Purpose -The management literature on cross-cultural adaptation has used a conceptualisation and measurement approach developed by Black and Stephens. Their work has led to significant development in the field. Now it is time to move beyond and use a more refined tool. This paper proposes such a tool and compares its characteristics with those of the older instrument. Design/methodology/approach -The paper is based on a sample of 204 expatriates, who were surveyed using the older and the proposed instrument. It uses confirmatory factor analysis to compare the two instruments. Independent variables include cultural difference and language skills. Findings -This study demonstrates that a more refined measurement of adaptation outcomes, which distinguishes cognitive and affective factors and four non-work facets, is superior to measurement based on the older instrument. The new scale also provides a case for the improvement of cross-cultural adaptation theory. Research limitations/implications -The paper is based on a cross-sectional sample and sample size is relatively small for confirmatory factor analysis. Additional research is necessary to corroborate the evidence presented here about the superiority of the proposed measure. The paper provides researchers with a new tool for use in cross-cultural adaptation studies. Originality/value -The paper describes a new, empirically developed measurement tool for cross-cultural adaptation.Keywords Expatriates, Cross-cultural management, Management effectiveness, Measurement
Paper type Research paperFor over a decade, many cross-cultural adaptation studies (e.g. Black, 1990a, b, Black and Gregersen, 1991a, Black, 1994, Taylor and Napier, 1996a, Robie and Ryan, 1996, Aycan, 1997, Kraimer et al., 2001, Selmer, 2001, Takeuchi et al., 2002 in the management literature have looked at a three-fold split initially proposed by Black (1988): general adjustment, interaction adjustment, and work adjustment. A subsequent measure developed by Black and Stephens (1989) has fairly consistently reproduced these three facets in these studies.The literature in the wake of the Black and Stephens questionnaire has contributed greatly to our understanding of cross-cultural adaptation of expatriates. Yet, there are a few problems associated with the measure: it was not developed in a systematic, theory-driven way; it measures adaptation one-dimensionally on an adjusted-unadjusted range; the three facets of adjustment may be an artefact of the unsystematically chosen items going into the original measure.