The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-7606.htm

CCM
21,4
Metacognition, cultural
psychological capital and
motivational cultural intelligence
386 Dilek Gulistan Yunlu
Business School, Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, Illinois, USA, and
Rachel Clapp-Smith
School of Management, Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, Indiana, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss the concept of cultural psychological capital, its
impact on motivational cultural intelligence (CQ), the influence of motivational cultural intelligence
on metacognitive awareness, and the moderating role of perspective taking on the relationship
between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognition.
Design/methodology/approach – Collected data from international management program alumni
to test the hypotheses.
Findings – The results show that cultural psychological capital has a positive relationship with
motivational cultural intelligence, which in turn relates to metacognitive awareness, and perspective
taking does not moderate the relationship between motivational cultural intelligence and
metacognition.
Research limitations/implications – The data were collected from a single source. The study
supports broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2001) by demonstrating that cultural psychological
capital has an important association with motivational cultural intelligence.
Practical implications – Cultural psychological capital can be improved. Therefore, organizations
that desire to increase the motivation of employees may consider improving the cultural psychological
capital of employees. Learning is an important outcome of motivational cultural intelligence, and it is
an asset for today’s organizations.
Originality/value – The study takes a positive perspective for cross-cultural experiences and
identifies cultural psychological capital as an important resource for expatriates. Metacognitive
awareness, as an outcome, provides support that cross-cultural experience results in higher learning
for individuals who are motivated.
Keywords Perspective taking, Broaden-and-build theory, Cultural psychological capital,
Metacognitive awareness, Motivational cultural intelligence
Paper type Research paper

Cross Cultural Management
Vol. 21 No. 4, 2014
pp. 386-399
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1352-7606
DOI 10.1108/CCM-07-2012-0055
Introduction
In an increasingly global environment, cross-cultural researchers have focussed on the
experiences of global work force. Most expatriate and overseas work assignment
studies have focussed on individual’s adjustment, its antecedents and consequences
(e.g. Shaffer and Harrison, 1998; Kraimer et al., 2001; Kraimer and Wayne, 2004; Wang
and Takeuchi, 2007) while employing a stress-strain perspective. Only a few studies
have taken a non-stress approach in understanding the global work climate and
individual’s experience (e.g. Chen et al., 2010). In particular, research has focussed
on expatriate outcomes such as job performance and premature return intentions (e.g.
Shaffer et al., 2006; Wang and Takeuchi, 2007). Another stream of research has
focussed on individual outcomes for cross-cultural experiences such as cognitive
complexity and creativity (see Maddux and Galinsky, 2009; Tadmor and Tetlock, 2006).
However, metacognitive awareness has not been examined as a beneficial outcome in
cross-cultural management literature. Metacognition has been extensively studied Cultural
in the field of education and learning as a critical component of adaptive learning (see psychological
Schunk, 2008). Employing a positive psychological perspective, we introduce
metacognitive awareness as an important outcome of cross-cultural experiences. capital
Individuals, who relocate to foreign places, inevitably experience learning in order
to become successful and well adjusted; we inspect how psychological resources play a
role in the motivational process, which in turn relates to metacognitive awareness for 387
individuals who gain cross-cultural experiences.
Building a cross-cultural model of individual experiences, we develop and suggest a
framework in which we identify cultural psychological capital (PsyCap) as a critical
component related to motivational cultural intelligence (CQ), which in turn relates to
increased levels of metacognitive awareness. Further, we suggest that perspective
taking enhances the positive relationship between motivational cultural intelligence
and metacognitive awareness. We employ broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson,
2001, 2003, 2004) to explicate our model and its findings, which suggests that positive
affect is instrumental in building personal resources.
Cultural psychological capital was adapted specifically for this study from the
original psychological capital scale developed by Luthans et al. (2007). Psychological
capital is composed of four state-like capacities: hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and
resilience. The original scale has been tested in other cultures (Luthans et al., 2005,
2006), but does not account for the psychological resources involved in transitioning
from one culture to another. Because psychological capital is state-like and context
specific, the scale was adapted to apply to multi-cultural environments. Motivational
cultural intelligence is defined as an individual’s drive and interest in adapting to
another culture (Earley and Ang, 2003). Motivational cultural intelligence represents
magnitude and direction of energy applied toward learning about and functioning
in cross-cultural situations (Ang et al., 2006, 2007). The concept of metacognitive
awareness refers to an individual’s ability to reflect upon, understand, and control one’s
learning (Schraw and Dennison, 1994). Thus, metacognition relies on one’s knowledge
of their abilities and strategies that may improve their own learning (Bendixen
and Hartley, 2003). Metacognitive awareness is different than metacognitive cultural
intelligence in that metacognitive awareness is not limited to cultural settings and
includes the use of better strategies in solving fluid combinations in general (Schraw
and Dennison, 1994). As an outcome of international experiences, particularly in this
study, we are interested in general metacognitive awareness.
Despite an abundance of studies that investigate cross-cultural experience and
its impact on positive outcomes such as cognitive complexity, job performance,
and creativity (see Maddux and Galinsky, 2009; Benet-Martinez et al., 2006; Tadmor
and Tetlock, 2006; Leung et al., 2008), to the best of our knowledge no previous studies
have empirically examined the impact of multi-cultural experience on metacognitive
awareness. Earlier studies suggest that cross-cultural experiences gained through
living abroad allow access to a greater number of novel ideas and concepts, encourage
people to approach problems from different perspectives, and can increase the
acceptance and recruitment of ideas from unfamiliar sources (Maddux and Galinsky,
2009). The above definition of cross-cultural experiences aligns well with the concept of
metacognitive awareness, which has been well established as a critical component
of learning and adapting in the field of education (see Schunk, 2008). In addition,
general and intrinsic motivation has been positively associated with the cognitive and
metacognitive aspects of learning in classroom settings (see Wolters, 1999). Similar to a
CCM classroom, we look at a cross-cultural environment as a potential place of learning.
21,4 Therefore, we empirically test the relationship between cultural psychological
capital and motivational cultural intelligence and suggest that motivational cultural
intelligence is associated with metacognitive awareness, which has been shown to
provide better regulation of cognition leading to better problem solving skills (Paris
and Winograd, 1990). Our study contributes to the existing literature in three ways;
388 first, we bring a positive perspective to the study of overseas work experience and
identify cultural psychological capital as an essential associate of motivational cultural
intelligence. Second, we investigate the relationship between motivational cultural
intelligence and metacognitive awareness. Finally, we examine the moderating role
of perspective taking on the relationship between motivational cultural intelligence
and metacognitive awareness.

