Promoting Individual
Global Mindset Through
Formal Learning
Bjorn M. van den Berg
10998365
University of Amsterdam Business School
Executive Programme in Management Studies - Strategy Track
A MSc thesis under the supervision of Prof. Dr. C. Gelhard
Statement of Originality
This document is written by Bjorn M. van den Berg who declares to take full responsibility for the
contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources
other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of
completion of the work, not for the contents.
Amsterdam, August 2017
Bjorn M. van den Berg
Statement of Ethics
This research was approved and supported by the Dean’s office of Amsterdam School of
International Business. The interview and questionnaire are treated anomalously and personal details
identifying participants such as name, address and contact details have not be recorded. Prior to the
interview and questionnaire, participants have given consent by accepting the interview request.
Recordings of the interview and verbal approval for recording will be kept together with short
transcripts of the interview.
Participation in this research was entirely voluntary with no incentive given in return.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ... 71 |
Introduction ... 9
Problem Statement ... 11
Reading guide ... 16
2 |
Theoretical Foundation ... 18
Mindset as Knowledge Structures ... 18
The construct of Global Mindset ... 19
Corporate and Individual Global Mindset ... 22
Developing a Global Mindset ... 24
3 | Theoretical Framework ... 33
Conceptual Model ... 38
4 | Method and Research Design ... 41
A Qualitative Comparative Approach ... 41
Data Collection and Preparation ... 46
5 | Analysis and Results ... 52
Bottom-Up Approach for Reassessing Conditions ... 52
Results Bottom-Up Approach ... 53
Reassessing Conditions ... 56
Results of Analysis Reassessed Conditions ... 57
Necessity ... 57
Configurations Promoting Global Mindset ... 58
6 | Findings and Discussion ... 59
7 | Contributions and Managerial Implications ... 64
8 | Limitations and Further Research ... 66
References ... 68
Appendices ... 75
Appendix 1.1 CQS Self-Reported ... 76
Appendix 1.2 CQS Observer ... 76
Appendix 2 Basic Principles of QCA ... 78
Appendix 3 Interview Template Global Mindset, Score Card and Contact Summary Sheet ... 82
Appendix 4 Raw Data Conditions ... 85
Appendix 5.1 Fuzzy Set Table ... 86
Appendix 5.2 Fuzzy Set Table Overarching Conditions ... 87
Appendix 6 Truth Table Analysis for all Conditions ... 88
Appendix 7 Truth Table Analysis for Personal Characteristics ... 90
Appendix 8 Results Truth Table Analysis Formal Learning Conditions ... 91
Appendix 9 Results of Truth Table Analysis reassessed conditions ... 92
Appendix 10 XY plots necessity ... 93
Appendix 11 Overview of Global Mindset Definitions and Characteristics ... 94
Table of Figures
Figure 1 Global Mindset and Effective Leadership ...12
Figure 2 Global Mindset Framework ...27
Figure 3 Conceptual Model Conditions promoting Individual Global Mindset. ...38
Figure 4 Advantages of QCA. ...41
Figure 5 Research stages QCA ...44
Figure 6 Venn Diagram for Relation of Sufficiency ...78
Figure 7 Necessity and Sufficiency ...81
Figure 8.1 XY Plot Necessity GIC ...93
Figure 8.2 XY Plot Necessity GSC ...93
Table of Tables
Table 1 Literature Overview Global Mindset ...29Table 2 Variables as Conditions ...39
Table 3 Variants of Qualitative Comparative Analysis ...43
Table 4 Overview and Characteristics Sample Group ...46
Table 5 Calibration Interval Scale Data towards Fuzzy Sets ...50
Table 6 Overarching Conditions promoting Individual Global Mindset ...56
Table 7 Representation Configurations ...58
Table 8 Overview Results of Proposition Testing ...63
Table 9 CQS Self-Reported Template ...76
Table 10 CQS Observer Template ...77
Table 11 Raw Data Table ...85
Table 12 Fuzzy-Set Table ...86
Table 13 Fuzzy-Set Table Overarching Conditions ...87
Table 14 Truth Table for all Conditions ...88
Table 15 Parsimonious Solution all Conditions ...88
Table 16 Intermediate Solutions All Conditions ...89
Table 17 Parsimonious and Intermediate Solutions for Core and Peripheral Causal Conditions ...90
Table 18 Truth Table Formal Conditions ...91
Table 19 Parsimonious Solution Formal Learning Condition ...91
Table 20 Truth Table Analysis – Intermediate Solutions Formal Learning Conditions ...91
Table 21 Parsimonious and Intermediate Solution Factorised Analysis ...92
Table 22 Analysis of Necessary Conditions ...92
Table 23 Overview Definitions and Characteristics Global Mindset ...94
Executive Summary
Globalisation has been, and still very much is, one of the major driving forces shaping the past century and the way we have done business. Markets, resources and opportunities are increasingly arising outside of our national borders and provide new challenges. Managers successfully dealing with these global challenges are becoming valuable and unique resources leading to competitive advantage. Cognitive and emotional abilities of these global managers provide organisations the capability to cross national boundaries and domestic cultures making business succeed.
