Group intercultural competence: proposing a concept

Schmidmeier, Janete; Takahashi, Adriana Roseli Wünsch

doi:10.1590/1679-395159430

Tabla de contenido Anterior Actual Siguiente

Tabla de contenido

Article • Cad. EBAPE.BR 16 (1) • Jan 2018 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395159430 linkcopy

Group intercultural competence: proposing a concept

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

The concept of intercultural competence (IC) was introduced by researchers to understand why and how some people, groups and organizations thrive in intercultural situations (LEUNG, ANG and TAN, 2014, 2014). The literature on individual IC is wide and guided by many concepts, but the predominant focus of these concepts are cognitive and behavioral, with a shortage of group level studies. In addition, there is an emerging paradigm shifting the emphasis of IC, including the ability to work successfully in a diverse team and the development of subsequent relationships, featuring a relational approach. A need was identified to deepen individual IC literature and investigate how it would be possible to work the concept at the group level. With the aim of proposing a concept for group intercultural competence (GIC), it was necessary to build a categorization of the field, a classification of concepts and an analysis of elements and IC dimensions, based on the literature on competence in general. With this it was possible to formulate a concept for the GIC that brings up a perspective of social construction of reality (BERGER and LUCKMAN, 2003), where the group intercultural competence can be better understood from an integrative perspective that encompasses social interactions. The dimensions that remained in the concept of GIC were: interaction, efficacy, cultural differences, communication, learning and negotiated culture.

Keywords:
Intercultural management; Multicultural Teams; Intercultural competence; Group intercultural competence; Cross-cultural competence

Definition	Focus / level
Ability to function effectively in another culture (GERTSEN, 1990; DINGES and BALDWIN, 1996).	Behavioral / individual
The knowledge of other people; self-knowledge; skills to interpret and relate; appreciation of the values, beliefs and behavior of others; and self-relativization (BYRAM, 1997).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
General ability to transcend ethnocentrism, appreciate other cultures, and generate adequate general behavior in one or more different cultures (BENNETT, 1986).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Ability to adapt to other cultures based on elements involved in the linguistic processes of interaction between the partners (FANTINI, 2000).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Manager’s ability to recognize and understand the existence of each culture’s own beliefs and values, as well as to establish productive dialogues with the local population, and also to solve conflicts resulting from possible intercultural shocks (LANE, DISTEFANO and MAZNEVSKI, 2000).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Ability to effectively interact both with people from other cultures as those of their own culture. It involves awareness of different values and behaviors as well as the ability to deal with them through non-judgment (BYRAM and NICHOLS, 2001).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Set of knowledge and skills needed to interact successfully with people from other ethnic, religious, cultural, national and geographic groups. An individual who has a high degree of intercultural competence is able to have successful interactions with people from different groups (HAMMER, BENNETT and WISEMAN, 2003).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
This is a meta-competence that allows players to look at the structures, objects and interactions from an affective distance, providing reflection and understanding of intercultural experience after interaction situations and allowing them to make situational adjustments of their actions and find alternatives that are negotiated between actors (EARLEY and ANG, 2003).	Cognitive behavioral / individual collective
Ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes. Ability to change the references appropriately and adapt the behavior to the cultural context. Ability to achieve goals through constructive interaction in an intercultural context (DEARDORFF, 2004).	Cognitive, behavioral and cultural / individual
High level competence, which refers to specialist’s ability to work in multicultural environments, promoting intercultural learning. Ability to use personal experience to facilitate collaboration within multicultural work environments. This competence includes personal characteristics such as: commitment, self-awareness, adaptation and flexibility; basic skills such as: methodological ability, organizational talent and social media skills, and ability to manage complex situations (LASONEN, 2005).	Cognitive behavioral / individual collective
Skills that basically involve: recognizing and optimizing cultural differences as resources for learning and for creating effective actions in specific contexts; thinking and acting on the basis of the premises of adaptation and empathy with the other, as well as the awareness that we share a cultural complex at all times; engaging the other (work teams, partners, communities, governments, among other stakeholders) to explore tacit demands that permeate organization and society behavior and needs (FRIEDMAN and ANTAL, 2005).	Cognitive, behavioral, cultural / individual and collective engagement
Capabilities that are necessary to achieve mutual understanding as well as for functional interaction and cooperation between people who have different cultural backgrounds (JOKIKOKKO, 2005).	Behavioral / individual
Effectiveness of an individual in developing a set of knowledge, skills and personal attributes in order to work successfully with people from different cultural backgrounds in country or abroad (JOHNSON and LENARTOWICZ, 2006).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Generic cultural skill that is required in the interactions between individuals of different human groups who experience strangeness as a consequence of their mutual ignorance of the differences between them with a view to producing culture, creating familiarity and thus cohesion among the individuals involved, allowing them to pursue their interaction goals (RATHJE, 2007).	Cognitive behavioral cultural / individual and generic cultural
Management of the idea that allows members of different cultural systems to be aware of their cultural identity and cultural differences and to interact effectively and appropriately with others in different contexts by agreeing on the meaning of various symbol systems with the result of mutually related satisfaction (KUPKA, 2008).	Behavioral / individual
To be competent is not only to be functionally adequate in the performance of one or several tasks but to have a capital of cognitive and attitudinal resources that allows the manager to act with sensitivity and to provide innovative and creative answers to challenges in different cultural contexts. In short, being competent means being able to learn significantly (FISCHER, GONDIM, PEREIRA et al., 2009).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Intercultural competence involves the critical cultural awareness of the Self and the Other in an intercultural encounter, with attention to relationship building, monitoring and management of emotions, empathy and face work (HOLMES and O’NEILL, 2012).	Cognitive behavioral / individual
Understanding the difference and the need to communicate effectively and engage with stakeholders effectively (FITCH, 2012).	Cognitive / individual
A CI diz respeito à compreensão cognitiva de um sistema cultural e, também, aos elementos analíticos e estratégicos que ampliam a interpretação e o âmbito da ação de uma pessoa, a fim de interagir adequadamente com pessoas de outras culturas. A competência intercultural dos atores-chave influencia e promove a negociação intercultural e processos de aprendizagem de modo positivo IC refers to the cognitive understanding of a cultural system, and also to analytical and strategic elements that broaden the person’s interpretation and scope of action in order to interact appropriately with people from other cultures. The intercultural competence of the actors influence and promote intercultural negotiation and learning processes in a positive way (BARMEYER and DAVOINE, 2015).	cognitive behavioral / individual and collective
To be interculturally competent it is essential to strive to understand the world from other people’s perspectives, to seek to understand how cultures connect and become a starting point for future positive change (MCCARTHY, WHITE and DAVOINE, 2015).	Cognitive behavioral / individual