Theory and hypotheses

In this section, we introduce the theory and develop our hypotheses. Broaden-and-build
theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2001, 2004) is predicated upon the idea that
positive emotions broaden one’s momentary-thought-action repertoires. Broadened
mindsets carry indirect and long-term adaptive value because broadening builds
enduring personal resources (Fredrickson and Losada, 2005). Positive affect, in the long
term, builds more accurate cognitive maps of what is good and bad in the environment.
Positive affect further influences the behavior of individuals and the intrinsic
motivational process for many kinds of tasks (Isen, 1999). Several studies have
established a positive relationship between positive affect and intrinsic motivation (e.g.
Kraiger et al., 1989; Estrada et al., 1994) (Figure 1).

Cultural psychological capital and motivation cultural intelligence

We adapted the original psychological capital (PsyCap) scale by Luthans and
colleagues (2007) to reflect the cross-cultural context; cultural psychological capital
is composed of four sub-dimensions: hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience.
These state-like capacities are open to development and have an impact on outcomes in
the workplace (Luthans et al., 2007). Each sub-dimension is defined as: first (hope),
persevering toward goals and redirecting paths to goals when necessary in order to
succeed in a cross-cultural environment; second (optimism), making a positive
attribution about succeeding now and in the future in an international context; third
(self-efficacy), having confidence to take on and put required effort to succeed at
challenging tasks in cross-cultural settings; and fourth (resilience), when faced by
problems and roadblocks in an international setting, sustaining and bouncing back to
attain success (Luthans et al., 2007, p. 3).

Figure 1. Perspective
Proposed model of Taking
linkages among cultural
psychological capital,
motivational cultural
intelligence, perspective Cultural Motivational
Metacognitive
taking and metacognitive Psychological Cultural
Awareness
awareness Capital Intelligence
Motivational cultural intelligence is defined as an individual’s drive and interest Cultural
in adapting to cultural variations (Earley and Ang, 2003). Several recent studies psychological
(see Tarique and Takeuchi, 2008; Ang et al., 2006; Shannon and Begley, 2008)
have examined the antecedents of motivational cultural intelligence, and have capital
identified extraversion (Ang et al., 2006), international non-work experiences (Tarique
and Takeuchi, 2008), and international work experiences (Shannon and Begley, 2008)
as important predictors of motivational cultural intelligence. These previous studies 389
were instrumental in shedding light on personal resources as antecedents of
motivational cultural intelligence; we add to the literature by extending the scope
to psychological resources and introduce cultural psychological capital. Motivational
cultural intelligence reflects the capability to direct attention and energy toward
learning about and functioning in situations characterized by cultural differences
(Ng et al., 2011). Individuals with high motivational cultural intelligence have an
intrinsic interest (Deci and Ryan, 1985) in learning in cross-cultural situations. Luthans
et al. (2007) suggest that hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience are considered
to be intrinsic motivational propensities. In addition, recent research suggests that
training that develops self-efficacy can result in increased motivational cultural
intelligence (e.g. Imai and Gelfand, 2010; Templer et al., 2006). We add a more
comprehensive list by considering hope, optimism, and resilience in addition to self-
efficacy. And, as mentioned earlier, positive affect is related to intrinsic motivation
(Isen, 1999). Therefore, building upon previous studies we suggest that cultural
psychological capital and motivational cultural intelligence have a positive
relationship:

H1. Cultural psychological capital is positively related to motivational cultural

intelligence.