The social construct of Global Mindset has emerged from academic and managerial literature
to explain this phenomena in business and management. Although the field of Global Mindset is
gaining momentum, researchers are critical of the wide variety of approaches and concepts of
Corporate and Individual Global Mindset. There is much speculation to what actually supports the
development of a Global Mindset but there is remarkably little empirical research supporting these
speculations. Formal learning is one of the championed antecedents of Individual Global Mindset.
This research tries to uncover the different conditions and configurations of these conditions that
promote Individual Global Mindset.
Through fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis this research adds to the limited but
growing number of empirical research and reinforces the complexity of Individual Global Mindset.
This complexity is highlighted by the number of different pathways consisting of configurations of
context. International Internship and Study Abroad have been mentioned by participants as pivotal
points of shaping those International Experiences.
Furthermore, this research supports the necessity of Knowledge Building as a consistent
causal condition in all configurations promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Additionally, this research supports the argument that personal characteristics e.g. having
studied at an international high school or having a mixed cultural background, are important
conditions for promoting the development of an Individual Global Mindset. Although Studying
Abroad is an important condition, mere studying within an international classroom setting may not
always lead to promoting a Global Mindset and has not been found to be a critical condition.
Key words: Individual Global Mindset; Formal Learning; Knowledge Building;
Qualitative Comparative Analysis
1 | Introduction
The very fabric of our business landscape has changed dramatically over the past decades. Markets have become increasingly global and dynamic. Opportunities, valuable resources, labour markets, and state of the art innovations lurk not around the corner but more often must be found outside of regional and national borders. The sheer force of globalisation is no longer just a theoretical construct but has proven a reality that all companies, small or large, and no matter the industry they are in, must consider to survive this industrial era (Nielsen, 2014).The effects of globalisation due to international transport and trade already can be seen going
back to the early 19th century of the industrial revolution. These effects have respectively shaped and
formed the past century. Advancements in technology have further increased the scope and speed of
globalisation and is still very much shaping the present and the future. It has eliminated
communication and trade barriers through world-wide interconnectedness at cultural, political and
economic levels (Giddens, 1999). The term globalisation describes the increasing connections and
interactions between individuals from all corners of the world (Javidan, 2010) and is characterised by
“erosions of boundaries” (Friedman, 2005; Javidan, 2010). With traditional boundaries disappearing,
business leaders and managers will have to redefine their approaches according to the challenges of
global markets (Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999). Understanding and overcoming these dynamic and
global challenges impacts organisational success and may claim competitive advantage over others.
Overcoming these dynamic and complex environments call for a major shift from structural and
business, meet local pressures and keep a close eye on worldwide developments (Kedia &
Mukherjee, 1999). This alternative mindset rests on high integration, ability to integrate diversity
across cultures and markets, and high differentiation, openness to diversity across cultures and
market (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002). Or as Govindarajan and Gupta (1998) put it: “success is all in
the global mindset”. Realising Global Mindset or at least the cognitive capabilities of managers and
key decision makers is important to organisational performance. The notion of managers global
capabilities and the effect on performance is not novel and already dates back to early work on
foreign investments by Aharoni (1966) and Kindleberger (1969) (Levy, 2005). The construct of
Global Mindset has emerged to identify competitive advantage and the challenges for new thinking
on international human resource management to address the need to meet future global workforce
trends (Story et al, 2014).
