more different. There is a certain dynamic movement in

stereotypical development because individuals change over time, and, due to the fact

that stereotypes are normative beliefs – like other beliefs too – they are able to be

changed. The beliefs are shared by a group in a way that they coordinate them and

their behavior in order to start processes to become more similar in certain areas which

are group relevant (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 6).

From a sociological point of view, these stereotypical groups can be divided into in-

groups and out-groups. Inside a group, stereotypes can be used as a communication

device and as a way to show the difference of such a cluster, compared to other

groups, out-groups, which they are not able or not willing to be identified with (Reich

& Spitzner, 2002, p. 45f).

The previous abstracts described the different principles of stereotypes from a socio-

psychological point of view. However, they do not offer much information about the

psychological nature of stereotypes, which can be divided into two different patterns

of how they form. First, there is stereotypical thinking as a result of a set of beliefs.


9

Therefore, a stereotype is “a relatively enduring system of interrelated concepts that

inform perceptions of members of certain groups” (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 7).

Second, stereotyping could also be the result of referring to a specific image of a

certain group (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 7).

As the introductory quote by Lippmann specifies that people tend to first define and

then see (Lippmann, 1998, p. 81), there is the question of how those stereotypes and

prejudices evolve initially. Therefore, the process by which individuals develop

stereotypes of groups and how they form in general will be discussed next.


10

2.1.2. The process of stereotyping

There are several theories about how stereotypes develop. Some of them are already

mentioned in the previous chapter, for example Grobman’s theory of missing

information (1990), or the differentiation of groups in order to clarify a certain

separation to others (Mc Garty et al., 2002, p. 6; Reich & Spitzner, 2002, p. 45f).

However, literature describes further ways of stereotype development, which will be

examined and analyzed in this chapter.

One theory is self-enhancement, where threats or temporary threats of a group’s or

individual’s self-esteem cause a stronger urge to think stereotypical of threatening

groups or individuals. This basically means that stereotypes develop stronger when

there is a need for self-enhancement. This need for positive self-evaluation, however,

mostly appears on a collective level. Favoring one’s in-group and decreasing the

significance of out-groups basically succeed in boosting each individual’s self-esteem

of the in-group. Additionally, it increases the standards of the in-group’s own culture.

Stangor & Schaller (1996) also argue that the status of a social group within a society

is related to the development of their collective self-esteem. Therefore, minority

groups and groups with lower status in society tend to express in-group favoritism.

Nevertheless, temporary threats to a group, with no relevance of the group’s status in

society or size, might lead to stereotyping and prejudice. Lastly, developing and

expressing consensual stereotypes of out-groups is also a way of becoming accepted as

an individual within a group (Stangor & Schaller, 1996, p. 23f).

Another theory suggests that stereotyping serves as a way of evaluation in order to

provide a useful basis of information about a group and put them into different

categories rather than having an exact equal of it. However, in some cultures, for

example in the West, this categorization is seen as impolite and wrong. People should

ideally be seen as individuals with diverse attitudes and characteristics (Mc Garty et

al., 2002, p. 8).


11

Smith and DeCoster (2000) argue that it is in the nature of human beings to differ

between two strategies while solving various logical problems. They either use a fast

approach in order to find reasonable and logical answers efficiently, or they can think

about the situation closely, spending enough time to come up with a different answer

than in the first place. In other words, they might agree on facts or arguments since

they seem to be put together by an expert and sound reasonable. However, this

situation might change after a closer look at the evidence (Smith & DeCoster, 2000, p.

108). Recently developed so-called dual process models provide a possible

explanation about how people scan other cultures or people (Chaiken & Trope, 1999).

They either take a fast approach if they are not willing to spend the time and effort on

an in-depth analysis, or they are willing and able to investigate the subject closely and

try to find out about certain factors. The model, therefore, also examines under what

conditions this second step might happens (Smith & DeCoster, 2000, p. 108).

In order to take a closer look at dual processing in connection with stereotyping,

Brewer & Feinstein (1999) gave the example of imagine the statement: “James is a

nurse”. In a category-based interpretation, the word “nurse” is activated first, which

leads to a context of general knowledge about this occupation, such as the belief that

nurses are generally women. The male name “James” and any following information

about him will be recalled in connection with the word “nurse”. Contrarily, in a

person-based interpretation, the person James is the subject of discussion and,

therefore, the center of the information gathering process. The word “nurse”, as well as

any other information will be collected around “James”. The intension of the dual

processing model is to distinguish between the category-based and person-based

interpretation of information (Brewer & Feinstein, 1999, p. 255). Figure 4, therefore,

shows the different ways people can interpret information and how they process it.


12

Figure 4: The dual process model (Brewer, 1988, p. 5)

Primarily, the differentiation between automatic and controlled processing is

implemented. In this stage the person unintentionally decides if the occurrence, such as

upcoming information, is relevant or not. In case it is irrelevant, the intrinsic choice

between a category-based or person-based interpretation does not come up. However,

from the point the stimulus is perceived as relevant, there are two modes of processing

the gathered information. The categorized processing, which is at the left in figure 4,

starts with activating a stereotypical thinking process through the method of pattern

matching. The person will scan information already available until it fits with the

actual stimulus. If this is successful, the process is fulfilled. In case the stimulus differs

from the information available, a more specific individual picture will be drawn – a so-

called individuation process develops. In the personal processing, contrarily, the

information already available is just used to build a faster and better picture of how the


13

stimulus person is. This mode is rather complex compared to categorizing, because it

depends on how much knowledge about a certain stimulus already exists and to what

extent this knowledge is used. Person-based categorization does not necessarily lead to

stereotyping since there is hardly a categorization. However, to some extent these two

processes happen parallel (Brewer & Feinstein, 1999, p. 256).

An interrelated study of Smith et al. (2006) shows a positive correlation between a

decrease of individuation and an increase of stereotyping when a person is exposed to

similar stimuli. In other words, previous exposure to a stimulus tends to lead to

category-based interpretation of information, and, therefore, towards stereotypical

thinking (Smith et al., 2006, p.475f). According to several authors (such as Garcia-

Marques & Mackie, 2001; Johnston & Hawley, 1994) this even makes sense since the

cognitive ability of people to process information on a high level over a longer period

of time is limited. Therefore, people tend to use previously gained knowledge in

similar situations, and, subsequently, stereotype (Smith et al., 2006, p.476).


14

2.1.3. Ways to reduce stereotyping

Stereotypes of cultures or certain groups are hard to change, and, these changes take a

long time. Superficial thinking about a group leads to a stereotypical perceptions in

people’s judgments, and even the attempt to process information can be influenced by

stereotypes, and, therefore, outcomes tend to be biased (Smith & Mackie, 2000, p.

190).

So, how can stereotypes be diminished? Even noticed differences do not necessarily

lead to a reduction of stereotyping, as Smith and Mackie (2000) point out. Observers

have a propensity to explain away unexpected deflections and make special

circumstances responsible for the discrepancy. An example is the common stereotype

about women and men. In tasks recognized as feminine, where participants of both

sexes do well, the same attributions are made. However, in cases considered

“masculine”, successful women are said to have gotten lucky. Men’s success was

automatically attributed to their abilities as men. Observers as well as participants in

this study denied women the credit for doing the masculine task properly because they

were just able to. They are either considered to be highly motivated to be successful in

a man’s world, or, as already mentioned, simply lucky (Smith & Mackie, 2000, p.

192).

This simple example shows that information that proves stereotypes wrong hardly ever

leads to an actual change in stereotypical thinking. A few exceptions of stereotypes do

not change the minds of prejudiced observers. Literature, therefore, offers many

theories of how to deal with stereotyping and ways to reduce it.

In 1954, the US-American psychologist Gordon Allport published the so-called

“contact hypothesis”, a paper about how to reduce prejudice in intergroup contacts

(Allport, 1954, n.a.). His study was focused on characteristics of contact situations

between different groups. Allport found out that only if several conditions are met is a


15

reduction of prejudice possible. First, equal status between the groups has to be given.

Second, common goals have to be set, which basically means an issue or a task that

can be shared as the same target, or a so-called “superordinate goal”. Third, no

competition between the groups is allowed and both groups have to be dependent on

each other in order to successfully fulfill the task. Fourth, a commonly acknowledged

authority has to be agreed on that establishes customs, laws and social norms and

sanctions them (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000, p. 94).

Furthermore, researchers expanded the theory over the last decades, but it became

increasingly difficult to meet all the necessary conditions. Through a meta-analysis of

over 200 previous studies, Pettigrew and Tropp (2000) developed a model to reduce

prejudice between groups. They found six essential points to achieve optimal contact

to solve the problem of inter-group stereotyping (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000, p. 110).

First, Allport’s four conditions should still be met in programs dealing with the

reduction of stereotypes. In addition, cross-group friendship is also an essential step

and should be enhanced strongly. In other words, relationships between members of

the two divergent groups reduce prejudicial thinking. The second point deals with

structuring Allport’s conditions. Equal status between groups, as demanded in

Allport’s conditions, hardly ever exists. Therefore, depending on the group context, it

is important that groups with lower status and a different perspective are also

incorporated into the process of reducing prejudices. Third, stereotyping is just one

component of prejudice in addition to beliefs and social distance, which can be

focused on through intergroup contact. Optimally, structured contact should focus on

this variety of prejudices rather than just on one single component. The fourth step

deals with additional important factors, such as surroundings and external influences.

Group contacts in an office, organizational settings, or work have a much deeper

impact than travel or tourism settings. However, the intensity and length of a contact

situation, as well as the necessary obligations to create the intergroup contact, have

major influences on its success. Fifth, it is important to establish situations where


16

groups face strong prevailing stereotypes and prejudices to be able to work on them.

The more obvious and clearly wrong stereotypes are, the easier it is to reduce them.

Finally, Pettigrew & Tropp (2000) mention that intergroup contact is an essential step

to overcome prejudicial thinking, but it is not enough. Social-structural changes in our

society, for example in institutions, are absolutely necessary to build a foundation for

intergroup contact. A good example is the United States Army, where structural

changes helped to overcome racism within the institution. Examples, therefore, are

tight regulations concerning getting along with equals as well as superiors and a “no

exception policy”. Contrarily, several American universities suffer from intergroup

conflicts and discrimination. They were not able or not willing to create socio-

structural changes to adapt to a diverse community (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000, p.

110f).

Several other authors argue that simple contact is not enough. Blaine (2007), for

example, writes that common interactions between groups help to reduce stereotyping.

In neighborhoods with different backgrounds but a common goal, like fighting crime,

or keeping the neighborhood clean and beautiful, stereotyping is reduced significantly

(Blaine, 2007, p. 209). Additional communication as well as the points above is still

necessary to reduce prejudice.

All the efforts to try to change or dispose stereotypes through communication or social

structural changes often do not lead to an actual positive result. The following chart in

figure 5 (Smith and Mackie, 2000) shows several reasons why stereotypes might

remain even with inconsistent information. The left side of the figure illustrates an

unsuccessful change of prejudices due to people defending and further using certain

stereotypes. Contrarily, the outcome on the right side explains successful change or

rejection of stereotypical thinking (Smith & Mackie, 2000, p. 197).


17

Figure 5: Possible results of stereotype-inconsistent information

(Smith & Mackie, 2000, p. 197)

The left column shows several possible reasons for stereotypes being strengthened

rather than changed. If inconsistent information is explained or individuals who do not

act stereotypically are considered atypical, the chances that stereotypes remain are

significant possibly. Even a new stereotype can be formed – a subtype of the existing

one – if there is a group of individuals acting atypical. In some situations stereotypes

are activated automatically, and, then, those stereotypes tend to stick. Contrarily,

however, stereotypes are rejected or changed if incoherent information is accessed

from too many sources within the stereotypical group, and, when the information

cannot be explained away. Also, when people are open-minded and enter into

conversations choosing not to rely on prejudices, stereotypes can change (Smith &

Mackie, 2000, p. 197f).

Since this thesis is about stereotypical thinking in a business environment, it is

essential for managers and coworkers (and expatriates) in inter- or multinational

organizations to be able to deal with different cultures and diversity in general.

Understanding cultural differences and stereotyping are two totally different things,


18

and, therefore, it is important to consider this fact in the business-, as well as in the

social world (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 80). The following table (Table 1) shows an

example of how these discrepancies between stereotyping, and managing and valuing

differences take place.

Table 1: Understanding differences versus stereotyping (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 81)

As already mentioned above, indicators of stereotyping are wrong assumptions of a

group made in advance, mostly (but not always) negative and based on anecdotal

evidence or impressions without any direct contact to the group. On the other hand,

managing the differences is based on actual research proven differences of cultural

clusters. These cultural differences are not seen as negative, such as stereotypes, but

either neutral or even positive. The example in Table 1 shows a cultural difference

between Asians and Americans when acting in certain management situations.

Additionally, those differences are based on a concept of greater probability, which

means that people tend to learn about the differences between cultures (Cox & Beale,

1997, p. 80f).


19

In working with diverse groups, for example, expatriates working in a foreign country,

people are almost forced to think in categories. However, it is worthwhile trying to put

this categorical, mostly stereotypical thinking aside, and just notice and accept the

differences some groups or cultures have (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 81).

In the field of expatriation, stereotyping and prejudice in general, is an essential part of

the whole process. People going abroad to work and live in a foreign country for a

certain period of time have to deal with the process of stereotyping and find ways to

get over it or, at least, live with it. Therefore, the next chapter deals with expatriation,

its purposes and difficulties.


20

2.2. Expatriation

“The expatriate experience is not only a disconnected occasion for

cross-cultural anxiety and adjustment, but also an important event in

the process of self-developing and learning. In interaction with the

new social context, expatriates incorporate many elements of

mediated experience in their day to day conduct; hence expatriation is

a re-arrangement of the concept of self” (Peltonen, 1998, p. 875).

The previous quote of Peltonen (1998) shows that expatriation is a complex field in the

present business and personal environment. Cultural differences of host and home

countries, alienation and misunderstandings make it increasingly difficult for

expatriates to do their jobs and live their lives in these new situations. This chapter

therefore, deals with expatriation, the necessary adaptation processes, and possible

setbacks.

2.2.1. What is expatriation?

Multinational companies (MNCs) and international organizations often have to

consider delegating employees to a foreign subsidiary for business reasons. The

International Human Resource Management (IHRM) assumes responsibility for this.

Its basic fields of work are the management of human resources of international

organizations, the comparison of human resource management in different countries,

and the management and preparation of employees – expatriates – going abroad

(Francesco & Gold, 2005, p. 145). Expatriation in general is the process of sending

employees to foreign countries for a limited or permanent period of time to manage or

control the company’s operations and provide technical and administrative information

(Jun et al., 2001, p. 369).


21

Through the complexity of today’s business world, there are several reasons for MNCs

to send employees abroad for a certain period of time. Table 2 shows the six most

mentioned causes for sending expatriates on job assignments.