Motivation cultural intelligence and metacognitive awareness

Metacognitive awareness refers to the ability to reflect upon, understand, and control
one’s learning (Schraw and Dennison, 1994). Metacognition cultivates independent
learning by providing personal insights into one’s own thinking; such awareness
can lead to flexible and confident problem solving (Paris and Winograd, 1990).
A large amount of research supports the importance of metacognition in cognitive
development, academic learning, and academic performance (Young and Fry, 2008).
Metacognition is an important aspect of adaptive learning and is useful to any domain
of problem solving in and out of school settings (Paris and Winograd, 1990). Even
though metacognitive awareness has been extensively studied in educational settings,
it has been relatively scarce in the cross-cultural management literature. Metacognition
is a relevant and important construct, as international assignments require adaptive
learning and it is built upon fluid problem solving skills.
Motivational cultural intelligence is essential in promoting the growth of cognitive
and metacognitive cultural intelligence (Ng et al., 2011). In a large-scale study of foreign
language learners, Schmidt and Watanabe (2001) found that the levels of motivation
affected the metacognitive strategies. Examining the interplay between motivation
and metacognition, Ling and Dejun (2003) demonstrate that motivation acts as an
energizing tool for metacognition; their study, composed of students, indicate that
motivation is an important antecedent of metacognitive awareness. Because
individuals who are motivated are more likely to be engaged, commit effort, and
persist to succeed in an environment, in general, studies suggest that motivation
CCM and motivational constructs explain the engagement and regulation of cognitive
21,4 and metacognitive strategies, (see Wolters, 1998). Wolters’s (1998) study among college
students support that intrinsic motivation prompts metacognitive regulation. Based on
the studies in the field of education and learning, we suggest that motivational cultural
intelligence promotes metacognitive awareness. In accordance with broaden-and-build
theory (Fredrickson, 2001), we suggest that increased metacognitive awareness is an
390 enduring personal resource and can be obtained because of motivational cultural
intelligence. Therefore, we posit that the level of motivational cultural intelligence is
associated with metacognitive awareness of international sojourners:

H2. Motivational cultural intelligence is positively related to metacognitive awareness.

The moderating effect of perspective taking on motivational cultural intelligence and

metacognition
Perspective taking, the ability to adopt another person’s perspective, is a cognitive
process, in which individuals attempt to understand others’ preferences, values, and
needs (Parker and Axtell, 2001). Perspective taking is an important concept in human
development with regard to social and cognitive capacity. Moreover, since perspective
taking refers to the ability to extend the context beyond a particular problem or
solution, it has a positive influence on learning capacity (Yukl, 1994). In this study,
we take the dispositional viewpoint, and suggest that individuals vary in their
dispositional tendencies to take the perspectives of others. Perspective taking is a
positive action, which results in understanding and acceptance of another’s position.
Because perspective taking is a cognitive and social concept (Parker and Axtell, 2001),
it fits well with our framework. Research shows that perspective taking enhances
interpersonal relationships (Batson, 1991) and positive organizational outcomes.
For example, Parker and Axtell (2001) demonstrated that perspective taking of
employees in a manufacturing company resulted in cooperative behaviors toward
external personnel such as the suppliers. In a more recent study, Grant and Berry
(2011) investigated the moderating impact of perspective taking on the relationship
between intrinsic motivation and creativity; their results demonstrated the enhancing
power of perspective taking as it strengthened the relationship between intrinsic
motivation and creativity.
Similarly, in our study we suggest that perspective taking enhances the effects
of motivational cultural intelligence on metacognition, because focussing attention on
the perspectives of others allow individuals to experience diverse perspectives (Grant
and Berry, 2011), which lead to numerous alternatives for potential cognitive schemas.
In addition, perspective taking is a positive disposition that enhances individuals’
experience of contextual differences and levels of empathy, which lead to positive
feelings for the others (Parker and Axtell, 2001). Moreover, it has been shown that
empathy, a similar construct to perspective taking, is associated with positive
affect (Nezlek et al., 2001). Broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2001) suggests that
individuals build their intellectual and social resources through experiencing positive
emotions. Hence, we propose:

H3. The relationship between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognitive

awareness will be enhanced by perspective taking such that motivational
cultural intelligence will relate to metacognitive awareness for those individuals
who are high on perspective taking rather than low.
Methods Cultural
Data collection and sample psychological
To test our hypotheses, we collected data from 236 alumni of a graduate school of
international management. Many of the alumni target international careers upon capital
graduation from the program. In the sample, 35 countries were represented in terms of
the country of residence. On an average, respondents had lived abroad 5.5 years at
some point in their lives, and 63 percent of the respondents reported having advanced 391
second language abilities. The average age was 40.4 and average years of work were
16.6 years. Due to missing responses, we had 192 valid surveys out of 236.

Measures
All measures with the exception of cultural psychological capital were obtained
from existing studies, and all have demonstrated sound psychometric properties.
The results of the Cronbach a coefficients ranged from 0.74 to 0.90.
Cultural psychological capital. We adapted Luthans et al.’s (2007) psychological
capital construct to measure cultural psychological capital. Because psychological
capital is context specific, we adapted the items to reflect cross-cultural settings.
The measure is composed of four sub-scales: hope; optimism; self-efficacy; and
resilience. Response options ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree).
A pilot study was conducted for the purpose of an exploratory factor analysis and to
improve scale reliability. The pilot study reduced the scale from 30 items to 16 items
that reliably loaded items onto the four dimensions of psychological capital. Sample
items for each sub-scale include: hope “When in another country, I think that I can
obtain goals that are important to me,” optimism “I always look on the bright side of
things regarding what I experience in other cultures,” efficacy “I feel confident
analyzing an unfamiliar culture to understand how I should behave,” and resiliency
“I usually manage difficulties one way or another when traveling abroad.”
Respectively, coefficient a’s were 0.74, 0.74, 0.85, and 0.75.
Motivational cultural intelligence. Ang et al. (2006) construct was used to measure
motivational cultural intelligence. For the measurement, a seven-point Likert response
scale was used with values ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
A sample item includes “I enjoy living in cultures that are unfamiliar to me.”
The coefficient a was 0.83.
Perspective taking. We used Davis’s (1980) eight-item measure of perspective taking.
Participants responded using a five-point Likert scale, where 0 indicated the item does
not describe the participant well and 4 indicated that it describes the participant very
well. A sample item includes, “Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how
I would feel if I were in their place.” The coefficient a was 0.75.
Metacognitive awareness. Schraw and Dennison’s (1994) metacognitive awareness
scale was used to measure metacognition of respondents. Because the original
metacognitive awareness scale had many items dealing with learning in an academic
setting and the setting of this study was organizational, only items that could be
relevant to the study context were used. This yielded a reduced 16-item scale that
captured both the knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition dimensions
of metacognitive awareness. On a five-point Likert scale, the response options ranged
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). A sample item includes “I use different
learning strategies depending on the situation” and the coefficient a was 0.90.
Control variables. We had four demographic controls, which included the
respondent’s age, gender, years living abroad, and length of work experience.
CCM Data analysis and results
21,4 Descriptive statistics, reliability estimates, and correlations are presented in Table I.
To test our hypotheses, we used multiple hierarchical regression analyses.
Our first model (Model 1) included the control variables and the higher order latent
construct of cultural psychological capital, in which each dimension loads onto a
single construct. This model examined the relationship between cultural psychological
392 capital and motivational cultural intelligence (H1). Our second model (Model 2)
examined the association between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognitive
awareness (H2), and included the control variables and motivational cultural
intelligence. Our third model (Model 3) included the control variables, motivational
cultural intelligence, perspective taking, and the interaction term between motivational
cultural intelligence and perspective taking, and the model assessed the moderating
role of perspective taking on the relationship between motivational cultural intelligence
and metacognition (Tables II and III).
H1 posited that cultural psychological capital would be positively related to
motivational cultural intelligence. Based on Model 1, H1 was supported; total
psychological capital (b ¼ 0.75, po0.05), was positively associated with motivational
cultural intelligence. H2 suggested that motivational cultural intelligence would have a
significant positive relationship with metacognitive awareness; as suggested,
motivational cultural intelligence was related to metacognitive awareness (b ¼ 0.42,
po0.05).
In H3, we suggested that the relationship between motivational cultural intelligence
and metacognition would be enhanced by perspective taking. H3 was not supported;
perspective taking did not have a moderating impact on the positive relationship
between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognition (b ¼ 0.20, po0.10).
Due to the conceptual closeness of the constructs, we also conducted a series
of factor analyses (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988) to ensure discriminant validity.
Using MPLUS software, we tested three nested models using cultural psychological
capital (PsyCap), motivational cultural intelligence, and metacognitive awareness.
The first model was one-factor using all variables from the study, followed by a two-factor
model, and a three-factor model. w2 difference tests (see Table IV) indicated that a better
fitting model was the three-factor model, confirming that, despite conceptual closeness,
the three constructs are psychometrically distinctive.