Cultivating and harnessing Global Mindset is increasingly becoming considered as a source
of sustainable competitive advantage and thus is high on the executive strategic agenda. The strategic
importance of Global Mindset in a dynamic and complex environment is highlighted in international
strategic management research. Increasingly, academics and professionals stress the impact of Global
Mindset on organisational key success indicators (Buechel, 2014; Cohen, 2010; Levy, 2007; Levy,
2005; Gupta and Govindarajan, 2002, Nummela, 2004; Paul, 2000).
Recent literature underlined the importance of Individual Global Mindset (IGM) in
organisational performance by looking at the positive impact of IGM on international behaviour of
the firm (Felicio, 2015). IGM requires (Javidan, 2010) intellectual capital in the form of global
business savviness (Gregersen et al 1998), cognitive complexity and cosmopolitan outlook. Secondly
it requires psychological capital, a passion for diversity, quest for adventure and self-assurance. And,
IGM is a combination of behaviour, cognition and knowledge elements (Felicio, 2015). Early & Ang
(2003) add a fourth critical component and highlight emotional elements.
Problem Statement
Recent work has begun to gather what we know about Global Mindset its antecedents and
ramifications (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017; Levy, 2007). However, the Global Mindset field still
lacks considerable empirical research (Levy, 2007). Conceptual frameworks of Global Mindset argue
formal learning and knowledge building as antecedent of Individual Global Mindset (Gupta &
Govindarajan 2002) but little is known about the mechanism of cultivating Global Mindset (Levy,
2007). Most of the academic work on Global Mindset is focused on large global multinationals and
small medium enterprises. The Global Mindset Framework (Javidan & Walker, 2007) builds on
extensive research among those organisation’s successful global leaders identifying core
competencies of managers portraying Individual Global Mindset. The core idea of this framework is
that a Global Mindset can be developed through interrelated critical components or “Capitals” of
Global Mindset (Beechler & Javidan, 2007). Also Kedia & Mukherjee (1999) focus on the
development of Global Mindset in global managers and stress the shift of manager’s hard skills
towards soft skills competencies necessary to compete in a global environment. The review1
highlights “purposeful training developed around an effective and structured [formal] learning
environment” as a condition for developing successful global leaders (Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999;
Gregersen et al., 1998). Building on Beechler & Javidan’s (2007) Global Mindset Capitals, Kedia &
Mukherjee’s, (1999) Global Competitiveness and Felicio’s (2015); Early & Ang’s (2003) critical
components figure 1 illustrates the connection between Formal Learning, Global Mindset and
Limited work has been done to investigate these capitals or competencies of Individual
Global Mindset through Formal Learning in university settings. Both Beecheler & Javidan (2007),
Kedia & Mukherjee (1999) and Gregersen et al. (1998) link the development of a Global Mindset to
formal learning but have not been able to provide empirical evidence on how the development of
these different competencies or conditions may lead to Individual Global Mindset. Arora et al. (2004)
established a significant correlation between the level of education of managers and their Individual
Global Mindset but this research echoes Story et al. (2014) and does not believe that level of
education alone promotes Individual Global Mindset but seeks to further understand what
configurations of conditions in education promotes Global Mindset.