Table 2: Reasons for expatriate assignments (Collings & Scullion, 2006, p. 41)

Back in 1977, Edström and Galbraith conducted a study on the importance of

expatriation for MNCs. The result was that lack of qualified employees in the host

country, as well as managerial and organizational development played an essential role

in the reasons for expatriation. Over the years, this model has been slightly adapted

through further categorizing of those objectives. First, management development has

been split up into career development, where employees are sent abroad to get

additional expertise and intercultural management skills. This, basically, goes hand in

hand with the company’s target to create a pool of qualified managers by sending them

to other countries (Collings & Scullion, 2006, p. 41f). Second, MNCs send their

employees abroad when there is a lack of skilled workers in the host country. This

often happens in so-called third world countries, where the educational level is not

adequate and capable employees are rare. In these cases, expatriates often have the job

of training local employees in order for them to be able to continue the business after

the expatriates return to their home country (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 25). Finally, there

are several organizational reasons. The transfer of expertise, as well as the

Management development

• Career development • Creating international cadre of managers Lack of qualified HCNs • Local expertise not available Organization development and control • Transfer of expertise • Control of local operations • Coordination of global policy


22

coordination of global policy is important for the company’s internal knowledge

transfer.

A study of Mäkelä (2007) showed that there are several characteristics of knowledge

transfer and knowledge sharing which only take place effectively through expatriation.

Trust, as an indicator for knowledge transfer, for example, is significantly higher

between expatriates and the host country employees than between so-called “arm’s

length cross-border relationships”. The reasons for this are simply the shared

experiences and common problem solving processes. Also, due to the physical

proximity and face-to-face interactions a higher level of trust is achieved, and,

therefore, a base for knowledge sharing is set. Often, the business relationship does not

end after the expatriate goes back home, but lasts notably longer than the length of the

assignment. Additionally, the understanding of different codes of conduct due to

language and culture, and the resulting understanding of different ways of

communication help to increase knowledge sharing (Mäkelä, 2007, p. 121).

In conclusion, it is important to mention that expatriates are often placed in charge of

controlling local operations in order to evaluate or monitor the attitude of foreign

subsidiaries. However, very often there is no clear separation between the mentioned

reasons for expatriation and the several causes that exist (Collings & Scullion, 2006, p.

42). Figure 6 shows the differences between a long-term (permanent) and short-term

assignment duration in combination with the assignment purpose.

Figure 6: The purpose of expatriation (Collings & Scullion, 2006, p. 42)


23

MNCs use short term expatriation assignments for two reasons. First, expatriates are

used to fix problems in the subsidiary or to supervise a newly established subsidiary in

a new country. Therefore, the assignment is teaching-driven. It could also be a position

filling task if qualified workforce is not available, as shown above. Summing up, this

kind of expatriation is used on demand over a short term period. Second, it can be used

to give so-called fast track career programmers the opportunity of gaining international

experience through a short term expatriation duty in order to enhance their career

(Collings & Scullion, 2006, p. 42f).

Long term assignments have slightly different reasons. As they are demand driven,

they could also operate as position fillers acting as corporate agents. More important,

however, is the idea of knowledge transfer between the subsidiary and the

headquarters. As mentioned above, it is essential to build a certain level of trust, which

takes time to be achieved. Learning driven, long term assignments focus on the

development of cross-national organizational capabilities, where expatriates acquire a

more global mindset both internally and externally (Collings & Scullion, 2006, p. 42f).

As already mentioned earlier, the IHRM is responsible for sending employees abroad.

Therefore, it is very important to choose the right persons so that necessary tasks are

accomplished properly. The biggest interest of the HR-Department is the cultural

adaptation of expatriates in the host country. There are two reasons. First, an

increasing number of employees have to go abroad as expatriates to manage the

business in the host country, and, second, the financial costs of expatriations, as well

as failed expatriations, are very high. Study show that the costs of failed expatriations

as a result of premature repatriation exceed by far 2 billion dollars each year (Jun et

al., 2001, p. 369).


24

2.2.2. Selection of expatriates

The selection of capable employees able to successfully go abroad for a specific or

permanent period of time is a very important and difficult process for the IHRM.

Several parameters, as shown in the following table (3), are given.

Table 3: Expatriation selection criteria (Selmer, 1995, p. 20)

Subsequently, these four main characteristics will be analyzed. However, since this

paper specializes in the change of stereotypical thinking, relational skills are of special

interest.

Technical abilities: For upper management expatriates it is essential to have

administrative skills, and secondly to have knowledge of the operations in the host

country so as to be able to do business properly and contribute to the company’s

success (Selmer, 1995, p. 20). Leadership skills are important characteristics for

expatriates since employees in other cultures tend to have different needs and desires.

Expatriates often have to find a way of adapting their management styles due to

different working methods or communication in order to be successful. Technical

competence and expertise are important factors in the current business world,


25

regardless if an employee goes abroad or not. However, in many international

companies, technical abilities are the main criteria used by the HRM to select a

specific employee (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 40).

Family situation: Studies of US corporations show that family does not play an

important role in the expatriate selection process. Nevertheless, family issues are often

the reason for failed expatriation. Spouses or children who are unable or unwilling to

integrate in the host culture have a negative impact on the success of the expatriation

(Selmer, 1995, p. 21). Questions about the role that family status plays in the selection

process are not answered clearly. On the one hand, single expatriates have the

advantage of being relatively free of family issues and, therefore, could focus more on

the job. On the other hand, the family can be a very important support when things do

not work as planned within the host culture (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 40).

Motivational state: Interest in the host country, the new culture, and in meeting new

people is a relevant factor for success. It is also of concern whether the employee

believes that the trip abroad – either for a certain period of time or permanent – is a

career opportunity which could lead to a higher position in the future. A positive

attitude towards the success of the mission and self-management techniques helps to

manage the expatriation process successfully (Selmer, 1995, p. 21).

Relational skills: Studies show that relational skills are even more important than

technical skills when going abroad. The ability of getting in contact with host-

nationals in order to interact with them and do business together is essential. The

expatriate has to be open-minded and flexible when encountering processes different

than at home. Also important are emotional stability and the ability to communicate

within the new environment. An expatriate should not see the home-country as

superior, but rather accept the differences and try to live with them like host-country-

citizens (Selmer, 1995, p. 21). Knowing the language of the host country is not always

mandatory. Often, English or the language spoken within the company is sufficient.

However, basic skills are of advantage to simplify adjusting to the host country, at


26

least at the beginning. It alleviates communication with locals and gives them the

impression of not being inferior. Studies and experiences of former expatriates show

that not knowing the language could lead to difficulties in social integration.

Contrarily, however, literature also mentions that knowing the language too well might

lead to complications as well because host-country employees do not see the expatriate

as part of another culture but as part of theirs. Committing a cultural “faux pas” is

excused more easily when it is obvious that somebody is new to the culture and still

learning about it (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 40).

Another important fact in the selection process is whether the expatriate is interested in

the culture. Therefore, preparation has to be done and eventual traits of the culture

recognized and learned. The next section, therefore, deals with the cycle of

expatriation and what to prepare and do at each level.


27

2.2.3. The cycle of expatriation

The cycle of expatriation can be divided to three phases; the pre-departure phase, the

assignment phase, and the post-assignment phase. Activities such as strategic

planning, selection, preparation, or performance management are covered in this

analysis. The following diagram, however, is an extended version of the expatriation

cycle which focuses on three levels of expatriation. The temporal perspective,

followed by the individual perspective and the organizational purpose are presented

and described (Dickmann et al., 2008, p. 246).

Figure 7: The cycle of expatriation (Dickmann et al., 2008, p. 247)

The outer ring represents the time line and is structured in the time before, during and

after the expatriation phase. The next ring shows the individual’s perspectives

depending on the time segment, whereas the inner ring illustrates the organization’s


28

purposes. The dividers separating each expatriation phase are not solid because several

activities and preparation tasks continue after certain phase changes. For example, the

preparation of expatriates before going abroad and the immediate tasks necessary after

the arrival at the host country (Dickmann et al., 2008, p. 246f). The following part

delves into the different expatriation phases shown in Figure 6.

Before international working: The expectant expatriate has to look forward to and

evaluate certain changes in the environment, culture and working conditions. If the

expatriate is on a program with an international company, time and working conditions

after the expatriation should be negotiated and cleared up (Dickmann et al., 2008, p.

246). Additionally, expatriates should also be prepared for eventual differences in the

host culture. It is advantageous to acquire basic knowledge concerning political,

economic and social conditions, as well as legal and social norms within business life.

A certain cultural understanding and interest will help to get through difficult times in

the host country (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 68). Cultural awareness and an understanding

that home culture is most certainly different than the host culture are essential. The

expatriate has to adapt to the host culture rather than be isolated from it (Dowling et

al., 2008, p. 140).

Therefore, the international company behind the expatriate – if available – is able to

support the expatriate. Language classes should be organized in order to be able to

socialize in the new environment. Additionally, short visits in the host country are

recommended to provide an insight into the new culture. If the expatriate moves over

with the family it is also important that the whole family is able to gain experience of

the new country. For many companies these short visits are too expensive to cover,

however, in comparison to a failed expatriation and the consequences of precipitate

returns international companies should consider these costs as an investment

(Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 70f). Cultural awareness programs are also an essential part of

an organizations preparation. Dowling et al. (2008) discovered four additional

components besides the language training. The international company has to arrange


29

so-called area studies programs that are composed of cultural orientation and

environmental briefing, including the already mentioned short trips before the actual

expatriation. Further, culture assimilators, sensibility trainings and field experience

trainings are also mentioned (Dowling et al., 2008, p. 141).

The preparation of an expatriate strongly depends on the duration of the assignment

and on the differences of the home culture to the host culture. Figure 8 shows the

recommended training of expatriates depending on the length of their stay abroad in

combination with different preparation methods and the necessary rigor of the training

(Dowling et al., 2008, p. 141f).

Figure 8: Cross cultural training approach (Downing et al., 2008, p. 142)

If the expected stay of an expatriate in the host country is less than a month or the

culture is very similar, the length of training tends to be less than a week with a low

level of rigor. Information given includes area and cultural briefings through movies or


30

books, as well as basic language training. If the duration is longer, or the host culture

is very different to the home culture, the training becomes increasingly intense and

longer. Training methods include simulations or cultural sensitivity trainings (Dowling

et al., 2008, p. 142).

During international working: When the expatriate (and the family) is on site, he has to

adjust to the culture as fast as possible. This adjustment and its pace, however, depend

on several factors. The difference of the cultures, experience, duration, or the job itself

and its mission clearly have an effect on adjustment. Additionally, personality and

character of the expatriate influence this adjustment to a great extent. This

development is a decisive step in an expatriate’s life and can be handled either with the

rejection of problems from the beginning or by immediately trying to find new ways

and solutions (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 70f). Ways of adjusting to the host culture are

shown in one of the following chapters (q.v. page 34: 2.2.4. Cultural Adaption).

The importance of a so-called career capital impact can be divided into the

organizational and individual level. Organizations use methods that influence the

identification of their expatriates through social tools or the internal work culture,

team-building exercises, as well as certain reward policies. In general, the international

company tries to manage the overall well-being of the individual abroad (Dickmann &

Doherty, 2007, p. 146). The expatriate’s career capital impact, contrarily, is built on

three ways of knowing. First, there is “knowing-how”, which is an over-the-years

generated proficiency that refers to occupational knowledge and career related skills

that include team-working skills or competence in strategic planning and marketing.

International assignments might lead to skills not always transferable to the home

country and which therefore, do not contribute to an enhancement of knowledge

overall. “Knowing-whom” as a second path of knowing builds on different kinds of

relationships within the organization, as well as personal contacts. This social capital

develops through intra-firm and inter-firm contacts, as well as professional and social

contacts, and is also created to support the individual’s career development. As an


31

expatriate, these contacts often split into several groups, such as host country contacts

and home country contacts. Additionally, contacts outside the organization are created

in the host country, due to the integration process. On the other hand, however, home

country contacts suffer from the assignment abroad and might get forgotten and thus

have a negative effect in the long run. The third path of knowing, “knowing-why”,

targets the individual’s identity. Values and beliefs influence career development and

help to gain the necessary identification with work and provide energy to accomplish

an expatriate’s assignment. Host countries with very different cultures and work

patterns might lead to the development of intense motivation and increase the

expatriate’s success rate. However, any radical changes of the individual’s inherent

balance might be a problematic issue after repatriation (Dickmann & Doherty, 2007, p.

147). This subject will be discussed below.

The fields of activities for the organization while the expatriate is abroad are the

international development of the firm and career, as well as performance management

of the expatriate. Methods besides reward policies and career opportunities for the

expatriate include cultural assimilation and mentoring programs, job rotation on site

and involvement in special project teams in order to help the expatriate to settle within

the new environment (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 80ff).

After international working: Repatriation is one of the most important steps in the

entire international assignment. Despite this, companies very often do not see the

problems occurred during this process, and, therefore, miss an opportunity of gaining

valuable experience out of the whole assignment (Fischlmayr, 2004, p. 88). The

repatriation process is comparable to the expatriation process with all its difficulties

concerning culture and assimilation to it. The difference is that the company and its

HRM assume a smooth reintegration due to the belief that the home country was and is

the center of life anyway and that there is nothing more important than that. However,

expatriates most certainly do not feel like this, and, therefore, fall into a deep


32

emotional hole, also known as a reverse culture shock (Baruch, 2004, p. 232). Culture

shock and re-culture shock will be analyzed more specifically in the next chapter.

An important aim for an expatriate returning to the home country is to readjust to the

home culture. The expatriate has to be aware of possible changes within the company,

such as restructuring, downsizing or change of market niche. Even if there is no

change within the company, the expatriate might have changed his work patterns,

values or beliefs due to the host culture which are not appropriate in the old

environment (Marx, 2001, p. 131).

However, changes accomplished in the host country cannot always be reversed back

home. The, in the host culture, generated career capital has to fit in with new activities

back home. Therefore, a qualitative research of Dickmann & Doherty (2007) showed

that an international assignment can have positive, negative and neutral effects on an

individual’s career capital concerning the three paths of knowing, and, therefore,

influence the expatriate’s behavior. On the knowing-why level, international

companies that provide long term career orientation, as well as attempt to manage

repatriation issues properly tend to have low expatriate failing rates and turnovers.

Knowing-whom in correlation with the interaction between the expatriate and the

home base of the company leads to the proposition that if reciprocal networking

existed and exists, the chances of building long lasting networks are higher. Knowing-

how propositions infer that skills, such as cultural awareness, communication styles

and people management (so-called soft skills) can be used for the further career of an

expatriate in an organization when the organization supports the development of those

skills (Dickmann & Doherty, 2007, p. 157f).

Necessary tasks for the organization after the return of expatriates not only include the

already mentioned factors of the Dickmann & Doherty study (2007). The company

also has to be aware of the cultural differences an expatriate has to face after the

return. However, valuable information and experience which the individual gained


33

through the assignment can be very useful within the organization. Unfortunately,

many organizations are not able to deal with the expatriate’s reverse culture shock,

and, therefore, miss the opportunity of using this specific experience. Planning a long-

term reentry assignment or a mentoring program to assist upcoming expatriates are just

two ways of acclimatizing repatriates to the home culture without losing them as

valuable managers. Additionally, reorientation programs are available to assist the

expatriate and the family when they move back home (Francesco & Gold, 2005, p.