Discussion
Moving beyond the traditional outcomes of job performance, adjustment, withdrawal
cognitions, cognitive complexity, and creativity in cross-cultural management
literature, we focus on metacognitive awareness as an important outcome of cross-
cultural experience. Our study shows evidence that cultural psychological resources
such as hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience have a positive impact on
motivational cultural intelligence. Individuals who have higher levels of cultural
psychological capital are able to show more motivational cultural intelligence, which is
associated with increased metacognitive awareness. Studies in educational literature
connect metacognitive awareness to better problem solving skills and adaptability
(Paris and Winograd, 1990). By identifying cultural psychological capital as an
important associate to motivational cultural intelligence, we extend our knowledge
about motivational cultural intelligence, and add cultural psychological capital as a
critical component of motivational cultural intelligence. Further, we examine the
moderating role of perspective taking on the relationship between motivational
Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 Metacognition 5.60 0.67 (0.90)

2 Motivational CQ 5.94 0.79 0.32*** (0.83)
3 Hope PsyCap 4.99 0.62 0.42*** 0.66*** (0.74)
4 Optimism PsyCap 4.88 0.62 0.40*** 0.65*** 0.77*** (0.74)
5 Self-efficacy PsyCap 4.99 0.64 0.44*** 0.66*** 0.81*** 0.77*** (0.85)
6 Resilience PsyCap 5.00 0.64 0.48*** 0.67*** 0.83*** 0.79*** 0.80*** (0.75)
7 Overall PsyCap 4.97 0.58 0.47*** 0.72*** 0.93*** 0.91*** 0.92*** 0.93*** (0.94)
8 Perspective taking 3.01 0.53 0.33*** 0.22*** 0.30*** 0.30*** 0.31*** 0.36*** 0.34*** (0.75)
9 Age 40.4 5.90 0.04 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.10 0.02
10 Gender 1.38 0.49 0.03 0.12 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.12
11 Time abroad 5.52 6.76 0.02 0.18** 0.11 0.16* 0.21** 0.14** 0.02 0.08 0.18**
12 Work experience 16.7 6.14 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02 0.88*** 0.14* 0.19***
Notes: Coefficient a’s indicating estimated reliabilities are in parentheses. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po 0.001
capital
psychological

deviations, reliabilities,
Means, standard
Cultural

393

and intercorrelations
Table I.
CCM Motivational CQ
21,4 Predictor Model 1

Control variables
Age 0.08
Gender 0.12
394 Years abroad 0.04
Work experience 0.16
Cultural psychological capital 0.75***
Overall R2 0.60
Adjusted R2 0.59
Table II. Overall F 55.57***
Regression results on Step DF
motivational cultural
intelligence (CQ) Notes: n ¼ 192. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po 0.001; ****po0.1

Metacognitive awareness
Predictor Model 2 Model 3

Control variables
Age 0.17 0.10
Gender 0.08 0.08
Years abroad 0.05 0.07
Work experience 0.26 0.20
Motivational cultural intelligence (CQ) 0.42*** 0.26**
Perspective taking 0.17*
Interaction terms
Motivational CQ  Perspective Taking 0.20****
Overall R2 0.18 0.26
Adjusted R2 0.16 0.24
Table III. Overall F 8.38*** 9.44***
Regression results on
metacognitive awareness Notes: n ¼ 192. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po 0.001; ****po 0.1

Model w2 df w2 Difference SRMR CFI

1-Factor Model 2127.302 629 0.114 0.632

2-Factor Model 1496.566 628 630.736* 0.077 0.787
Table IV. 3-Factor Model 1400.574 626 95.992* 0.074 0.810
w2 difference test of
nested models Note: *significant at po0.001

cultural intelligence and metacognitive awareness. Based on previous evidence, we