Historically, international business education or global learning is strongly linked with educating
global managers. Through quantitative research, Kostelijk, Coelen & de Wit (2015) have linked
international competencies of Dutch International Business and Management programmes with
successful alumni becoming global managers. However, the field of international education has a
mixed understanding of what (core) competencies actually are (Barth et al., 2007) and which
configurations of competencies and conditions lead to desired employability outcomes. In broad Figure 1 Global Mindset and Effective Leadership (based on Beechler and Javidan, 2007; Early & Ang, 2003; Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999).
understanding Barth et al. al (2007) characterise competencies as mindsets comprising of various
interrelated and overlapping “psycho-social” elements and can be developed in a context specific
way. “They may be acquired gradually in different stages, and they are reflected in successful
actions”. In addition, scholars (e.g. Smith, 2012, Deardorff, 2004) include knowledge, skills and
attitudes in the definition of Global Learning and label them intercultural competencies. Smith, 2012
goes as far as to characterise intercultural competence as Global Mindset and ads to the wide variety
of approaches of Global Mindset. These definitions of competencies closely resemble Beechler &
Javidan’s (2007) Psychological and Social Capital and the interrelations with Intellectual Capital.
The importance of Psychological Capital in formal learning is further supported by Clapp-Smith et al
(2007) where they argue that Psychological Capital mediates the relationship between cognitive
capacity ‘the amount of information one can retain’ and cultural intelligence ‘the ability to function
effectively in a multi-cultural environment’ in the development of Global Mindset. Although the
importance is highlighted, both competencies and capitals in formal learning have little support in
empirical research through a lens of Individual Global Mindset.
The speed at which an individual develops a Global Mindset is determined by four factors (1)
curiosity about how the world works (2) explicit and self-conscious voice of current mindset (3)
exposure to different cultures and people (4) intrinsic motivation to develop an integrated perspective
that combines cultural knowledge and markets (Gupta & Govindarajan 2002). These factors in turn
can be related to conditions of formal learning and may promote the development of a Global
Mindset in young graduates ready to enter the global labour market.
Although education practitioners have mixed experiences with study abroad modules,
short-term study abroad has been positively related to developing a Global Mindset (Deloach, 2003). Also,
have been identified as promotors of Individual Global Mindset they have not yet been researched
through Formal Learning in a university setting.
Sense of scope
More and more universities as organisations of Formal Learning are developing international
programmes to cater towards students willing to study abroad. Seeking high quality programmes
elsewhere, the number of students studying abroad has exponentially grown over the last few years.
According to the OECD currently 5 million students are pursuing their education abroad and this
number has tripled in the last 30 years and is expected to further increase to 7 million in the
foreseeable future. The most significant growth and trend in international English-taught education is
coming from Asia.
The European Union actively influences international higher education globally to move
towards economic and political integration. The well-funded ERASMUS programme effectively
eliminated barriers for European students to study abroad and increasing European student mobility
in international education. The programme provided international academic experiences to over
300.000 students from 34 different countries2. The subsequent Bologna process of 1999 harmonises
the entire academic EU system by seeking to align education degree compatibility, academic
qualifications and credit systems. More recently also Non-EU countries have joined the Bologna
agreements allowing for global alignment (Altbach & Knight, 2007). Although (core) competencies
are not specifically mentioned in the Bologna documents they are central to the concept of
employability (Schindler, 2004). Increasing and improving employability is frequently considered to
be the paramount goal of the Bologna process. Bringing about transparency in international
competencies is therefore of great importance.
2
These positive trends have been applauded by most European countries but little is known
about how this internationalisation of education cultivates the Global Mindset for both international
and domestic students.
In sum, this research will look into uncovering (core) conditions and configurations of those
conditions of formal learning in higher education. By doing so, this research will attempt to open up
the black box of international business education in the context of promoting Individual Global
Mindset at Amsterdam School of International Business.
Research Question:
Which (core) conditions or configurations of conditions of formal learning
promote Individual Global Mindset (IGM) in undergraduate business students?