165f). Due to the main focus on expatriation, the topic of repatriation is not analyzed

further.

As already mentioned above, the next chapter focuses on the cultural adaptation of

expatriates and the importance of being properly prepared. Cultural distress, as well as

the phenomenon “Culture Shock” will be examined.


34

2.2.4. Cultural adaptation

Cultural adaptation is an essential element during the expatiation process. If a person is

not able to live under new conditions within the new culture, the entire expatriation

project is at stake. One of the signs of cultural adaptation is the so-called culture

shock, which was already mentioned in the cycle of expatriation. Therefore, the

understanding of the consequences of culture shock in combination with cultural

adaptation will now be focused on. Back in 1960, Klaus Oberg first recognized and

mentioned six different aspects of cultural distress (Furnham & Bochner, 1986, p.

47f):

+ Stress caused by the necessity of making psychological changes due to the new

environment.

+ The new environment causes a sense of loss concerning friends, status and

profession.

+ Feeling rejected by the members of the new culture.

+ Not being sure about the new role within the society, as well as confusion about

values and feelings.

+ Feeling surprise, disgust and anxiety after recognizing the differences of the

new culture compared to the old one.

+ Feeling incapable when not being able to deal with the new culture and

environment.

Oberg describes culture shock as an outcome of losing one’s family characteristics,

home-culture values and symbols. This manifests itself when the expatriate thinks

countless times about how things are in the home culture and how to deal with them in

the host culture. This, for example, includes the questions of how and when to shake

people’s hands, what to say and how to act when meeting people, how to deal with

invitations, etc. These questions and concerns lead to a feeling of total helplessness

and frustration. Symptoms are the fear of contact, concerns about hygiene, water, and


35

food, the fear of being cheated and robbed everywhere, and the view back home,

where all these concerns are unnecessary (Furnham & Bochner, 1986, p. 48).

Another very common way to express and describe the term “cultural shock” is by

plotting the stages of cultural adaptation. The following graph in figure 9 shows

expatriation as well as repatriation shock in form of an “extended U-curve”.

Figure 9: Stages of cultural adaptation (University of Calgary, 2002)

The process of adjustment moves from a higher level towards a lower, less adequate

level of adaptation and, after a certain period of time back to a higher level when the

expatriate is able to cope with the new culture (Peterson, 1995, p. 3). Figure 7

basically shows a culture shock when entering the new culture and a re-culture shock

when returning home. However, this paper primarily deals with the cultural

differences and difficulties on entering a foreign country as expatriates and, therefore,

the expatriation phases will be analyzed closer.


36

Plotting the cultural shock in stages is a rather more neutral than negative way of

describing the difficulties in another culture. It is an “educational and developmental

process with positive as well as negative consequences” (Pedersen, 1995, p. 3). The

following paragraph will focus on each of these stages.

Pre-departure phase: This stage is characterized by up and downs in the expatriates’

well-being. On the one hand, it can be very stressful and challenging to attain the

necessary paperwork, such as visa and resident permits. There is little time to think

about the experience itself, which can be depressing. On the other hand there is the

excitement of going abroad and getting to know a new culture, and new people

(Arthur, 2004, p.21f). However, this phase is essential for a successful expatriation.

The Human Resource Management has to train the expatriate that he/she is aware of

the upcoming differences and tasks (Francesco et al., 2005).

Honeymoon phase: In this first stage of initial contact, the expatriate is overwhelmed

by new surroundings. The new culture seems to be very exotic and exciting and people

seem to be friendly. This stage is comparable to the excitement of a tourist in a new

country. However, the individual’s identity is still rooted in the home country.

Expatriates tend to act passively, which indicates little experience with the culture, but

the positive emotional feelings exceed the doubts (Peterson, 1995, p. 3).

Culture shock: This step of the cultural adaptation graph shows expatriates hitting an

emotional rock bottom. It depends on each individual how long and how intensive this

distress is. Some hardly notice the culture shock and it passes quickly, others have a

very hard time and experience depression, homesickness and bitterness (Naylor, 1996,

p. 102). The individuals feel responsible for not being able to cope with the situation in

the new culture, and, therefore, avoid contact with local people. They start to dislike

the culture and criticize everything (Peterson, 1995, p. 3). Cultural shocks are totally

normal when coping with a change in the environment as normal experiences learned


37

in the home country no longer apply (Naylor, 1996, p. 102). How people handle

culture shock, however, also depends on the preparation prior to departure.

Adaptation: The last stage of the relevant cultural adaptation process in this paper is

the adaptation itself. The expatriate starts to feel positive and enthusiastic about living

in the new culture by enjoying the local society, learning the language and making

local friends. As mentioned above, reaching this stage takes time and can differ

individually (Solomon & Schell, 2009, p. 325f). Additional to this stage, some

literature gives a so-called enthusiasm stage, where the individual feels at home and

prefers certain cultural traits in the host culture better than the ones in his/her home

culture.

Much literature (Peterson, 1995; Reisinger & Turner, 2003) divides the adaptation

phase into several stages. The first stage involves coping with the new environment,

whereby mostly negative emotions like anger and resentment are displayed.

Individuals in this stage act stubbornly and do not want assistance from outside.

Individuals in the second stage already see and evaluate good and bad things and

compare them to their home culture. This balance enables the possibility of

interpreting both cultures. The final stage is characterized by reciprocal inter-

dependence, where the individual is at ease in both cultures. This stage, however, is

sometimes described as an unreachable ideal state of multiculturalism (Peterson, 1995,

p. 3). Repatriation phase: This phase is basically comparable to the first 4 stages of the

expatriation process. There is a stage prior to departure, the honeymoon stage, the re-

entry culture shock and an adaptation stage (Solomon & Schell, 2009, p. 326).

The duration and intensity of culture shock on an expatriate depends on several

factors. First, the degree of cultural similarities and difficulties between the home- and

host culture play an important role. Second, the ability to adjust to these changes, as


38

well as the length of stay and the friends and connections expatriates make. All these

factors influence cultural adaptation. Literature shows that some expatriates never

leave the honeymoon stage or are constantly confused and unsecure (Reisinger &

Turner, 2003, p. 61).

Therefore, the authors of Expert Expatriate, Hess and Linderman, (2002) have created

five steps that help to adjust to the new culture. First, the individual has to have certain

language and cultural skills. Being able to learn and understand basic phrases and

words fast, and, additionally being able to cope with the new culture helps a lot during

the first couple of weeks in the new environment. Second, it is important to have a

comfortable home base in order to process new experiences. Third, friendships and

supportive networks also are essential to help adjust to the new environment and

culture. Having local native friends helps to adapt to daily life and, additionally,

reduces prejudice. Fourth, it is important that the expatriate is able to confidently

navigate through the new environment. Being confident and open to new things makes

life a lot easier than approaching new experiences with diffidence. Finally, having

meaningful and enjoyable activities distracts from difficulties within the new culture,

and so proves very useful (Hess & Lindeman, 2002, p. 151f).

The authors compare the expatriation process to moving a complicated machine to a

new location. This may involves disconnecting wires and cables and then reconnecting

them at the new place. For expatriates the main problem is the missing link to the new

environment (Hess & Lindeman, 2002, p. 150f).


39

In conjunction with Hess and Lindeman (2002), a theoretical model of the study of Ali

et al. (2003) showed the components of intercultural adjustment (figure 10), which are

personal traits, family- and work characteristics (Ali et al., 2003, p. 566).

Figure 10: Intercultural adjustment (Ali et al., 2003, p. 566)

This model focuses not only on the expatriate but also on the expatriate’s spouse who

also has an important role to play in the expatriation process. Each determinant will

now be analyzed closely.

Personality traits: The influences of personal traits, such as open-mindedness, cultural

empathy or social initiative are essential and closely related to successful adjustment in

the host culture. Cultural empathy refers to the ability to cope with the new culture and

its people’s behaviors and thoughts. The term open-mindedness is the willingness of

an individual to accept and adopt cultural values and rules of the host country, and to

be able to become part of the cultural in-group (Ali et al., 2003, p. 566f), as explained


40

in connection with stereotypes (q.v. page 9: Shared group beliefs). Social initiative is

very important when getting in contact with locals and the host country in general.

Acting rather offensive and taking action is purposeful and leads to greater success in

the new environment. Emotional stability and flexibility are vital in stressful situations

especially when there is a need to switch strategies under difficult circumstances (Ali

et al., 2003, p. 567).

Family characteristics: Family characteristics are very important when a partner or

spouse is involved in the expatriation and describe the type of relationship among the

involved individuals. First, there is family cohesion or the emotional bonding and

degree of connection between the family members. If an individual goes abroad for

private reasons, it is important to have a strong bond between family members, but

also beyond the boundaries of family to neighbors or local friends. Second, family

adaptability defines the ability of adjusting the family system if the situation demands

it. Examples could be a feeling of homesickness, safety issues or political and

environmental situations in the host country. Communication as a third characteristic

is the ability to address problems and issues in order to resolve them. However, it is

important that there is a mutual conflict resolve to avoid problems in the future (Ali et

al., 2003, p. 567f).

Work characteristics: Satisfaction at work within a different work environment is a

very important factor for a successful expatriation process (Ali et al., 2003, p. 568). If

the expatriate works for an international company abroad, it is also essential for the

organization to support the individual and help if there are concerns or issues.

However, this topic has already been covered in chapter 2.2.3 (q.v. page 23f: The

cycle of expatriation).

Intercultural adjustment: Intercultural adjustment can be divided in three parts.

Psychological adjustment deals with mental and personal satisfaction. Socio-cultural

adjustment shows daily life situations and the ability to handle them properly and


41

successfully. Finally, intercultural interaction defines the ability to deal with people

from other cultures (Ali et al., 2003, p. 565).

These two basic theories about adaptation to new cultures show the difficulties and

challenges of being abroad as an expatriate. The next section deals on the one hand

with cultural adjustment as a progressive result of being well prepared, and, therefore,

managing the cultural shock quickly, and on the other hand, shallow due to superficial

preparation. Essential in this process is the understanding of stereotypical thinking and

the process of getting rid of or learn to deal with it.


42

2.3. Expatriation and stereotyping

“Satisfaction with the host culture has been found to influence the

expatriate’s commitment to the local operation and to the parent

company […]. Market alienation has a negative effect on satisfaction,

but it is reduced by participation in the host marketplace. Further,

cultural knowledge was not found to be directly related to satisfaction

with the host culture, but rather was related indirectly through its

association with participation in the host country” (Jun et al., 2001, p.

369).

As the quotation of Jun et al. (2001) already shows, satisfaction with the host culture

depends on certain facts. Their study shows an indirect correlation between the

cultural knowledge of the host country and the satisfaction with it (Jun et al., 2001, p.

372f). Although the study is focused on business expatriates, it also can be used on

individuals that expatriate for different, personal reasons. This chapter, therefore,

analyzes the development of cultural knowledge and stereotypes using the basis of this

study and its findings.

2.3.1. Satisfaction in the host country

Although it seems important to know something about a country, such as its culture or

the behavior of its inhabitants before the actual expatriation, it is not proven that the

stay abroad will then progress smoothly and without complications. The already

discussed culture shock is one issue that can occur and cause difficulties in a new

culture. Jun et al. (2001) conducted a study on how cultural knowledge of a certain

country affects the satisfaction level in this country. They assumed that not only

cultural knowledge of a country is indirectly responsible for satisfaction. However,

they expected this knowledge to be helpful in market participation within the

expatriation process. This leads to less market alienation which has a direct impact on


43

satisfaction in the country (Jun et al., 2001, p. 371f). The following diagram shows the

structural model of this adaptation process. The technical terms and the hypothesis will

be explained in more detailed.

Figure 11: From cultural knowledge to satisfaction (Jun et al., 2001, p. 372)

Cultural knowledge: It is hard for expatriates to actively participate in the host culture,

if behavioral patterns are unknown. The lessening of this uncertainty and anxiety could

take place through gaining knowledge about the culture and its habits. For this, direct,

as well as indirect learning about a culture is possible. Direct contact, such as visiting

the host country prior to the stay abroad is a more effective way of getting to know the

culture. However, it is riskier and leads to a higher chance of embarrassment. Very

often though, indirect learning through mass media or cultural training in the home

country leads to misinterpretations and wrong assumptions about the host culture, as


44

shown by the non-significant relationship between cultural knowledge and satisfaction

in the host country in figure 11 (Jun et al., 2001, p. 371).

As an expatriate it helps to know certain facts about a culture. However, without active

participation within the new culture, this knowledge does not necessarily bring

satisfaction to the foreigner in the host culture.

Market participation: As an expatriate, it can be hard to participate in the host culture

when the society seems narrow-minded and not receptive to foreigners. Being in the

situation of non-acceptance in the host society can be very stressful and frustrating.

Also, not knowing what is going on and how the culture works is a disadvantage when

going abroad. Therefore, increased knowledge about the host culture and the country

helps to understand the differences, and, thanks to that, the expatriate is able to deal

with this new situation. Thus, the study of Jun et al. showed a positive relationship

between cultural knowledge and market participation, as pointed out in figure 11 (Jun

et al., 2001, p. 371).

Market alienation: As a result of not accepting the new environment, the expatriate

tends to feel separated from the host culture with its values and norms. Host country

nationals as members of an in-group (q.v. page 8: shared group beliefs) often treat

foreigners as outsiders in their belief of preserving their culture (Foster, 1995, p. 53).

This mainly happens in cultures that are rather traditional and narrow-minded about

new things, such as the German culture (Hall & Hall, 1990, p. 35ff). However, this is

not a question of foreigners not being welcome, but rather to protect their own culture

as well as the awareness that people from the out-group can never understand people

from the in-group. As an expatriate, it is important to know that after gaining certain

knowledge of the culture and participating in the new environment, those differences

decline. Cross-cultural information and building relationships with host country

nationals help to break that in-group/out-group thinking and alleviate living within the

new society (Foster, 1995, p. 54).


45

Satisfaction: Jun et al.’s study (2001) showed a correlation between satisfaction and

cultural knowledge. However, as figure 11 illustrates, avoiding uncertainty purely

through cultural knowledge is not enough to assure satisfaction in the host country.

Further, it does not even have a positive effect. Therefore, for an expatriate it is

important to be open-minded and participate within the new culture. The researchers

found out that knowledge of the host culture has a positive effect on successful market

participation. It is suggested that participation in cultural sensitivity trainings should be

integrated before departure. Finally, successful market participation leads to less

market alienation, and, respectively, to greater satisfaction in the host country (Jun et

al., 2001, p. 375).

However, cultural adjustment is a very complex process and does not happen

overnight. Cultural knowledge certainly helps expatriates to go through this adaptation

process faster and smoother, but it still is a learning process that has to be

accomplished in both, home and host culture. Therefore, the next chapter deals with

the cultural adaptation as a way of earning competence and dealing with given

stereotypes.