suggested that high levels of perspective taking would strengthen the relationship
between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognition. However, our findings
did not support the enhancing effects of perspective taking. It is possible that when
individuals are motivated to learn about other cultures, perspective taking may be
redundant as individuals are already engaged in learning and adapting to the new
cultural setting.
 Nonetheless, our results support the broaden-and-build theory (Fredrickson, 2001); Cultural
positive resources such as psychological capital certainly do relate to motivational psychological
cultural intelligence, which in turn can enhance an important cognitive resource:
metacognitive awareness. capital
Limitations and suggestions for future research
The contributions of our study should be interpreted in light of the study’s 395
limitations. An argument can be made that the motivational cultural intelligence items
were drawn from Bandura’s (2002) work on self-efficacy and a sub-dimension of
cultural psychological capital is self-efficacy, and naturally there will be a positive
relationship. It is important to note here that all sub-dimensions of cultural
psychological capital positively related to motivational cultural intelligence; resilience
having the largest effect size. However, a series of factor analyses indicated that despite
the high correlations between psychological capital and motivational cultural
intelligence, the constructs are distinct from each other and it follows, therefore, that
their relationship is meaningful for understanding the role of the broaden-and-build
model (Fredrickson, 2001) in expanding cognitive resources such as metacognitive
awareness.
In addition, our study did not find a moderating influence of perspective taking
on the relationship between motivational cultural intelligence and metacognition. This
may be a clue about the overwhelming impact of motivation in organizational and
individual outcomes. Thus, future studies should further delineate the relationship
between motivation and perspective taking. Does perspective taking’s influence wither
under the presence of a strong motivation?
While the sample is robust in terms of size and representative for generalizing to a
larger population of working adults in an international context, the data nonetheless
were collected from a single source, potentially creating common method bias.
Because the variables tested in the current study are cognition based, they therefore
do not lend themselves well to a design with multiple raters. Podsakoff et al.
(2003) suggest that one of the techniques for controlling common method bias
is to protect respondent anonymity; in line with this recommendation our
respondents were insured that their anonymity would be protected. According to
Podsakoff et al. (2003), this procedure should reduce people’s appraisal anxiety
and make them less likely to edit their responses to be more socially desirable,
lenient, and acquiescent. However, future study designs should consider multiple
methods including survey assessments, qualitative assessments and cognitive
exercises.
Finally, the sample, again, is characteristic of managers who have had multiple
international experiences and have international responsibilities. However, this study
does not address causation and future research may provide more insight into the
cognitive processes of global managers in the midst of cross-cultural scenarios.
Such research could be conducted either in a lab, in which a cross-cultural intervention
is created, or in the field while managers are engaged in an international assignment.
Longitudinal design may also be helpful in delineating the relationships. Therefore,
future research that provides opportunities to make causal inferences, either through
true experiments, natural experiments, or longitudinal designs would make a
contribution in understanding the direction of the relationships that we test in the
current study. We have established that the relationships do exist, which makes a
compelling case to further test our model through experimentation.
CCM Practical implications and conclusion
21,4 This study provides an interesting glimpse into some of the cognitive processes that
are relevant to learning in cross-cultural contexts. First, the study provides a context-
specific measure of positive psychological capital, that allows for understanding the
psychological resources available to managers as they operate in a multi-cultural
environment. While this is particularly important for multi-national corporations, the
396 psychological resources are also relevant to a broader population of managers, as
the economy becomes more globalized and diverse populations are more mobile.
The role of positive psychological capital in motivational cultural intelligence
provides insight into how organizations may focus attentional processes to engage
managers in more intrinsic interest in understanding and learning from different
cultural contexts. Research has shown that positive psychological capital may be
developed through interventions (Luthans et al., 2006), and similarly, it is possible to
design interventions to enhance cultural psychological capital.
Observing that motivational cultural intelligence relates to metacognitive awareness
also indicates an important relationship in learning. Metacognitive awareness deals
with the knowledge of cognitions as well as the regulation of cognitions. An ability to
understand and regulate how one learns provides greater opportunities for managers
to prepare themselves for challenging work contexts, including the complexity of cross-
cultural work environments. By understanding the role of motivational cultural
intelligence in the recognition and regulation of cognitions, organizations may also focus
greater formal or informal resources on encouraging learning from different cultural
contexts. While motivational cultural intelligence is an intrinsic motivation in directing
energy toward adapting to new environments, organizations may find avenues to
reinforce and promote this ability. As such, we propose that managers interested in
enhanced metacognition for their expatriate employees will find it beneficial to create
conditions that support motivational cultural intelligence. It is common practice for
American organizations to select individuals for international assignments primarily
based on technical experience and competence (Black et al., 1991). In order to prepare
these technically competent individuals, most intercultural training focusses on basic
information about the host culture (Earley and Peterson, 2004) whereas motivational
aspects are assumed to be the territory of the individual. Therefore, alongside the
traditional intercultural preparation, offering expatriates training that encompasses
cultural psychological capital, which promotes motivational cultural intelligence can
enhance their intercultural motivation relating to enhanced metacognition. In today’s
hypercompetitive environment, most scholars agree that the most strategically important
resource in an organization is knowledge (e.g. Kogut and Zander, 1996) that incorporates
global experiences; metacognitive awareness is the omnipotent source upon which
knowledge is most effectively acquired. Thus, it is in the best interest of organizations
to equip their employees with the tools to enhance their metacognition.