This research will add to the limited number of empirical research on the construct of Global
Mindset and its development. It will seek to provide insights of core conditions of formal learning
and is going beyond the mere level of education. Further, it may clarify contradicting empirical
findings across research fields with regards to international experiences (e.g. Story et al, 2007;
Deloach et al., 2008). It also may provide researchers and international educators in the field of
International Education insights on how to support the development of Individual Global Mindset in
the context of Formal Learning. Furthermore, the relative unique research approach may prove useful
for assessing international education in the context of Global Mindset and may result into different
Reading guide
This research thesis is structured as follows:
Part 1 Introduction and Problem Statement
Part 2 Theoretical Foundation - Literature Review
Part 3 Introduction to the Research - Theoretical Framework / Conceptual Model
Part 4 Method and Research Design - Qualitative Comparative Analysis -
Part 5 Fuzzy-set QCA Analysis and Results
Part 6 Main Findings and Discussion
Part 7 Contribution and Managerial Implications
Part 8 Limitations and Further Research
Within the introduction, the importance of a Global Mindset has been set out. The construct
is introduced through the effects of globalisation on strategies and competitive advantage and the
need for managers to be able to cross cultural boundaries with ease. Gaps in academic and
managerial literature are identified and lead to the problem statement of this research.
Part 2 provides theoretical foundations of the relative new field of Global Mindset through a
review of different authors from different fields of research. This establishes milestones in the field
and challenges at hand.
Further, the literature review gives way to understanding the theoretical framework in part 3
on which this research is built and will provide the broader context in which to place empirical
Furthermore, part 3 will fold in the theoretical foundation into conditions as variables and is
illustrated with a conceptual model built on grounded conceptual and empirical conditions for
promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Part 4 encompasses the relative unique research approach to formal learning in a Global
Mindset context. A set-theoretic-approach has been chosen to combine the strengths from both
quantitative as qualitative methods. The Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) method and tools
provide the foundations for “within case” analysis as “cross-case” comparison. Within this part,
QCA’s research design is presented together with variables called conditions, sampling technique and
data collection and preparation.
Part 5 covers the analysis for a data driven bottom up approach to formal learning in the
context of global mindset. From this initial analysis conditions and solution are reassessed through
literature and new understandings to further uncover the concept of promoting Individual Global
Mindset. Secondly, from this reassessment of conditions a subsequent analysis is done. This part
covers the analysis of testing the assumptions of Formal Learning conditions in the context of
Individual Global mindset. Cases are analysed through computing overarching concepts based on the
theoretical framework and Truth Table Analysis providing parsimonious results for sufficient
conditions promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Part 6 combines the different analysis and presents the findings. It presents core conditions
from the analyses and provides insights in configurations of conditions promoting Individual Global
Mindset. It also includes a discussion on these findings.
Part 7 and 8 conclude this research and presents academic and managerial contributions.
2 |
Theoretical
Foundation
In order to understand the concept of Global Mindset it is important to understand the core concept of a Mindset. “Mindset” originates from the discipline of cognitive psychology and more recently evolved from organisational theory where mindset focuses on how we make sense of the world in which we interact (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002).
Mindset as knowledge structures
A current mindset helps to gather and interpret new information (Walsh & Charalambides,
1990). Over time mindsets can change through the introduction of new and novel information
although when we are not aware of our mindset this information can be rejected. If that information
fits with your current mindset the mindset is reinforced. The extent of the awareness of our current
mindset, or self-consciousness, influences how we learn and evolve. Building on the mindset theory
and cognitive psychology, a mindset exists in the form of “knowledge structures” (Gupta &
Govindarajan, 2002). The two main attributes of every knowledge structure, be it a firm or an
individual, are differentiation, the narrowness versus broadness of knowledge and integration of
different knowledge elements (Nisbet & Ross, 1980). In other words, a mindset is a set of cognitive
filters through which we make sense of what is going on around us, it can evolve over time and be
enriched through experiences (Arora et al, 2004). According to Rhinesmith (1992) a mindset is “a
The construct of Global Mindset
Global Mindset in business and management literature has taken flight over the past decade.
Two main schools of thought have emerged from this body of literature and the majority of
researchers consider Global Mindset, in relation to national and cultural diversity, ‘the cultural
perspective’ and strategic complexity ‘the strategic perspective’ (Levy et al, 2007). In more recent
research the two schools of thought have merged and the multidimensional approach is increasingly
becoming more dominant, combining both cultural as strategic elements. Table 1 contains a
chronological order of the Global Mindset literature and is labelled according to different approaches.
Table 23 in Appendix 11 contains a full overview of definitions of Global Mindset and its
characteristics.