46

2.3.2. Developing social competence

As already seen in the previous chapter, a well adapted expatriate is psychologically

and emotionally satisfied, and owns social competence. Contrarily, unsuccessful

adaptation may lead to lowered mental health, identity confusion, feelings of being

marginalized and alienated. If an individual is fully adapted to the new culture, they

not only accept the new culture but live like natives and enjoy their state of being (Jun

et al., 2001).

The social competence necessary to deal with the new environment does not develop

over night. In the host country a culture shock and the subsequent cultural adaptation

very often cause rethinking and reevaluating of certain situations. As already

mentioned in this paper, whether cultural adaptation happens faster or slower depends

on several factors. It should be mentioned that an expatriate can have an intense, but

brief cultural shock, which is easily handled. Contrarily, an individual can have a mild

culture shock but is not able to change its attitudes, and, therefore, suffers for a longer

period of time. However, affecting factors can be personal characteristics, cultural

distance to the host country and the knowledge of the culture, family dynamics, the

job, and the support of the company if the expatriate has a business assignment (Guy et

al., 1996).

As figure 12 shows, there are three phases of development which an expatriate goes

through. Various tasks and responsibilities, such as communication in the new

environment, conflict solving in general, and others business related tasks lead to an

awareness of having different perceptions and beliefs to the host culture. This progress

of being aware is already the first phase of gaining social competence in order to be

able to live satisfactorily in the new society. The second development phase is the

understanding of those differences and the question of why people handle issues or

certain activities differently. The last step is taking action and trying to either find a

compromise or adapt to the new settings (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 91ff).


47

Figure 12: Developing the competence to manage diversity (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 93)

This way of gaining social competence is also an important step when considering the

expatriate’s previous stereotypes before the stay abroad. Thinking about actions that

are solved differently in the host country already raises the matter of stereotyping and

the process of changing them. However, this concept only works when there is open-

mindedness and willingness to participate in the new environment, as already

explained above. When business related, it is important to find the right person for a

task in another country, and it is essential to prepare and train the person so that he/she

is aware of the differences in the foreign country. Negative stereotyping and

unwillingness to adapt to the host country most certainly have an effect on the

performance and the success of the whole project.

As this thesis deals with the aspect of change in the stereotypical thinking of business

expatriates, the last theoretical chapter briefly raises the questions to be targeted.


48

2.3.3. Questions to be targeted

There is plenty of literature about expatriation, preparation for international

assignments, and cultural adaption. Studies and books on how expatriates should deal

with problems in the host culture and how to reduce the effects of a culture shock also

are available on the market. Furthermore, the issue of stereotyping and prejudicing is

discussed on a broad range.

However, the question of how stereotypes affect expatriates and how this thinking

changes during the stay abroad is not covered in literature. Therefore, I want to

investigate ways in which the stereotypical thinking of expatriates about the host

country changes over time. Due to the lack of studies directly addressing this area I

chose an explorative approach with the use of qualitative research methods.

In general, the selected study method is called “Qualitative Research Interview”. It is

basically defined as an in-depth interview with the purpose of gathering real-life

information about the described phenomenon. As an interviewer it is important to see

the research topic from the perspective of the person being interviewed in order to

understand the issues. Therefore, an interview guideline helps structure the elements of

conversation between the interviewer and the interviewee. However, in general, the

interview is structured as an open discussion more than a strict question/answer

situation. The interviewed person talks about experiences, feelings and problems in a

very open way. In case something is unclear or the interviewee wanders off the topic,

the interviewer steps in to direct the situation again.

This method is basically divided in four parts. After the first task of defining the

research question and collecting the necessary background information, the interview

guideline has to be created. As already mentioned, this guideline is no more than an

aid for situations when the interview gets stuck or the interviewee goes off the topic.

Therefore, it has to very openly structured and the interviewer has to be able to


49

eventually restructure during the interview process. Therefore, it is helpful to divide

the guideline into different phases. The third step besides recruiting participants is to

carry out the interviews. It is important that the interview takes place where the

interviewee feels relaxed and confident. Interview locations could be the work place,

home of the interviewee, or a coffee shop. However, it should not be a place where

ongoing distractions disrupt the conversation. It is recommended to tape the interview

in order not to miss important parts of the interview, such as showing hidden

information through the change of tone. Fifth, the interviews have to be analyzed.

Therefore it is important to start the analysis after the first few interviews in order to

be able to change the guideline if important points are not being covered. Analyzing

open structured interviews can be difficult since there are no step by step questions

asked. Therefore, it is essential to structure the transcripts into different parts trying to

find similar patterns between the interviews. After completing this task and having

sufficient information about a certain outcome hypotheses can be drawn.


50

3. Empirical Study

The objective of this empirical qualitative study is to find out if and how expatriates

change their stereotype view of Austria after a certain period of time in this host

country. The expatriates were chosen exclusively from the United States in order to get

a consistent picture of the situation. It is assumed that every person coming to the

country has a certain opinion and image of Austria. This image can either be of a

specific character about Austria, a broader attribute about the German culture or the

Western world. The stereotype can be formed through education, stories from friends,

movies or specific cultural trainings.

3.1. Design and methodology of the empirical study

After reviewing existing literature, the design of this empirical study, as well as the

methodology were determined. The lack of literature on the topic about change of

stereotypes of expatriates in a host country led to the use of a qualitative study method.

Table 4, therefore, shows the different tasks to be accomplished. In the following, each

step will be described further.

a. Seeking for US-expatriates

b. Preparing the interview guideline

c. Arranging meetings with the expatriates

d. Carrying out the interviews

e1. Transcribing the interviews

e2. Analyzing the interviews

Table 4: Tasks of the study


51

a. Seeking for expatriates

It turned out to be quite challenging to find US-American expatriates in Austria, since

official institutions are not allowed to pass on private contact information to the public.

In addition, major international companies usually hiring US-American expatriates for

a couple of years had to interrupt those proceedings due to the tight economic and

financial markets. However, there is an official Austro-American Association in

Austria with a branch in Linz (AAS, 2010) where several US-Americans were willing

to participate in an interview. A second helpful source to contact expatriates was the

International Club (The International Club, 2010), an online platform used by

international expatriates to get to know the country and customs. For the empirical

study to be successful it was important to find expatriates with different lengths of stay

so as to see the change of stereotypes over time. The Austro-American Society was

very helpful when finding expatriates with lengths of stay between a few months and

over ten years.

b. Preparing the interview guideline

In combination with existing literature and the assumption that everybody has at least

some stereotypes about Austria, an interview guideline was prepared (see appendix).

However, I avoided talking directly about stereotypes or prejudices since that might

have led to confusion or misunderstandings of the expatriates. Rather, I used the

expressions “pictures” or “images” of a country in an expatriates’ mind. As already

mentioned, the interview was a fairly open conversation where the interviewee was

able to talk about the expectations of the country, experiences and unexpected events.

Therefore, the guideline was structured in four major parts.

The first part dealt with the image of Austria the expatriates had before going abroad.

The interviewees were asked to talk about their lives prior to the actual expatriation.

Questions about where they grew up and where they spent the majority of their life

helped the interviewee to start talking very openly. It was also essential to obtain

information about where they grew up since it makes a difference whether the


52

expatriate lived in a culturally diverse city or in a traditional rural setting. The

interviewees were also asked if they had had prior information about Austria, its

culture and people. I avoided asking directly about stereotypes but aimed rather for

associations and ideas about the country, as well as how they think Austrians conduct

business, or accomplish activities in general. Furthermore, I tried to find out if the

opinion of the country sometimes changed before arrival because of new information,

or cultural sensitivity training – either offered by the company or privately accessed –

and about family status and how the family was prepared for the task. Finally, positive

or negative feelings prior to the actual departure date were asked.

The second part of the guideline dealt directly with incidents in the host country.

Questions focused on expatriates experiencing cultural shock or other occurrences or

incidents that had an impact on their stereotypical thinking. We tried to find out how

the already mentioned stereotypes developed over time in the host country and if other

perspectives about Austria came to mind. The expatriates might have imagined the

first couple of days in the host country differently or had memorable experiences –

positive or negative – with local people. Also questioned and discussed was whether

certain occurrences strengthen certain stereotypes, and whether other stereotypes were

altered due to dispute or debate. This part of the interview was very important for the

following analysis and therefore took the most time and effort of the entire

conversation.

Part three dealt with certain experiences and their effect on the expatriate and his/her

behavior. The basic task was to find out if positive/negative experiences strengthen a

certain positive/negative image of a country, and, therefore, confirmed those

stereotypes. These questions had to focus on each expatriate individually, since every

expatriate had different positive or negative stereotypes about Austria. Comparisons

between stereotypes the expatriated had before the stay abroad and stereotypes he/she

had during the time of the interview were discussed. Also the question of feeling


53

integrated in society and the emotional state were important for the further analysis

and findings of the empirical study. Part three ended the interview.

The fourth part of the guideline focused on the optimal outcome of the study. It dealt

with the question in which direction changes of stereotypical thinking were turned.

Were they intensified or softened due to the individual experiences of the expatriates.

Individual background information or history that influenced stereotypical thinking, as

well as common experiences were taken into account so as to find patterns that

changed the stereotypical picture of expatriates about Austria.

c. Arranging meetings with the expatriates

As already mentioned, it was very important to find the right spot to conduct the

interviews. The expatriate had to feel comfortable and safe when talking about mostly

private feelings and experiences that occurred before or during their stay in Austria. It

was also important to find places without unnecessary distractions. However, despite

this, the majority of interviews took place at public places, such as different coffee

shops or restaurants. Some of the interviews took place on the campus of Johannes

Kepler University or at the expatriates’ homes.

d. Carrying out the interviews

Basically, all the interviews were structured very freely. Questions from the

interviewer’s side were only asked if the interviewee did not know what to say or if

he/she drifted off the topic. The interview always started with a personal introduction

of the interviewer, small talk about school and future career plans, as well as an

overview and the intentions of the topic expatriation and stereotyping, and a guarantee

of total confidentiality, and de-personalization. Mainly the expatriate talked about

expectations, experiences, and difficulties during the preparation and stay in Austria. It

has to be mentioned that it was hardly necessary to use the prepared questions of the

interview guide since the interviewees were all very open and willing to talk about

quite private issues. After the interview the expatriates were asked if they would be


54

available for eventual further questions to avoid misunderstandings. All the

conversations were taped with permission of the interviewees.

e. Transcribing and analyzing the interviews

An essential step for successful analysis was to transcribe the interviews right after

they were taken. In this way it was possible to still remember gestures and facial

impressions to certain for the interviewee important experiences. On the basis of the

interview guideline a coding list was compiled (see appendix). With these codes it was

possible to put together similar occasions and experiences of different expatriates, and,

in the end, to find patterns. Common incidents, therefore, were taken closely into

account and afterwards clustered. Doing this during the interview process allowed me

to slightly adapt questions in order to achieve a clearer picture of the expatriate’s

stereotypical thinking and the change process.

Due to the openness of the individual interviews it took quite a long time and a lot of

effort to find similar experiences, cluster and analyze them. In the end, however, two

basic directions emerged. Chapter 4, “Results of the study”, points out those outcomes

and presents the findings of the empirical qualitative study.


55

3.2. Interview samples

In order to get a clear picture of the change in stereotypical thinking of expatriates in

Austria it was important to find a diverse field of US-American expatriates. Due to the

economic and financial crisis this intention got rather complicated since lots of major

international companies stopped using business expatriates in order to save the

company money. However, through several Expatriate Associations it was still

possible to find willing foreigners working and living in Austria. In the following

section, some demographic characteristics are presented.

All in all, eleven expatriates participated in the interview process. Out of those eleven,

seven interviewees were female. Concerning the length of stay of all the expatriates in

Austria, it has to be said that the majority of the interviewed persons – seven – have

been living in Austria for eight years or longer. One expatriate has lived in the country

for almost 30 years. During her assignment this interviewee got married to a local,

and, therefore, quit her international job with the purpose of settling down in Austria.

However, in order to get a broader picture of the expatriation process and eventual

changes in stereotypical thinking over a longer period of time, she was also

interviewed. One interviewee went on an expatriate assignment five years ago; the rest

has been here since 2009.

Those three expatriates that have been in Austria for less than one year all are

participating in the so-called Fulbright program (Institute of International Education,

2010). Future German language teachers from the US come to Austria to teach for one

or two years in an Austrian secondary school or technical college. The expatriate

living in Austria for almost 30 years recently retired from work, and the rest is

working throughout Upper Austria in different business sectors.

Depending on their jobs and personal plans for the future, the interviewees had

different upcoming arrangements concerning repatriation in the US. The three


56

Fulbright teaching assistants will most certainly have to go back after their one year

assignments. However, one out of those expatriates planned to step out of the

Fulbright program to start working permanently in Austria and another one intended to

extend to two years. The situation of the other expatriates was not as clear. Two

expatriates tend to repatriate after a certain period of time. However, due to their

current life situation they have no detailed plan. Six expatriates do not have any

intention of going back to the US (except for visits) within the next couple of years.

The interviews usually took between 20 and 40 minutes. They started with an

introduction of the topic and ended with some small talk about mutual experiences or

questions about personal impressions and evaluations. The interview was taped in

order to analyze the data. However, small talk was not recorded and, therefore, does

not appear in this analysis. The interviews mostly took place in public places, such as

coffee shops or bakeries. Some were carried out at work, JKU, or at the expatriate’s

home.


57

4. Results of the study

In order to find an answer about how stereotypical thinking changes and which

patterns can be identified, several questions have to be targeted beforehand. These are

divided into three sections in order to be able to structure the findings.

In the first section, the images of Austria the participants had in mind before their

arrival are presented. The question of how Austrians deal with certain things and how

they accomplish activities is raised and answered by the expatriates. The second

section deals with the early experiences of the participants and how these affected their

thinking of Austria and its citizens. The question of culture shock and the subsequent

issue of an eventual change of stereotypical thinking are answered as well. Often, there

were critical incidents that affected the expatriates’ thinking about a country, which

are presented and analyzed in this part too. The third section deals with their actual

situation in the host country and the question whether experiences strengthen a certain

positive or negative image of the country, and if there is any common ground between

the interviews. Finally, certain patterns or factors that changed stereotypical thinking,

as well as their development will be identified. Then, the information obtained before

will be clustered and taken into account in order to find an answer.

Because eleven individual interviews were used to answer the question if stereotypes

change over time in a foreign country, clustering was an essential part in the analyzing

process. Every participant experienced totally different episodes and was part of

unique occurrences. However, certain patterns, such as negative or positive experience

with local people, the national system or the government itself somehow lead to

similar feelings and opinions about the country. These occasions had to be found,

analyzed and clustered with the aim of finding similar pattern between the expatriates.

The following sections display those clusters.


58

4.1. The image of Austria before expatriation

This part deals with Austrian stereotypes and the picture US-expatriates had in mind

before coming to this country. After presenting the findings on this subject, a

comparison to theory is presented in order to see potential differences and variations.