References
Anderson, J. and Gerbing, D. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L. and Koh, C. (2006), “Personality correlates of the four-factor model of
cultural intelligence”, Group & Organization Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 100-124.
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, Y.K., Templer, K.J., Tay, C. and Chandrasekar, N.A. (2007),
“Cultural intelligence: its measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision
 making, cultural adaptation and task performance”, Management and Organization Cultural
Review, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 335-371.
psychological
Bandura, A. (2002), “Social cognitive theory in cultural context”, Applied Psychology: An
International Review, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 269-290. capital
Batson, C.D. (1991), The Altruism Question: Towards a Social-Psychological Answer, Erlbaum,
Hillsdale, NJ.
Bendixen, L.D. and Hartley, K. (2003), “Successful learning with hypermedia: the role of 397
epistemological beliefs and metacognitive awareness”, Journal of Educational Computing
Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 15-30.
Benet-Martinez, V., Leu, J. and Lee, F. (2006), “Biculturalism and cognitive complexity: expertise
in cultural representation”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 386-407.
Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M. and Oddou, G. (1991), “Toward a comprehensive model of
international adjustment: an integration of multiple theoretical perspectives”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 291-317.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B.L., Kim, K., Farh, C.I.C. and Tangirala, S. (2010), “When does cross cultural
motivation enhance expatriate effectiveness? A multilevel investigation of the moderating
roles of subsidiary support and cultural distance”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 1110-1130.
Davis, M.H. (1980), “A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy”, JSAS
Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 85, pp. 85-104.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human
Behavior, Plenum, New York, NY.
Earley, P.C. and Ang, S. (2003), Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions Across Cultures,
Standford University Press, Standford, CA.
Earley, P.C. and Peterson, R.S. (2004), “The elusive cultural chameleon: cultural intelligence as a
new approach to intercultural training for the global a manager”, Academy of
Management Learning and Education, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 100-115.
Estrada, C.A., Young, M.J. and Isen, A.M. (1994), “Positive affect influences creative problem
solving and reported source of practice satisfaction in physicians”, Motivation and
Emotion, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 285-299.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2001), “The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-
build theory of positive emotions”, American Psychologist, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 218-226.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2003), “The value of positive emotions”, American Scientist, Vol. 91 No. 4,
pp. 330-335.
Fredrickson, B.L. (2004), “The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions”, Philos Trans R
Soc Lond B Biol Sci, Vol. 359 No. 1449, pp. 1367-1378.
Fredrickson, B.L. and Losada, M.F. (2005), “Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human
flourishing”, American Psychologist, Vol. 60 No. 7, pp. 678-686.
Grant, A.M. and Berry, J.W. (2011), “The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic
and prosocial motivations, perspective taking and creativity”, Academy of Management,
Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 73-96.
Imai, L. and Gelfand, M.J. (2010), “The culturally intelligent negotiator: the impact of cultural
intelligence (CQ) on negotiation sequences and outcomes”, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, Vol. 112 No. 2, pp. 83-98.
Isen, A.M. (1999), “Positive affect”, in Dalgleish, T. and Power, M.J. (Eds), The Handbook of
Cognition and Emotion, Wiley, New York, NY, pp. 521-539.
Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1996), “What do firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning”,
Organization Science, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 502-518.
CCM Kraiger, K., Billings, R.S. and Isen, A.M. (1989), “The influence of positive affective states on task
perceptions and satisfaction”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
21,4 Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 12-25.
Kraimer, M.L. and Wayne, S.J. (2004), “An examination of perceived organizational support as a
multidimensional construct in the context of an expatriate assignment”, Journal of
Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 209-237.
398 Kraimer, M.L., Wayne, S.J. and Jaworski, R.A. (2001), “Sources of support and expatriate
performance: the mediating role of expatriate adjustment”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 54
No. 1, pp. 71-99.
Leung, A.K., Maddux, W.W., Galinsky, A.D. and Chiu, C. (2008), “Multicultural experience
enhances creativity: the when and how”, American Psychologist, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 169-181.
Ling, W. and Dejun, G. (2003), “A research on the relationship between metacognition and
learning motivation”, Psychological Science, Vol. 5, pp. 5-13.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C.M. and Avolio, B.J. (2007), Psychological Capital: Developing The Human
Competitive Edge, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O. and Li, W. (2005), “The psychological capital of Chinese
workers: Exploring the relationship with performance”, Management and Organization