Cultural Perspective on Global Mindset
Perlmutter’s (1969) paper describing Global Mindset as a ‘geocentric orientation of multinational
organisations’ was one of the first in its kind. The paper identified that ‘how an organisation does
business’ is affected by the conscious or unconscious belief system and/or assumptions of
management about global business. In other words, the “state” of mind of management influences the
organisation’s strategy and consequent actions. Perlmutter (1969) recognised three mindset or
attitudes named ethnocentric (home market orientation) polycentric (foreign market orientation) and
geocentric (global orientation). Managers with a geocentric orientation, or a Global Mindset (Levy et al, 2007), significantly shape the multinational corporation through structural design, formulating
global strategy and allocating resources with a supranational approach.
independently develop and interpret “criteria” for performance and apply those “criteria” in different
countries, cultures and markets. The first empirical research (Kobrin, 1994) based on Perlmutter’s
(1969) geocentric orientation of the multinational organisation studied the prominent assumption that
global integrated firms, or globally organised organisations, display such geocentric orientation.
Although the research did find an association between a geocentric orientation and the scope of the
firm, the causal relation was all but clear. Furthermore, and important to the development of the
Global Mindset construct, the research suggest a multidimensional approach rather than a
one-dimensional approach.
The Cultural Perspective is very much related to Cosmopolitanism (Levy et al, 2007) and
should be considered as a conceptual dimension of the Global Mindset construct. In Levy’s (2007)
framework cosmopolitanism symbolises a mindset that is open towards the “outside”, unites local
and global and an awareness to others. Additionally, a cosmopolitan mindset has characteristics of
openness and eagerness to learn from others (Hannerz, 1996).
Strategic Perspective on Global Mindset
A second school of thought emerged from the strategy field out of Harvard in the 1970’s and 1980’s.
The Strategic Perspective connects to the concept of globalisation and finds its origin in the
innovative research of Bartlett & Ghosal (1989, 1990) of classifying the ‘transnational organisation’.
The transnational organisation is defined with a new management mentality that “recognises that
environmental demands and opportunities vary widely from country to country….[and also]
recognises that different parts of the company possess different capabilities” (Bartlett & Ghosal,
1989). Subsequently, the strategic perspective assumes that the strategic capability of an organisation
can be found in the cultivation of a “complex managerial mindset” (Bartlett & Ghosal, 1989; Paul,
Perspective features (1) high cognitive abilities to understand the complex global world (Nisbet &
Ross, 1980; Levy, 2007), (2) balance the local and global (e.g. Arora et al, 2004) (3) differentiate and
integrate among and across cultures and markets (Gupta Govindarajan, 2002) and (4) sensitivity to
global and current issues (Rhinesmith, 1996; Levy, 2005).
Several studies have focused on the strategic implications of successfully balancing global
integration with local responsiveness (e.g. Murtha et al, 1998; Begley & Boyd, 2003), also described
as “think global act local” (Arora et al, 2004). Strategic transformation enabling a firm’s global
integration resulted in a cognitive shift towards managers Global Mindset (Murtha et al, 1998).
Multidimensional Approach to Global Mindset
Recent work calls for substantive efforts to address the confusion on the multi-use of the concept of
Global Mindset (e.g. Levy at el., 2007; Andersen & Bergdolt, 2017). Currently two major
perspectives or schools define the Global Mindset concept. The first school of thought conceptualises
Global Mindset as a strategic construct and focuses on the strategic importance of Global Mindset.
The second major school of thought define Global Mindset as a cultural construct, focusing on the
cognitive and cultural dimensions of the Global Mindset. And in addition to the cultural and strategic
perspectives on Global Mindset a third school of thought has been built around Rhinesmith’s (1996)
work and take on a multidimensional integrative approach to Global Mindset. This multidimensional
approach conceptualises Global Mindset with both elements from the cultural as the strategic
perspective. For example, Levy et al (2007) define Global Mindset through a multidimensional
approach: “Global Mindset is a cognitive structure characterised by openness and the articulation of
Through an in-depth review of the Global Mindset literature, Andresen & Bergdolt (2017)
echoed Levy et al (2007) and underlined two important constructs: cosmopolitanism and cognitive
complexity (Levy et al, 2017) and stress motivational prerequisites. They conclude:
“A global mindset is defined as the capacity to function effectively within environments that are characterised by high cultural and business complexity. In order to function effectively within cross-cultural environments that are also characterised by high strategic business complexity, it is vital to possess - in addition to cognitive and motivational prerequisites - a specific attribute (mindset) characterised particularly by openness and cosmopolitanism.”