Finally, possible reasons for deviations between theory and practice are given.

The interviews resulted in two major directions which, however, were rather

unexpected due to existing theory. Some of the interviewees did not have a certain

image of Austria in mind, but saw Austria as part of the Western World and assumed

close similarities to the United States. The other part had an image of Austria or the

German speaking countries. Subsequently, these two trends are analyzed further and

verified through statements from the interviews.

Austria as part of the Western World

Five interviewees out of eleven had no clear stereotypical image of Austria in mind.

They associated Austria with the rest of the Western World, and, therefore, thought

that US-American cultural standards are somehow related and comparable to the

Austrian standards. The following lines of the interview of expatriate D describe the

way this group of expatriates thought about Austria.

“…that was all kind of funny because I didn’t know so much about Austria or

legalities of people traveling from country to country, I think I was a very

typical American and I thought that everything and every country that was a

free country was like our country…”

A similar statement of expatriate B was that the expatriate “did not really have any

specific picture of what Austria would be in comparison to any other European or

Western country” the she has lived in. On the direct question of having a stereotypical

picture in mind, every expatriate in this group said that they did not. Hence, they did


59

not think stereotypically when putting Austria in a pot with the rest of the Western

World. Additionally, facts such as language, the location, and the mountainous

landscape were often the only information available. A reason why almost 50% of all

of the interviewed expatriates had that point of view could be the missing preparation.

However, as discussed later in this chapter, some of the expatriates with a clear picture

of Austria also had no preparation before leaving the United States.

Not surprisingly, also the question of how Austrians accomplish activities could not be

answered directly. Nobody was able to describe attitudes or behaviors they thought to

be typical for the country, other than general assumptions of Austrians being open-

minded and friendly. These attitudes, however, were also thought of as American

manners.

Austria as individual country

The other six expatriates questioned about stereotypes of Austria mentioned clearly

what they thought about the country, as well as the behavior of its citizens. Twice,

however, Austria was mixed in with the Bavarian culture, and, vice versa respectively.

The sources of these stereotypes were either friends who had been to the country or

certain movies and education. Interviewee E, for example, mentioned the following:

“I decided to come to Austria because I had a good friend that time who had

lived in Carinthia, in Klagenfurt, and he described Austria as Nirvana, he

described it to me as the most progressive place on the planet […]. Well he

was, for an American, quite liberal he was very impressed with the Austrian

social system, was very impressed with healthcare that Austria provided, then

its citizens, and spoke about Austria in such fond and endearing terms that it

would make anybody curious who was interested in leaving the United States.”


60

This statement then formed this expatriate’s stereotypes about the country. However, it

has to be mentioned that this expatriate left the United States about 20 years ago. Back

then, internet communication was not available, and, therefore, information was not as

easy accessible as in today’s world. Contrarily, even in times of internet expatriates

mentioned friends, former expatriates or travelers as their source of information about

the country, as a statement of interviewee C shows, who came as a Fulbright teaching

assistant last year:

“…I didn’t know a lot about Austria but I had a school friend who studied in

Austria and then he just told me how wonderful the country was, how nice the

people were, how beautiful the scenery was, how it was not so touristy that you

couldn’t get to other people but yet it was close to, you know, also nice other

countries…”

Others imagined Austria as being very similar to Germany or through the movie

“Sound of Music”. Almost everybody that saw this movie prior to the expatriation

somehow related Austrian culture with the traditional costumes and people being very

musical.

“I had unfortunately seen the movie “Sound of Music” about at least 15 times,

so it was almost like a magical experience for me, because I flew into Salzburg

over Scotland and so I almost felt like in a magical world. Maybe it was

influenced be the movie “Sound of Music”, so that was the first special thing

about coming to Austria […]. I thought about the music, that the people are

musical and relaxed and that the mountains are beautiful, and the flowers and

the scenery, the landscape and so on…”

This quote of expatriate J showed that the movie “Sound of Music” played an essential

role in this group of expatriates. Additionally to the movie, Germany and especially

the Bavarian region often stood as an example for the overall German culture, as the

last quotation of interviewee H shows:

“And I came, I mean, I had a picture of Austria from being in Bavaria, because

I learned my German in Bavaria […]. I just knew a little bit about Vienna and


61

Salzburg, things like that, so I didn’t really have the huge impression of what

the Austrians would be like […]. I was thinking the alpine cultures are the

same, at least a little bit in this direction, I found that it helped me learning

German; I was used to the Bavarian, so I thought the Austrian was similar in

certain ways.”

Expatriates that had comparatively clear Austrian stereotypes were also able to think

about the behavior and attitudes. Being friendly, polite and open-minded were

common stereotypes about people living in this country.

Further comments to Austrian stereotypes

It was somehow surprisingly that almost half of the expatriates did not have a clear

image of Austria in their minds. Therefore, I will try to interpret possible reasons for

this in the following paragraph, and highlight the results through the literature review.

The first unexpected information gathered from the interviews in this present study

was that none of the expatriates had any kind of preparation of Austria and its culture

before joining the host culture. In conclusion, they were dependent on stories they had

heard, movies they had seen or the assumption of Austria not being that different from

the United States anyway. According to Scullion & Brewster (2001), this phenomenon

is a general occurrence in the US-American expatriation process. Compared to

European multinational companies, firms in the US do not tend to use preparation,

such as cultural sensitivity training due to the fact that general managers think it is not

necessary or effective. Just 30% of expatriates in the US participate in any kind of

preparation before their assignments, whereby over 60% of British or Irish managers

join a similar training (Scullion & Brewster, 2001, p. 356). It is also proven in

literature that cultural awareness training is the most commonly offered program to be

able to adjust to another culture before the assignment. However, those programs tend

to be on a voluntary basis (Price Waterhouse Europe, 1997/98).


62

A second explanation of why these expatriates did not have a clearer picture of Austria

could be the size of the country and its globally comparatively low importance, as well

as Germany as the big neighbor, a country with the same language. According to a

study of Avery et al. (1999) Austria’s cultural background within the German speaking

countries is homogenous, despite some local differences (Avery et al., 1999, p. 21).

For instance, the model of cultural dimensions of Geert Hofstede (1982) showed just a

slight difference between Germany and Austria basically in all dimensions (Hofstede,

1982). Avery at al. also stated that data about the so-called face value suggests that

German nations tend to be on an equal individualistic level which is much less

compared to the American, and that they are equally concerned about the common

welfare (Avery et al., 1999, p. 21f).

A third factor of expatriates not joining a cultural sensitivity or awareness training

could be the fact that US-Americans do not think Austria is so much different from the

United States since Austria is considered as a First World Country. Different

expatriates on business related trips, therefore, had a picture of Austria as part of the

Western World rather than as an individual country.


63

4.2. Change of stereotypical thinking

This chapter deals with the changes in stereotypical thinking of the participants of this

study in the host country, as well as the matter of culture shock due to either untrue or

unfulfilled stereotypes. Furthermore, cultural introduction weeks as a countermeasure

to cultural sensitivity trainings in the home culture will be discussed and analyzed,

since the majority of the expatriates had such training.

Preparation in the host country

Due to the fact that the expatriates did not have cultural sensitivity training or

preparation for the stay abroad, this first part deals with the preparation right after the

arrival. Surprisingly, just slightly over 50% had any kind of cultural preparation after

their arrival. Representing those, the next quote of expatriate A is a very typical

description of how that preparation took place.

“When we came to Austria, they had some kind of introductory week where

they took us around for a week and showed us different things and, you know

in Vienna, when you are going to Vienna there is the Burgtheater, the Opera

and State Plaza… They also told us a little about how people might react in

certain situations, but I don’t remember too much about that…”

If there was preparation through either the company or the institution that sent the

expatriate, it was very focused on the assignment itself rather than a general overview

about the culture and the behavior of the people in the host country. In the case of

Fulbright teaching assistants the preparation was focused more on conditions and facts

around educational life, such as the student-teacher-relationship and organizational

difficulties and differences to the United States.


64

Expatriates that came to Austria also for private reasons, such as relationships besides

their work-related expatriation, hardly had any preparation after their arrival in the

host country because there was no company or institution behind them. However,

usually the partner and his/her family played an important part in the process of getting

to know the culture.

“…and my husband’s family - also that was very important to me at the very

beginning because I realized that I was not only marrying him but I was going

to marry into a new family and my family was not going to be there and I must

say that his family was really good and they supported me a lot in this new

environment…”

Interviewee D described the importance of the husband’s family in the whole

integration process at the beginning of the expatriation. Additionally, it seemed vital

for expatriates with also private expatriation reasons to have more than just one person

to talk about cultural differences in the host country. Otherwise, a certain dependence

of the expatriate to the partner develops which has a negative impact on the whole

integration process.

Despite the fact that only slightly over 50% had some kind of cultural preparation, ten

out of eleven interviewed expatriates had experiences with culture shock. Sometimes it

was recognized by the expatriates through directly delineating the problems that

occurred, and, other times, it was obvious through the answers given at the interview.

Therefore, the matter of culture shock will be analyzed in the following part. The

specific person that did not have any negative experience will also be discussed in

combination with the theory of “global mind set”.

Culture shock experiences

Bad experiences during the first time in Austria basically had two main reasons. First,

there were problems with the Austrian culture being reserved and narrow-minded.


65

Second, there was the major problem with communication due to the dialect spoken in

Austria. Therefore, those experiences will be analyzed separately, starting with the

cultural differences.

Other than through literature expected, almost 65% of the interviewees mentioned that

Austrians are reserved and conservative, as well as not very open to new things.

Therefore, it did not matter what kind of stereotypical thinking the expatriates had

before they came to Austria. Both, expatriates with a general view of Austria as part of

the Western World, as well as those with a specific stereotype about Austria or the

German culture had these issues.

“And I must say that it was also at this time as I become more out on my own, I

learned about the Austrians and Germans being quite reserved. And as an

American I took that right away as meaning that there is something wrong with

me, they don't like me, what is the matter with me or why are people so

unfriendly…”

The majority of the interviewed expatriates had problems getting to know local people

because they immediately thought that there was something wrong due to a rather

uncommunicative social approach. Four sources (D, G, J and K) gave the exact same

example of the difference between the German and US-American way of building

friendships.

“… because in contrast to here, I think, that in the States you are kind of like

you are innocent until proven guilty and that means very often that after the

first impression let's say that doesn't throw you off a little, you are actually ok

to be my friend until you prove otherwise. Whereas here, it works the other

way around…”

“…in a way, you have to get to know people, there is not a sense of casual,

casualness getting to know somebody, or on a superficial basis… you really

have to know somebody before, you know, they kind of let loose. And that was

a big difference and problem to recognize…”


66

Contrary to Austria, people in the US tend to be more open towards other people and

nationalities and it seems easier to get into contact with them the first time. However,

showing interest in the other person does not mean to be curious just out of pity or to

be superficial. Several interviewees mentioned that they feel misunderstood when

people say that Americans are phony and superficial. They just show interest and are

friendly at the beginning and then decide whether to follow this up after the first

impression. That can be somewhat embarrassing for an Austrian and also taken as an

aggressive act, which of course is not the case. They tend to be much more

conservative without certain casualness when getting to know somebody. Contrarily,

they have to know a person quite well in order to loosen up and commit to the

friendship.

On the rural side this phenomenon seems even worse than in urban surroundings.

Expatriate J, who set up his own business as an organic farmer and manager of a bed

and breakfast talked about the difficulties in being accepted in the community and also

about the issue of making friends as a foreigner.

“So my point is that they know what I do and when I do it but they don’t know

me. They are insecure to come up to get to know me personally, but they know

everything about me […]. But the funny thing is that when my business

became successful and I went into a Gasthaus [tavern], all were greeting me

then. So in America I can make friends after the second time I meet them, not

here, it took a long time to greet each other.”

Other expatriates living in rural communities experienced similar situations. The

inhabitants of small countryside villages are very conservative concerning people from

outside. If they come from another country, it takes even longer to be accepted in the

community. Several expatriates said that it seemed that people knew everything about

them, such as their habits, daily routines and activities, but they did not know them on

a personal basis. As a reason, some interviewees explained this phenomenon as being

reserved towards change simply being scared of asking.


67

Another mentionable fact that bothered over 70 % of the interviewed expatriates that

were in the host country for longer than 5 years was “constant whining of society

about marginal problems without taking action”. People tend to complain about

everything that is not as they want it to be, have the perfect solution to the problem but

do not take action because it would not change anyhow. Asking about specific events

that have occurred, the general consensus was complaints about local activities

concerning either political affairs or problems in a business related environment.

Again, there was no difference between expatriates with a stereotypical view of

Austria as part of the Western World and those who had a specific image of Austria

(or the German culture) in mind. People from both groups had problems of similar

kinds to a greater or lesser extent. However, there are differences between expatriates

that came to Austria a longer time ago and those who came within the last three years.

As already mentioned above, about 65% of the expatriates thought of Austria as being

narrow-minded and very conservative. All these expatriates had been in Austria for

longer than five years. Contrarily, three out of four expatriates that came to Austria

within the last 5 years had a totally different point of view about the host-country

nationals, as interviewee I explained:

“My expectations were more like, mmh, pretty relaxed, just different from

America, and here is definitely a different mindset in this Germanic culture, in

general more open-minded and liberal. My first impression of an Austrian, the

first one I met was this person that offered me and allowed me to stay with her

for a few days while I was finding a place, […] she was really helpful calling

people helping me to find a place, it sort of lived up to my expectations that

there are a lot of friendly and open people…”

There could be several reasons for this change in perception, such as the development

of English as an important language or the globalization and internationalization of the

country. However, these assumptions are not part of the research question and

therefore not analyzed further. Nevertheless, this last part shows that positive

stereotypes of expatriates about Austria being rather open-minded and liberal – as


68

already seen in chapter 4.1. –are also fulfilled. This matter is important for the further

analysis of the study.

Language problems

Ten out of eleven expatriates had significant problems with the language. The other

person had lived in Bavaria, Germany, before and therefore was able to cope with the

dialect in Austria. Problems basically occurred in two different ways. Either,

expatriates had a certain level of standard German from school or during language

courses and were aware of the dialect spoken in Austria, but simply could not speak or

understand it. Or, people were aware of standard German and convinced that it is

spoken that way everywhere. Two interviewees did not have prior language

knowledge and started to take courses in the host country. Subsequently, the two major

groups are analyzed in more detail.

Three interviewed expatriates – all in Austria for at least 10 years – were not aware of

the difference between High German and the Austrian dialect. However, they had

German in school or in language courses prior to their expatriation, as interviewee E

explained:

“I had studied German, oh, man, I couldn’t believe, I was like: What language

are they speaking? It was really difficult. And it took me a very long time to

figure out what people were actually saying and to be able to follow a

conversation. And just the words like “auffi, owi, ummi, zuwi, dauni”… all

these words you don’t hear in High German […]. I had no idea about the

dialect. I was expecting; you know how when you learn English and then you

go from here to English speaking countries you expect to be able to

communicate. And it is often not the case, it is often difficult. Well, put the

“auffi, owi, ummi” on top of that - it was very rough at the beginning.”