Elements by author	Definition overview	Dimensions for group intercultural competence
Interaction Deardorff (2004); Jokikokko (2005).	It is able to achieve its goals through constructive interaction in a multicultural context.	Interaction management (KOESTER and OLEBE, 2003); Team Consolidation and Engagement (MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; FRIEDMAN and ANTAL, 2005; BIRD, 2010); Cohesion among team members (RATHJE, 2007); Results orientation (MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; BIRD, 2010); Strong, clear and detailed planning (MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009; BIRD, 2010); Understanding the organization’s strategic objectives (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009); Understanding team goals (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009); Clear description of roles (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009).
Effectiveness Dinges e Baldwin (1996); Gertsen (1990); Bennett (1986).	It is able to function effectively with members of diverse cultures, generating adequate general behavior in one or more cultures.	Promoting intercultural learning (DEARDORFF, 2004; LASONEN, 2005); Ethno relative view - accepted the existence and importance of cultural differences in the group (DEARDORFF, 2004); Relationship building (MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; BIRD 2010); Diversity management (PANGGABEAN, MURNIATI and TJITRA, 2013); Appreciation of the values, beliefs and behavior of group members (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009; BYRAM, 1997); Personal attributes valuation (FITCH, 2012); Non-judgmental posture (BYRAM and NICHOLS, 2001); Negotiated culture (KIM, 1988; BARMEYER and DAVOINE, 2015); Successful interactions (HAMMER, BENNETT and WISEMAN, 2003; KUPKA, 2008); Ability to manage complex situations (LASONEN, 2005); Management of uncertainties (BIRD 2010).
Cultural differences Friedman e Antal (2005).	It is able to recognize and optimize cultural differences as a resource for learning and for creating effective actions in specific contexts.	Global Mentality (BÜCKER and POUTSMA, 2010); Management of intellectual and cultural resources (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009); Team members engagement (FRIEDMAN and ANTAL, 2005).
Comunication Byram (1997); Fantini (2000); Deardorff (2004); Moran, Youngdahl e Moran (2009); Fitch (2012).	It is able to promote effective communication, that is, open, clear and frank communication.	Clear and open communication (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009); Constant Feedback (MORAN, YOUNGDAHL and MORAN, 2009); Sociolinguistic ability (DEARDORFF, 2004); Accuracy in sending and receiving messages (DEARDORFF, 2004); Intercultural communication skills (BYRAM, 1997; MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; BIRD, 2010; LOUGH, 2011; FITCH, 2012); Verbal and non-verbal skills (FANTINI, 2000; BUENO, 2010).
Learning Fischer, Gondim, Pereira et al. (2009).	It is able to learn meaningfully, generating innovative and creative responses to the challenges of different cultural contexts.	Continuous intercultural learning (MENDENHALL and OSLAND, 2002; BIRD, 2010); Openness to intercultural learning (DEARDORFF, 2004); Guidance for sharing knowledge (KOESTER and OLEBE, 2003).
Negotiated culture Earley e Ang (2003); Deardorff (2004); Barmeyer e Davoine (2015).	It is able to flexibilize the team reference, adapting it to the multicultural context, through a negotiated culture.	Flexibility (DEARDORFF, 2004); Adaptability (DEARDORFF, 2004); Negotiated culture (KIM, 1988; BARMEYER and DAVOINE, 2015); Ethno relative view - accept the existence and importance of cultural differences in the group (DEARDORFF, 2004); Openness to intercultural learning (DEARDORFF, 2004).

location_on

Fundação Getulio Vargas, Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas Rua Jornalista Orlando Dantas, 30 - sala 107, 22231-010 Rio de Janeiro/RJ Brasil, Tel.: (21) 3083-2731 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: cadernosebape@fgv.br

rss_feed Acompañe los números de esta revista en su lector de RSS

[TFN3] Source: Elaborated by the authors.