Review, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 249-271.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B.J., Avey, J.B. and Norman, S.M. (2007), “Psychological capital: measurement
and relationship with performance and satisfaction”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 60 No. 3,
pp. 541-572.
Luthans, F., Combs, G.M., Clapp-Smith, R. and Nadkarni, S. (2006), Knowledge Workers in India:
Exploring the Relationship of Hope and Optimism with Performance, Paper presented at
the Academy of Management Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA.
Luthans, F., Avey, J.B., Avolio, B.J., Norman, S.M. and Combs, G.M. (2006), “Psychological capital
development: toward a micro-intervention”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 27
No. 3, pp. 387-393.
Maddux, W.W. and Galinsky, A.D. (2009), “Cultural borders and mental barriers: living in and
adapting to foreign cultures facilitates creativity”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 96 No. 5, pp. 1047-1061.
Nezlek, J.B., Feist, G.J., Wilson, F.C. and Plesko, R.M. (2001), “Day-to-day variability in empathy as a
function of daily events and mood”, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 401-423.
Ng, K.Y., Van Dyne, L. and Ang, S. (2011), “Cultural intelligence: a review, reflections, and
recommendations for future research”, in Ryan, A.M. Leong, F.T.L. and Oswald, F. (Eds),
Conducting Multinational Research Projects in Organizational Psychology, American
Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 29-58.
Paris, S.G. and Winograd, P. (1990), “Promoting metacognition and motivation of exceptional
children”, Remedial and Special Education, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 7-15.
Parker, S.K. and Axtell, C.M. (2001), “Seeing another viewpoint: antecedents and outcomes
of employee perspective taking”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 6,
pp. 1085-1100.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Schmidt, R. and Watanabe, Y. (2001), “Motivation, strategy use, and pedagogical preferences in
foreign language learning”, in Dornyei, Z. and Schmidt, R. (Eds), Motivation And Second
Language Acquisition, University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu, HI, pp. 313-359.
Schraw, G. and Dennison, R.S. (1994), “Assessing metacognitive awareness”, Contemporary
Educational Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 460-475.
Schunk, D.H. (2008), “Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: research Cultural
recommendations”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 463-467.
psychological
Shaffer, M.A. and Harrison, D.A. (1998), “Expatriates’ psychological withdrawal from international
assignments: Work, nonwork, and family influences”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 1, capital
pp. 87-118.
Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., Gregersen, H., Black, J.S. and Ferzandi, L.A. (2006), “You can
take it with you: individual differences and expatriate effectiveness”, Journal of Applied 399
Psychology, Vol. 91 No. 1, pp. 109-125.
Shannon, L.M. and Begley, T.M. (2008), “Antecedents of the four-factor model of cultural
intelligence”, in Ang, S. and Van Dyne, L. (Eds), Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory,
Measurement, and Applications, M. E. Sharpe, New York, NY, pp. 41-55.
Tadmor, C.T. and Tetlock, P.E. (2006), “Biculturalism: a model of the effects of second culture
exposure on acculturation and integrative complexity”, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 173-190.
Tarique, I. and Takeuchi, R. (2008), “Developing cultural intelligence: The roles of international
nonwork experiences”, in And, S. and Van Dyne, L. (Eds), Handbook of Cultural
Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications, M. E. Sharpe, New York, NY,
pp. 56-70.
Templer, K.J., Tay, C. and Chandrasekar, N.A. (2006), “Motivational cultural intelligence, realistic
job preview, realistic living conditions preview, and cross-cultural adjustment”, Group
Organization Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 154-173.
Wang, M. and Takeuchi, R. (2007), “The role of goal orientation during expatriation: a cross-
sectional and longitudinal investigation”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 5,
pp. 1437-1445.
Wolters, C. (1999), “The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and their
use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance”, Learning and Individual
Differences, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 281-299.
Wolters, C.A. (1998), “Self-regulated learning and college students’ regulation of motivation”,
Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 90 No. 2, pp. 224-235.
Young, A. and Fry, J.D. (2008), “Metacognitive awareness and academic achievement in college
students”, Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 1-10.
Yukl, G. (1994), Leadership in Organizations, 3rd ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

About the authors

Dilek Gulistan Yunlu is a Professor in the Business School at the Northeastern Illinois University.
She received her PhD in Organizational Behavior and Strategic Management at the University of
Wisconsin – Milwaukee. Her research interests include creativity, cross-cultural management,
and entrepreneurship. Professor Dilek Gulistan Yunlu is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: dgyunlu@uwm.edu
Dr Rachel Clapp-Smith is an Assistant Professor of Leadership in the School of Management
at the Purdue University Calumet. She received her PhD in Organizational Behavior and
Leadership at the University of Nebraska and MBA in International Management at Thunderbird,
the School of Global Management. Dr Clapp-Smith has devoted her research to Global Mindset and
Global Leadership Development.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.