69

It was a big culture shock expecting to be able to communicate at least at basic level

and then not being able to understand even a little bit of what people said.

Additionally, English was not very common back then and it was very hard to

communicate at all. Two expatriates (G, K) even described Austrian as a second verbal

language to learn besides Standard German.

Five interviewees were aware of the different dialect spoken in Austria. However, they

had either never heard it before, or they could not cope with it at the beginning.

Actually, there was not a very big difference between those who had not been aware of

the dialect and those who knew that there was one, but did not know much more about

it. Again, expatriates that came to Austria over ten years ago had greater problems

communicating than recent arrivals as English has become increasingly important over

time. The following quote of expatriate F shows the difficulties of expatriation before

the 1990s, which every interviewee had at that time:

“Nobody spoke English, even if it was a huge university town [Graz]. I

couldn’t get by unless I spoke German, and my German was ok, but it wasn’t

fluent and they had a dialect. From that point of view I didn’t have any

preparation, I was just put into this situation, but that was the best thing, total

immersion and had a hard time in the beginning with the German but after a

few months I was dreaming in German and that is when you know you are

fluent…”

Also expatriates who had either assignments in Germany or Switzerland prior to

Austria had problems with the accent and any communication due to the fact that they

were not able to familiarize themselves with it before their stay in the host country.

However, nowadays the dialect is not a very big problem anymore since English has

become a generally recognized and spoken language in Austria. Therefore, it is not

strictly necessary to know the language before entering the host country, although it

helps a lot in getting to know local people and their culture in order to be able to cope

with eventual differences. As already mentioned, two expatriates did not have prior

language knowledge and started to study the language during their stay in Austria.


70

Further comments on the change of stereotypical thinking

Despite the fact that no interviewed expatriates had any kind of preparation before

they went abroad, just slightly over 50% were prepared after their arrival. However,

those trainings seemed to be very focused on the task of the expatriate without

covering general cultural differences between the home- and the host country. There

could be two different explanations in existing literature for this lack of preparation as

shown in the next part.

First, there is the already discussed study of Scullion & Brewster (2001) that argues

that US managers do not even think that cultural sensitivity training is necessary or

effective before the assignment, so why would it be effective in the host country

(Scullion & Brewster, 2001, p. 356). Also, theory is undecided if cultural awareness

programs effectively help expatriates to manage their stay abroad better than without

such preparation. Kealey & Protheroe (1996) claim in their review that there is no

question about the fact that intercultural sensitivity, as well as communication skills,

are absolutely necessary to be successful in the host country, but even more if cultural

training can provide expatriates with such skills. The actual result of their empirical

study is that although there is a certain increase of knowledge of the host culture and

interpersonal skills in order to communicate, it is unclear if cultural sensitivity training

effectively improves the expatriate’s performance (Kealey & Protheroe, 1996, p. 161).

Jun et al. (2001) explained cultural adaptation as a process of developing certain

competences in order to be integrated into the culture and actually satisfied in the host

country. Therefore, active market participation is a basic step when adapting to a new

culture. Cultural knowledge can be an aid rather than a guarantee (Jun et al., 2001, p.

372). This theoretical model is shown in the literature review in the first part of this

thesis.

Second, expatriates without a business related assignment hardly ever join cultural

training, and, therefore, are often dependent on their contacts in the host country.


71

Copeland & Norell (2002) conducted a study about spouses and their adjustment

abroad, which correlates to expatriates that have a relationship in a foreign country.

Social support networks, therefore, have an essential role in building a relationship to

the host culture nationals. Establishing local social networks, joining clubs and

organizations, as well as informal get-togethers help to adjust to the new environment

if there is no company behind the actual expatriation (Copeland & Norell, 2002, p.

270). Additionally, already discussed personal characteristics, such as open-

mindedness, social initiative and cultural empathy, flexibility and emotional stability

are important for the whole adjustment process in the host culture (Ali et al., 2003, p.

566).

Experiences of culture shock are normal during a longer stay in another country or

culture. The intensity, however, depends on several factors, such as personality,

preparation and local environment. Stereotypes of the host-country also play an

important role on culture shock experiences. If expectations are completely different

than reality, expatriates are forced to deal with uncertain and unanticipated situations.

A study of Pitts (2009) about students studying abroad in France showed that culture

shock depend on each student’s personality and, to some degree, the expectations the

student had about the country (Pitts, 2009, p. 454). Similar to Pitts’ study, almost

every participant of this empirical study had culture shock to a certain degree,

depending on prior experiences and stereotypical images of the country. For the

participants it was the feeling that Austrians were rather reserved towards new things.

A certain in-group/out-group thinking of host nationals and expatriates could develop

and handicap common interaction (Reich & Spitzer, 2002, p. 45f). This can lead to

market alienation, and, ultimately, lead to unsuccessful cultural adaptation of

foreigners.

One of the interviewed expatriates in the present study did not report any kind of

cultural shock or distress. In order to try to explain this phenomenon, the notion of the

“global mindset” might be an interesting approach. Solomon & Schell (2009)


72

described a global mindset as the ability of an individual to use information about a

culture gathered over time in order to recognize clues that show different behaviors

and attitudes of people in this culture (Solomon & Schell, 2009, p. 224). The expatriate

has to be able to manage cultural differences and see them as distinctions to another

culture rather than stick to stereotypes of the culture. This does not necessarily mean

that individuals that are able to manage cultural differences do not have stereotypes

about a culture or a country. They use stereotypes of a certain country to visualize a

broader picture at the beginning and then create a more perceptual scheme to see the

different values beneath the stereotypical, superficial context. Individuals with higher

culturally competences tend to be able to distinguish between the characteristics of

people of another culture without putting them in one pot (Clausen, 2010, p. 59).

Beaman (2004) characterizes the model of global mindset on the basis of ethnocentric,

polycentric and geocentric different orientations, as shown in figure 13. It shows that a

combination of these different mindsets leads to a global mindset rather than one

specific type (Beaman, 2004, p. 45).

Figure 13: Global mindset (Beaman, 2004, p. 45)

The theory of ethnocentric mindset explains the belief of expatriates that the home

culture is the basis for all beliefs and values. It implies certain superiority over all


73

other cultures. However, there are situations where this mindset is helpful in an

expatriation process, such as standardization of company procedures in order to protect

the intellectual company value from others. Contrary to the ethnocentric mindset there

is the polycentric approach where the adaptation to a new culture is usually successful

and gaps between the home and host cultures are quickly accomplished. Expatriates

with a polycentric mindset try to do business as locals do, and, to a certain extent

become native in a work related way. Unlike people with an ethnocentric mindset,

polycentric staff is able to operate in areas where it is important to be focus on the

local markets and habits. Geocentric mindsets value a fictive global culture by partly

ignoring local cultural differences. They seek a universal culture where different kinds

of people work towards one common goal. Geocentric expatriates ideally work on a

global level, on tasks where they respect and deal with people of different cultures and

approaches towards a common business goal. A global mindset, therefore, is a

combination of the three basic mindsets (Beaman, 2004, p. 45).

Concerning the actual qualitative study, language problems and issues with the partly

strong dialect of local people also had an impact on culture shock. Pitts (2009) argues

that in order to be satisfied in the host country certain market participation is necessary

to get used to the new environment and to find new friends. Often, expectations about

the language being comparable on a certain academic level and the expectation of

prior skills being sufficient to communicate are wrong and lead to frustration, stress

and uncertainty (Pitts, 2009, p. 453f).

However, it has to be mentioned that nowadays communication in English is much

easier than ten to twenty years ago. As an international business language English is

mandatory in the Austrian education system and almost all of the younger generation

knows at least the basics. Therefore, it is not as necessary as it was in the 80s and 90s

to know German to communicate in Austria, although the study showed that cultural

adaptation is easier if the local language is known.


74

4.3. The influence of certain experiences

The last two chapters showed that stereotypes and expectations prior to the stay abroad

often did not match reality. The understanding of the host culture being different came

either suddenly due to a certain incident or steadily with the passing of time.

Contrarily, if the stereotype matches reality to some extent, expatriates tend to develop

the stereotype further. This chapter shows the partly individual examples the

interviewed expatriates had before the patterns that changed stereotypical thinking are

identified in the next chapter 4.4.

Understanding through a specific incident:

The process of understanding a specific attitude or behavior of locals of another

culture always followed a certain incident. This incident was either a positive or

negative occurrence that caused the expatriate to start thinking about the whole

situation. Other than in the following section where time and ample, although less

formative occurrences played an essential role, here, one big event caused a rethinking

of prejudices and stereotypes.

Interviewee J, for example, had held a speech on India in German after being in

Austria for 9 months and knowing the language for about a year:

“And I was very proud because after one year of German and the six weeks of

studying for this talk people would be impressed. I didn’t even know where

Austria was before… And I was surprised that after my talk people in America

would thank you and congratulate for the talk, and they [natives] asked me how

long I was living in Austria, and I said I have been here nine month; and to my

surprise, Germans were very straight forward, they told me that I was lying and

that it was not possible that I was in Austria for nine months and speak so good

German, and so I was almost insulted!”


75

These accusations and rather negative occurrences caused interviewee J to change, or

at least think about his previous stereotypes and expectations of Austria being relaxed

and comparable to the Western World, as the following statement shows:

I was expecting a congratulation and here these Austrians didn’t believe me

and they told me in my face that I was lying, so, I mean that was rough because

in America – if they don’t believe you – just out of politeness they would say

something nice and think something different, but they still would be nice to

you, but here people are straight forward […]. So that was one of my biggest

shocks.”

Further, the interviewee expressed that from this time on it was clear that there was

another cultural mentality and Austrians were more direct than people from other

cultures, such as the US-American one.

Contrarily, also positive experiences have an effect on stereotypical thinking.

Expatriate I had stereotypes that matched his experiences to some degree, as already

shown on page 67. He expected Austrians to be “…pretty relaxed [with a] different

mindset here [and] in general more open-minded and liberal […] than in the States.”

These expectations were entirely fulfilled after an Austrian helped with looking for an

apartment and offering a place to stay.

“I thought it was really kind of her to invite me to stay while searching a place

even though she didn’t know me, and so she was really helpful and calling

people helping me to find a place, it sort of lived up to my expectations there

are a lot of friendly people.”

In this case, the specific stereotype about Austria was endorsed through certain

experiences which led to a stabilization of the stereotype rather than a rethinking of it.

However, in most of the cases expatriates experienced more than just one incident

which slowly and over time changed their stereotypical thinking of Austrians and their

behavior.


76

Understanding by time

The majority of the interviewed expatriates experienced a slow but steady change of

stereotypical thinking. Occurrences that repeatedly came up during their stay in the

host country started a rethinking process. Expatriate D, for example, had a difficult

time understanding the differences of getting to know people. As Austria was directly

compared to the United States as part of the Western World several situations taken for

granted changed and the expatriate needed time to recognize the different cultural

values.

“And yeah, it took a while, and then I learned that it didn't have to do with me,

it also didn't have to do with the fact that they didn't like me or that they were

mean or insensitive, it just had to do with the culture. They weren't as outgoing

and as open as Americans are […]. I also find that the longer I am here, the

more that certain mistakes get less. And I now can also judge if somebody is

being reserved or if they behave simply unfriendly, I can also judge if

somebody is just a lousy cashier because she is not friendly with the customers

or if she is just plain stressed or if she is just playing nice and it is busy, so

there are many things that I have learned about the fine things of dealing with

the culture here and that now makes my life a lot easier.”

Overall, Austrians were considered to be rather reserved and narrow-minded compared

to the self-assessment of US-Americans being curios and open-minded about new

cultures. Additionally, Austrians seemed to be rather direct about daily life

experiences, as the following common statement by expatriate B shows:

“Americans might be a little bit nicer about general things and instead of

saying something in someone’s face they rather say something nice and lie to

someone instead and try to be a bit nicer. My experience with Austrians is that

they are very blunt […] but you just have to remember, it is the culture and

how they do it.”

The majority of the interviewed expatriates had a similar opinion about that matter.

However, there was no evidential difference between expatriates that had a stereotype


77

of Austria being part of the Western World or of Austria having a certain specific

culture. Subsequently, the next section tries to analyze the influence of certain

experiences on stereotypical thinking through available theory.

Further comments on the influence of certain incidents

As already mentioned in the theoretical part of this thesis, there is not a lot of literature

about the change of stereotypical thinking of the host country during an expatriation

assignment. According to Smith & Mackie (2000), several conditions have to be

present in order to change stereotypes. Incoherent information and experiences in the

new environment, such as behavior that was different than expected, help to break up

stereotypes and give the individual a chance to rethink the whole situation (Smith &

Mackie, 2000, p. 197f). However, people have to be careful not to immediately take

new behavior for granted and develop a new stereotype, as explained in the literature

review in chapter 2.1.3. – Ways to reduce stereotyping.

In order to be a successful expatriate, an open mind and awareness of upcoming

differences between the stereotypes of a country and reality has to be in place. Cox &

Beale (1997) describe this open mindedness as part of a process to develop

competency to deal with this new environment. The following adapted figure by Cox

& Beale (1997) – as already stated in the literature review – shows that several tasks

and responsibilities have to be accomplished in three different phases to gain the

necessary knowledge to understand and be aware of stereotypes (Cox & Beale, 1997,

p. 91ff).


78

Figure 14: Three phases of stereotypical competence (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 93)

Summarizing the literature review, Cox & Beale (1997) argue that expatriates have to

be aware that possible differences between cultures might be present. Conflicts,

decision making or other business customs, as well as non business related action

might be accomplished differently but ultimately lead to the same result. Only if the

expatriate is aware of these differences it is possible to understand them as the second

step of this model shows. Here, the expatriate should raise the question of why

customs are diverse and why people accomplish certain activities differently. The third

development phase deals with taking action and adapting to the new customs or at

least finding a compromise. It is important to talk about development phases since

gaining knowledge and competence in awareness and dealing with stereotypes takes a

certain period of time (Cox & Beale, 1997, p. 91ff).

The present study actually confirms that gaining competence in being aware of

stereotypes is a development rather than an instant process. The participants of the

empirical qualitative interview mostly reported that it took them a long time to actually

change stereotypical thinking and be aware of differences between the home and host

countries.


79

4.4. Identified patterns that change stereotypical thinking

The main research question was if positive (negative) experiences change a certain

positive (negative) image of a country and therefore confirm or refute those

stereotypes. Therefore, it either intensifies or softens the stereotypical thinking of an

expatriate in the host country. The analysis of the interviews showed three main

directions in answer to this question. First, several interviewees explained the slow

change of stereotypical thinking after several minor incidents that proved given

stereotypes wrong. Second, some expatriates talked about a radical change of beliefs

about the country after a major incident. It has to be mentioned that those experiences

were mostly negative resulting from culture shocks. And third, there was also the

situation of intensifying positive stereotypes after positive experiences.

Almost all of the participants in this qualitative study had a certain image of Austria

and its citizens in their mind as being rather open and curious about new cultures and

people. However, two stereotypical directions were given. Five out of eleven

interviewed expatriates saw the Austrian culture not as a distinct, specific society but

rather as a part of the generalized Western World. The participants in this group did

not think of Austria as any different to other European countries or the United States.

Often only obvious, partly unique facts, such as the language, the location or the

mountainous landscape were the only distinction to other parts of Europe. Behavioral

characteristics of locals or ideas of how they perform in business situations simply

were not given. Instead, comparisons between the Austrian and US-American culture

were drawn and partly expected to be the same.

The other group of participants had a clear image of Austria in terms of the behavioral

thinking of its citizens, as well as the country in general in their minds. The main

sources for information about the country were mostly experiences of friends or

certain TV shows. Several interviewees saw the movie “Sound of Music” and directly

associated the shown characteristics with Austria. In conclusion, the participants of


80

this study expected Austrians to be friendly, polite and open-minded towards new

cultures and foreigners. The fact that not a single expatriate joined a cultural sensitivity

training prior to the stay in Austria had an impact neither on the two different

stereotypical directions, nor on the difference in culture-shock-experiences of the

participants after the arrival.

Culture shock was an issue for ten out of eleven interviewed expatriates. Bad

experiences in the host country, due to impressions that Austrians are rather narrow-

minded and reserved, as well as the partly strong dialect led to symptoms of cultural

distress. As a result of reserved Austrians and the difficulties understanding the

language, the majority of participants in the study had problems getting to know the

locals. To pick up the theory of Jun et al. (2001), market participation is very

important for an expatriate to feel at ease within the host culture. If there are

difficulties of being accepted in the new environment or if the expatriate is not able to

communicate with locals, a certain separation from the host culture may evolve (Jun et

al., 2001, p. 371f). They feel excluded from society and not welcomed although this is

not the intention of the locals. Therefore, it is important to know the culture and keep

trying to interact with the new environment (Foster, 1995, p. 54). This showed that

most of the times stereotypical expectations did not match real life.

However, there was one expatriate that did not experience any kind of culture shock.

One explanation literature offers is the theory of global mindset. According to

Solomon & Schell (2009), the global mindset is the ability to use information about a

country to recognize behaviors in that country in order to see them as basic knowledge

(Solomon & Schell, 2009, p. 224). The expatriate, therefore, is able to use stereotypes

as a foundation without necessarily sticking to them. He/she sees them as distinct to

one’s own, or other cultures, and is able to distinguish between characteristics of

people of different cultures without clustering them (Clausen, 2010, p. 59). One

interviewed expatriate showed a comparable behavior.


81

The majority of the interviewed expatriates, however, had cultural difficulties in the

host country. The process of overcoming those difficulties and understanding the local

culture either came suddenly after a certain incident, or steadily over time. In the event

of a sudden change of opinions about the host country, a positive or negative

occurrence happened that caused the expatriate to rethink his/her stereotypical notions.

Very common incidents within this study were rather negative occurrences where the

expatriates were surprised about the directness and unfriendliness of the locals. US-

Americans, for instance, would rephrase certain comments out of politeness. They feel

overwhelmed that Austrians tend to be rather direct and also give negative feedback.

Comments, such as “I was surprised that […] Germans were very straight forward,

they told me that I was lying and that it was not possible that I was in Austria for nine

months and speak so good German, and so I was almost insulted” are an example for

that feeling.

However, the majority of participants had a slow but constant change of stereotypical

thinking. Minor unexpected occurrences repeated over time during their stay in the

host country led to a thinking process. As already stated, being in Austria as an

expatriate, they often got the feeling that the locals were conservative, reserved and

narrow-minded. Expressions, such as “it took a while to get used to it, but it is the way

it is…”, or “you just have to remember, it is the culture and how they do it” show the

rather slow change of the stereotypical picture of Austrians.

Despite the fact that the participants changed their stereotypical thinking suddenly

after an unexpected occurrence or slowly over time, a certain pattern is identified. This

pattern leads to the first proposition:

Negative experiences soften positive stereotypes and change the

picture of a country to a more realistic image.


82

Contrarily, other expatriates had a positive image about Austria in their minds before

the expatriation, and actually experienced those stereotypes. This led to a confirmation

of host-country nationals being as imagined and, therefore, did not necessarily change

the stereotypical picture of the country. An example is the story of an interviewed

expatriate who had positive stereotypes about Austria and actually experienced them.

Subsequently, there was no sign of any maceration of the stereotypes. This sample

establishes the second proposition:

Positive experiences confirm and even strengthen positive

stereotypes without changing the image of a country.


83

5. Limitations of the study

This empirical study allowed insight into the complex area of change in stereotypical

thinking of expatriates in another country and within a foreign culture. It showed the

development of stereotypes over time and, that through certain experiences, these

prejudices do change. However, there are certain limitations of the study.

First, all the expatriates were from one specific country, the USA. Austria and the

USA are both considered to be part of the Western World and, therefore, many

customs are similar. This eventually made it difficult for some expatriates to obtain a

clear image of the host country before the expatriation. Comparing the United States

with Austria might be stereotypical thinking; however, the intention was to obtain

stereotypes similar to those described in the theoretical part. The concept of cultural

distance, therefore, plays an important role. Triandis (2000) defines cultural distance

as a conflict that “is greater when the two cultures are very different than when they

are similar” (Triandis, 2000, p. 18). Therefore, several factors have an effect on

cultural distance. It is greater if different languages are spoken or even if strong

dialects within a language are present. Also different social structures, such as family

relations, or religion have an effect on cultural distance. Even if people are aware that

a person has another religion, problematic situations can arise since humans tend to

base their judgment on different beliefs. In addition, standards of living also play an

essential role in cultural distance (Triandis, 2000, p. 18f). It seems that besides the

different languages in Austria and the United States, there are certain similarities

between these two countries and, therefore, it became increasingly difficult to draw a

clear and objective image of Austria before the expatriation process. Following studies

could focus on expatriates from other more varied countries according to the definition

of the concept of cultural distance.

Second, not a single expatriate had a negative stereotypical picture about the host

country Austria. Therefore, the theories of positive experiences changing a negative


84

stereotypical image, as well as negative experiences not changing negative

stereotypical images but rather intensifying it could not be analyzed.

Third, the sample size of just eleven participants is a limitation in the empirical study.

Due to the current economic situation and the resulting financial cuts international

companies had to enforce, multiple firms stopped knowledge transfer through

expatriation. They had to cut back on expenses and saved costs on limiting expatriate

assignments.

Fourth, a differentiation between expatriates on a business related stay that joined a

cultural sensitivity training and expatriates that did not should be considered. Further

empirical studies should focus on both groups of expatriates. Business expatriates with

pre-training might have the advantage of being prepared by the company specifically

for a certain country and culture. Contrarily, they might stick to false stereotypes more

than expatriates that experience the culture directly within the expatriation process.

Expatriates without cultural sensitivity training might have evolved a closer bond to

the host country and, therefore, are able to address problems differently.

However, this empirical study offers a lead to further investigation on this issue.

Further qualitative analyzes specialized on certain cultures, as well as a general

overview on how stereotypes change in a foreign country have to be conducted.

Additionally, quantitative studies that cover more than just one country should be

carried out in order to get a bigger picture of the issue of stereotypical thinking and its

changes in a foreign culture.


85

6. Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to analyze if stereotypical thinking of expatriates about

a certain culture changes after a specific time in a foreign country. There is an

abundance of literature and empirical studies about expatriation, as well as stereotypes

and the matter of prejudices; however, there are hardly any experimental studies about

the connection between those topics. After a theoretical input concerning stereotyping

and expatriation an empirical study was completed. Eleven US-American expatriates

currently in Austria for business, as well as private reasons were interviewed and

asked about their stereotypical beliefs and if these changed over time. Subsequently,

the theoretical and empirical parts will be described briefly.

Stereotypes are generalized, widely held perceptions of a certain group of people or

cultures. There are several reasons for stereotypical thinking. First, it defines a specific

group identity in order to distinguish one group (in-group) from another (out-group).

Second, it helps to simplify the overload of information and focuses on the obvious

characteristics and differences of a group (Clausen, 2010, p. 58). Without this

condensation and simplification there would be an overload of information. However,

the problem is that besides verbal information also non-verbal, visual data is

processed, and, therefore, a stereotypical picture is sometimes distorted and does not

match reality (Petersen & Schwender, 2009, p. 9). Lippman (1922) once stated that

“for the most part, we do not first see, and then define; we define first and then see’’

(Lippmann, 1922, p. 81). However, there are ways to reduce stereotyping. It is

important to establish intergroup contact and communication channels in order to

discover the actual beliefs behind a group or culture. If groups or cultures are faced

with strong reciprocal stereotypes, opportunity is provided to directly recognize and

work on them (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000, p. 110f). Additionally, the topic of managing

and valuing differences is a way of recognizing discrepancies between groups in order

to see them as a distinction rather than just as typical stereotypes. Therefore, and as an

expatriate in particular, it is important to have an open mind and to be aware that


86

cultural differences can occur. When being in another country, it is essential to interact

within the new environment and be able to understand certain differences. Knowledge

about the other culture can be an aid but is not a guarantee of success in reducing

stereotypes and being able to integrate into the new culture (Jun et al., 2001, p. 371).

Nowadays expatriation is an increasingly important strategy for international

organizations to deal with business tasks abroad. Employees are sent abroad for a

limited or permanent period of time to manage and control the company’s operation in

the host country (Jun et al, 2001, p. 369). The expatriate has to deal with cultural

differences, and, therefore, needs to have certain skills, technical abilities and the right

motivation. If the expatriation is business related, a complex selection of the IHRM

takes place in order to guarantee a successful project (Selmer, 1995, p. 20). However,

expatriation also takes place for private reasons, such as relationships. In this case, a

background organization is not available and the individual is responsible for any

eventual issues and concerns. However, for both, business expatriate and private

expatriate, it is generally very important to be open-minded towards the new culture

and to show willingness to participate in the new environment in order to be able to

adapt to it. There are several theories about intercultural adjustment, such as the study

of Ali et al. (2003), where they divided the topic of intercultural adjustment in three

parts; personality traits, family- and work characteristics (Ali et al., 2003, p. 566).

Although expatriates can be prepared and are open-minded to the new culture and

environment, most of them still experience the so-called culture shock as part of the

adaptation process. Everything feels wrong and the expatriates feel responsible for

problems with host culture nationals and the country in general (University of Calgary,

2002). Often, the reasons are wrong assumptions and expectations of the culture due to

wrong information or simply stereotypical thinking and an unawareness of differences

in the host culture (Foster, 1995, p. 53).

This led to the main research question if stereotypical thinking changed after certain

incidents occurred, and here certain patterns were identified. Therefore, an empirical


87

study with eleven expatriates from the US – currently in Austria – took place. The

interviewees were in the country for business reasons, such as short term expatriations,

as well as on jobs not connected to an American international company. Basically, the

study showed that there is a strong correlation between expatriation and the change of

stereotypical thinking in the host country. Two propositions were established. First,

positive stereotypical images of a country soften if negative experiences occur. This

can either happen through a major experience, where the expatriate immediately starts

to think about prejudices, or through slow substitution of thoughts through minor

occurrences and incidents. Second, positive stereotypical images of a country are

confirmed or even strengthened if positive experiences occur. There was no sign of

rethinking a stereotypical image if the image actually fitted the experiences in the host

country.


88

7. Bibliography

AAS (2010): Austro-American Society. Received Jan. 29th, from

http://members.liwest.at/aas/.

Ali, A. & Van der Zee, K. & Sanders, G. (2003): Determinants of intercultural

adjustment among expatriate spouses. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 27 (5), 563-580.

Allport, G.W. (1954): The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. In:

Oskamp, S. (2000): Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination. New Jersey: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Arther, N. (2004): Counseling International Students: Clients from Around the World.

New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Avery, G. & Donnerberg, O. & Gick, W. & Hilb, M. (1999): Challenges for

management development in the German-speaking nations for the twenty-first

century. Journal of Management Development, 18 (1), 18-31.

Baruch, Y. (2004): Managing Careers – Theory and Practice. Edinburgh Gate: Pearson

Education Limited.

Beaman, K.V. (2004): Myths, Mystiques, and Mistakes in Overseas Assignments: The

Role of Global Mindset in International Work. IHRIM Journal 8(6), 40-53.

Blaine, B.E. (2007): Understanding the Psychology of Diversity. London: SAGE

Publications LTD.

Blattner, E. (2005): Wien; 15th ed. München: Falk Verlag.

http://members.liwest.at/aas/�


89

Brewer, M.B. (1988): A dual process model of impression formation. In: Chaiken, S.

& Trope, Y. (1999): Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: The

Guilford Press.

Brewer, M.B. & Feinstein, A.S.H. (1999): Dual Processes in the Cognitive

Representation of Persons and Social Categories. In: Chaiken, S. & Trope, Y.

(1999): Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: The Guilford

Press.

Chaiken, S. & Trope, Y. (1999): Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology. New

York: The Guilford Press.

Clausen, L. (2010): Moving beyond stereotypes in managing cultural difference:

Communication in Danish – Japanese corporate relationships. Scandinavian Journal

of Management, 26, 57-66.

Collings, D.G. & Scullion, H. (2006): Strategic motivations for international transfers:

Why do MNCs use expatriates? In: Scullion, H. & Collings, D.G. (2006): Global

Staffing. New York: Routledge.

Copeland, A.P. & Norell, S.K. (2002): Spousal adjustment on international

assignments: the role of social support. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 26, 255-272.

Cox, T.Jr. & Beale, R.L. (1997): Developing Competency to Manage Diversity. San

Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc.

Datter (2008): The Archetypal American. Received Dec. 06th, from

http://blog.cagle.com/daryl/2008/12/19/the-archetypal-american/.

http://blog.cagle.com/daryl/2008/12/19/the-archetypal-american/�


90

Dickmann, M. & Brewster, C. & Sparrow, P. (2008): International Human Resource

Management: A European perspective, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Dickmann, M. & Doherty, N. (2007): Exploring the Career Capital Impact of

International Assignments within distinct Organizational Contexts. British Journal

of Management, 19, 145-16.

Dowling, P.J. & Festing, M. & Engle, A. (2008): International Human Resource

Management, 5th ed. London: Thomson Learning

Fischlmayr, I.C. (2004): Expatriation, Ein Handbuch zur Entsendung von Mitarbeitern

ins Ausland. Linz: Trauner Verlag.

Foster, D.A. (1995): Bargaining across cultures: How to negotiate business anywhere

in the world. United States of America: McGraw-Hill

Francesco, A.M. & Gold, B.A. (2005): International organizational behavior, 2nd

edition. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Furnham, A. & Bochner, S. (1986): Culture Shock; Psychological Reactions to

Unfamiliar Environments. New York: Methuen & Co.

Garcia-Marques, T. & Mackie, D.M. (2001): The feeling of familiarity as a regulator

of persuasive processing. Social Cognition, 19 (1), 9-34.

Gentleman (2007): Stereotypes part 1: The French. Received Dec. 06th, from

http://www.made-in-england.org/stereotypes-part-1-the-french/.

http://www.made-in-england.org/stereotypes-part-1-the-french/�


91

Gill, M.J. (2004): When information does not deter stereotyping: Prescriptive

stereotyping can foster bias under conditions that deter descriptive stereotyping.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 619–632.

Graff, J. & Schaupp, G (2009): More than Manners: So treten Sie professionell auf -

The Business Professional’s Guide to Success in Germany. Germany: Co IN-Medien.

Received Dec. 06th, from http://www.business-knigge.com/.

Grobman, G.M. (1990): Stereotypes and Prejustices. Received Oct. 20th from

http://www.remember.org/guide/History.root.stereotypes.html.

Guy, P.S. & Patton, W.E. (1996): Managing the Effects of Culture Shock and

Sojourner Adjustment on the Expatriate Industrial. Industrial Marketing

Management, 25, 385-393.

Hall, E.T. & Hall, M.R. (1990): Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French

and Americans. Yarmouth, Maine: Intercultural Press Inc.

Hess, M.B. & Linderman, P. (2002): Expert Expatriate: Your Guide to Successful

Relocation Abroad. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Hofstede, G. (1982): Culture's consequences: International difference in work related

values. Journal of Economic Psychology, 7 (2), 249-256. In: Avery, G. &

Donnerberg, O. & Gick, W. & Hilb, M. (1999): Challenges for management

development in the German-speaking nations for the twenty-first century. Journal

of Management Development, 18 (1), 18-31.

Institute of International Education (2010): Fulbright Program for U.S. students -

Sponsored by U.S. Department of State. Received Feb. 12th, from

http://us.fulbrightonline.org/home.html.

http://www.business-knigge.com/�

http://www.remember.org/guide/History.root.stereotypes.html�

https://han.ubl.jku.at/han/sciencedirectDB/www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8H-458WPPJ-7&_user=464415&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F1986&_alid=1231676398&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=5871&_sort=r&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=2390&_acct=C000022158&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=464415&md5=58ddfc1e9fae477f28b16a7c7b6fcb1f�

https://han.ubl.jku.at/han/sciencedirectDB/www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8H-458WPPJ-7&_user=464415&_coverDate=06%2F30%2F1986&_alid=1231676398&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_cdi=5871&_sort=r&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=2390&_acct=C000022158&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=464415&md5=58ddfc1e9fae477f28b16a7c7b6fcb1f�

http://us.fulbrightonline.org/home.html�


92

Johnston, W.A. & Hawley, K.J. (1994): Perceptual inhibition of expected inputs: The

key that opens closed minds. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 56-72.

Jun, S. & Gentry, J.W. & Hyun, Y.J. (2001): Cultural Adaption of Business

Expatriates in the Host Marketplace. Journal of International Business Studies, 32

(2), 369-377.

Kealey, D.J. & Protheroe, D.R. (1996): The Effectiveness of Cross-Cultural Training

for Expatriates: An Assessment of the Literature on the Issue. International Journal

of Cultural Relations, 20 (2), 141-165.

Koch, A. (2002): Visuelle Stereotype im öffentlichen Zuwanderungsdiskurs?

Pressefotos von Migranten in deutschen Tageszeitungen. In: Petersen, T. &

Schwender, C. (2009). Visuelle Stereotype. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.

Kordon, K. & Uitz, B. (2006): Stereotypes or realistic views? How is Austria seen

from outside? Wirtschaftskammer Österreich. Received Dec. 06th, from

http://www.cebs.at/pages/cebs_intern/AWS_06/AWS_E1_stereot_06.pdf.

Lippmann, W. (1922): Public Opinion. New York: McMillan. In: Clausen, L. (2010):

Moving beyond stereotypes in managing cultural difference: Communication in

Danish – Japanese corporate relationships. Scandinavian Journal of Management,

26, 57-66.

Lippmann, W. (1998): Public Opinion, with a new introduction by Michael Curtis.

New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

Mäkelä, K. (2007): Knowledge Sharing Through Expatriate Relationships.

International Studies of Management & Organization, 37 (3), 108-125.

http://www.cebs.at/pages/cebs_intern/AWS_06/AWS_E1_stereot_06.pdf�


93

Mc Garty, C. & Yzerbyt, V.Y. & Spears, R. (2002): Stereotypes as Explanations.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Moore, J. (2007): The Effects of Stereotyping. Received Oct. 20th, from

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/233134/the_effects_of_stereotyping.html

?cat=9.

Naylor, L. (1996): Culture and Change: An Introduction. Westport: Greenwood

Publishing Group Inc.

Pedersen, P. (1995): The Five Stages of Culture Shock – Critical Incidents Around the

World. Contributions in Psychology, 25. Received Jan. 3rd, from

http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=15095974.

Peltonen, T. (1998): Narrative construction of expatriate experience and career cycle:

discursive patterns in Finnish stories of international career. The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 9 (5), 875-892. In: Hartl, K. (2003):

Expatriate Women Managers: Gender, Culture & Career. München und Mering:

Rainer Hampp Verlag.

Petersen, T. & Schwender, C. (2009): Visuelle Stereotype. Köln: Herbert von Halem

Verlag.

Pettigrew, T.F. & Tropp, L.R. (2000): Does Intergroup Contact Reduce Prejudice?

Recent Meta-Analytic Findings. In: Oskamp, S. (2000): Reducing Prejudice and

Discrimination. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/233134/the_effects_of_stereotyping.html?cat=9�

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/233134/the_effects_of_stereotyping.html?cat=9�

http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=15095974�


94

Reich, S. & Spitzner, F. (2002): Veränderung stereotypischer Wahrnehmung durch

Ethno-Soaps. Eine Untersuchung am Beispiel der Serie Türkisch für Anfänger. In:

Petersen, T. & Schwender, C. (2009): Visuelle Stereotype. Köln: Herbert von

Halem Verlag.

Pitts, M.J. (2009): Identity and the role of expectations, stress, and talk in short-term

student sojourner adjustment: An application of the integrative theory of

communication and cross-cultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 33, 450-462.

Price Waterhouse Europe (1997/98): International assignments: European policy and

practice. London: Price Waterhouse International Assignment Services Europe. In:

Scullion, H. & Brewster, C. (2001): The Management of Expatriates: Message from

Europe. Journal of World Business, 36 (4), 346-365.

Reisinger, Y. & Turner, L.W. (2003): Cross-Cultural Behaviour in Tourism; Concepts

and Analysis 1st ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Scullion, H. & Brewster, C. (2001): The Management of Expatriates: Message from

Europe. Journal of World Business, 36 (4), 346-365.

Smith, E.R. & Mackie, D.M. (2000): Social Psychology. Philadelphia: Psychology

Press.

Solomon, C.M. & Schell, M.S. (2009): Managing Across Cultures: The Seven Keys to

Doing Business with a Global Mindset. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Stangor, C. & Schaller, M. (1996): Stereotypes as Individual and Collective

Representations. In: Macrea, C.N. & Stangor, C. & Hewstone, M. (1990):

Stereotypes and Stereotyping. New York: The Guilford Press.


95

Selmer, J. (1995): Expatriate Management – New Ideas for International Business.

Westport: Quorum Books.

Smith, E.R. & DeCoster, J. (2000): Dual-Process Models in Social and Cognitive

Psychology: Conceptual Integration and Links to Underlying Memory Systems.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4 (2), 108-131.

Smith, E.R. & Miller, D.A. & Maitner, A.T. & Crump, S.A. & Garcia-Marques, T.&

Mackie, D.M. (2006): Familiarity can increase stereotyping. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 471-478.

The International Club (2010): Expats-Forum Linz and Upper Austria. Received Jan.

29th, from http://expatslinz.ning.com/.

Triandis, H.C. (2000): Culture and Conflict. The International Journal of Psychology,

35 (2), 1435-1452. In: Samovar, L.A. & Porter, L.E. & McDaniel, E.R. (2009):

Intercultural Communication, Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

University of Calgary (2002): Cultural Adaption – What to expect. Received Dec. 28th,

from http://www.fp.ucalgary.ca/ISCcampus/ds/modules/ccliving.htm.

http://expatslinz.ning.com/�

http://www.fp.ucalgary.ca/ISCcampus/ds/modules/ccliving.htm�


96

8. Appendix

8.1. Interview guideline

The guideline was structured in four major parts, as shown in this chapter. It has to be

mentioned that it was not really necessary to work with elaborated questions since the

interview was an open conversation.

Part 1: What image of Austria did the expatriates have before going abroad and

what were their stereotypes about Austria?

This set of questions deals with the life of expatriates prior to the actual

expatriation. Their image of Austria will be asked, as well as how they got

their stereotypes about the country and if these changed over time or not.

Additionally, eventual preparation organized by a company will be determined

and discussed.

Questions to help gather information:

• In which part of the US did you grow up (was it a cultural diversified place;

how many inhabitants lived there)?

• Did you know anything about the country Austria?

• What were the images in your head about Austria, did you have any ideas /

associations about it?

• View of Austria, behavior, how they did/accomplished things and

activities?

o When did you get to know it?

o What did you get to know?

o Were there different opinions about Austria?

o Did you have any stereotypical thinking back then?

• Why did you go / decide to go to Austria?

o Did your company require you to go?


97

o Would you have rather gone somewhere else or would you have

stayed – if possible?

o Did your company prepare you to go abroad? (PREPARATION)

o What was your preparation?

Classes

Cultural sensibility training

Other information

o Were you the only expatriate in this country or were there more

colleges?

o Were you able to bring your family?

Were they prepared?

• Through the preparation (no matter which), did anything change about the

picture of Austria or Austrians in general? (stereotype)

o If yes, what changed?

o If no, why?

• What feeling (positive, negative) did you have when the actual departure

date was coming up (excitement, fear…)?

Part 2: Does stereotypical thinking of expatriates living in a foreign country for a

longer period of time change?

This part deals with the early incidents in the host country. Do expatriates

experience cultural shock, or are there other occurrences or incidents that have

an impact on stereotypical thinking. How do these stereotypes develop and do

other perspectives about the host country come to mind. Do certain stereotypes

become more intense and does the expatriate alter other stereotypes towards

different aspects about the country will be questioned.


• How long have you been here up to now?


98

• How were the first couple of days?

• What did you do the first couple of days (what was prepared by the

company)?

• How did you feel about the people?

o Were they like you imagined?

o Was there anything totally different than you imagined?

Describe…

o Were there events where you had no idea what was happening? Where

you got “egg on your face”…

• Were there some memorable experiences with local people?

• Did you have a so-called cultural shock? (some experience, which was

uncomfortable or shocking)

o When did that happen?

o Why did it happen?

o How did it show?

o Did you overcome it?

o How long did it take to overcome it?

• Did you do some cultural activities or activities to acclimatize?

e.g. cultural sensitivity training…

o Which where they?

Part 3: If it does change, how do certain experiences affect these changes?

Do positive (negative) experiences strengthen a certain positive (negative)

image of a country and therefore confirm those stereotypes. These questions

have to be focused on each expatriate individually, since everybody has

different positive and negative stereotypes about a country.


99


• What is the image like now? Did it change / did you change your mind?

When, where, incidents?

• How do you feel today?

• Did certain stereotypes intensify or were they rejected?

o Why, was there a specific reason or a critical incident?

• Are you totally integrated today or do you still fel different?

• Remember what you said before about Austrian stereotypes. Did anything

change about the Austrian stereotypes?

o What changed?

o Why did it change? Was there a certain incident / experience?

o Did certain experiences change stereotypical thinking in a positive or

negative way for you personally?

• Do you enjoy the stay here or did you regret being here?

Part 4: Based on the set of questions above, are there certain patterns or factors

that can be identified and, if yes, towards which direction do these

patterns lead?

Which direction do changes of stereotypical thinking lead to; do they intensify

or soften based on the experiences of expatriation. Certain background

information or history that influences stereotypical thinking, as well as

common experiences will be taken into account to find patterns that change

the stereotypical picture of expatriates in Austria.


100

8.2 Coding list

This document lists all the necessary codes for the analysis of the interviews. It was

initially created on the basis of the interview guideline and eventually extended

through upcoming facts in the interview process.

Stereotypes (STT)

• Style (STY):

image of the country (PIC)

- through movies

- through stories

- through education

- through a friend

- through comparison to the US

behavior of inhabitants (BEI)

• Form (FORM):

self-recognized (SRE) / not recognized by the interviewee (NRE)

clearly focused on Austria (CFA) / not focused – e.g. just Western

World (NCFA)

not given or available with this person (NGA)

- why?

- no information looked for

• Development in home country (DEVH):

lack of information – superficial thinking (LIN)

aids for information (AIN)

wrong information (WIN)

- judgment of the country (JOC)


101

- accidently wrong information (AWI)

shared group beliefs (SGB)

no information from official site (NIO)

• Development in host country (DEVA):

occurrences and incidents (OCC)

how?

• Intensity (INT):

high / middle / low

several occurrences of stereotypes (SOS) / just one or two major

occurrences of stereotypes (OOS)

• Reduction – Process of reduction (RED):

over time w/o any active handling (OVT)

through a certain “changing” incident (TCI)

through previous experience (PEX)

no reduction of stereotypes (NRS)

- stereotype is automatically activated anyway (SAA)

- characteristics are common for Austrians (CCA)

- managing cultural differences (MCD)

• Duration until reduction-development (DUD):

fast, due to a certain incident – until 6 months of arrival (F)

semi-fast – 6 months to 1 year (SF)

slow – more than 1 year (S)

• Tools to change stereotypical thinking (TCS):

surroundings (SUR)

- common interaction with locals (CID)


102

- time (TIME)

- common goal (COG)

- communication (COM)

cultural sensitivity training (CST)

friends (FR)

language class (LCL)

Expatriation (EXP)

• Style (STY):

moving for education – also TA (EDU)

moving for work (WOR)

moving for relationship (REL)

• Intended duration (DUR):

shorter than 1 year (SD)

between 1 and 5 years (MED)

infinite time (LOD)

• Culture Shock (CUS):

yes / no… why?

intensity (INT)

- strong / weak

- steady / once

how/why

• Overcoming the Culture Shock (OCUS):

how


103

• Language (LAN):

aware of the language German (ALG)

- High German (HG)

- also aware of the dialect (DG)

- problems with salutation (PSA)

not aware of the language (NLG)

• Contact with domestics (CWD)

through communication (TCO)

- with “strangers”

- with family members

- friends

- work

through organizations, clubs, etc. (TORG)

no contact (NCO)

• Problems (PROB)

cultural differences (CUD)

which ones?

• Overcoming Problems (OPROB)

over time w/o any active handling (OVT)

through a certain “changing” incident (TCI)

through previous experience (PEX)

Thesis: The Change of Stereotypical Thinking of US-Expatriates in Austria

Documents

Transcript of Thesis: The Change of Stereotypical Thinking of US-Expatriates in Austria