Furthermore, Kedia & Mukherjee (1999) view having a Global Mindset as the ability to
manage complexity, showcase a global and local orientation at the same time and display an
openness as well as empathy. They assume that individuals with a Global Mindset think of cultural
diversity as a firm asset. Moreover, individuals with a Global Mindset thrive on ambiguity and have
the ability to balance different views and demands. Global Mindset includes an emotional and thus
motivational connection.
Corporate and Individual Global Mindset
Up until now most of the focus has been on the Organisational or Corporate Global Mindset.
Additionally, the individual micro-level view has been instrumental in recent research (Story et al,
2014) and has underlined the importance of Individual Global Mindset in organisational
performance. Individual Global Mindset has been found to have a positive impact on international
behaviour of the firm and influences overall organisational performance (Felicio, 2015). Jeanette
(2000), for example, defines a manager’s strategic Global Mindset as a mindset that understands the
business, the industry and global market place. A business leader with a Global Mindset has the
opportunities in markets instead of only seeing national and cultural differences. Echoing Jeanette
(2000), Levy et al (2007) link Individual Global Mindset to the importance of a Corporate Global
Mindset. Only having global competent managers is not sufficient for organisational performance if
the organisational structure, routines and behaviour do not support Individual Global Mindset of
managers (Jeanette, 2000).
Rhinesmith (1992) describes Global Mindset on an individual level as a capability of global
managers and leaders that allow them to manage complex and culturally dynamic environments,
value cultural differences and make sense of global trends. A Global Mindset, according to
Rhinesmith (1992: p. 24), “is a way of being rather than a set of skills. It is an orientation of the
world that allows one to see certain things that others do not. A Global Mindset means the ability to
scan the world from a broad perspective, always looking for expected trends and opportunities that
may constitute a threat or an opportunity to achieve personal, professional or organisational
objectives”.
Early research on Mindset in managers has shown the development of an Individual Global
Mindset increases global competitiveness (Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999). Besides requiring a common
set of traits, Global Managers require a specialised set of traits, skills, and competencies. To be able
to compete, across borders managers need to integrate three global forces of (1) global business, (2)
regional/country pressures, and (3) worldwide functions (Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999), ultimately
Developing a Global Mindset
Drawing on the Resource Based View (Barney, 1991; Teece et al. 1997) and Mind-set Theory
(Gollwitzer, 1990, 1999) global competitiveness (Media & Mukherjee, 1999; Nummela, 2004) and
international behaviour of the firm (Felicio 2016;2015) have successfully bridged competitiveness
with intercultural competencies through Corporate Global Mindset and global managers Individual
Global Mindset. Developing that Global Mindset however has been a much-speculated topic but has
very little support in research (Story et al, 2007). The field of Human Resource Management has
taken a special interest in understanding the development of global competencies in organisations’
global managers. More specifically they are being asked to better understand the development of a
Global Mindset. Organisations operating on a global playing field, typically prioritise Human
Resource practices in search for competent global managers.
Story et al (2014) publishing in the Journal of Human Resource Management looked at the
challenges for international HRM through the analysis of the antecedent of Global Mindset. They
proposed two key indicators for Global Mindset; cultural intelligence (Early and Ang, 2003) and
global business orientation (Nummela et al, 2004; Levy et al, 2007). Both cultural intelligence (Early
et al, 2003; Early, Murnieks & Mosakowski, 2007; Levy et al 2007) and global business orientation
have been operationalised as Individual Global Mindset.
Early & Ang (2003) suggested that culturally intelligent individuals are able to acquire
knowledge and behaviour ‘on the go’ and are able to use and act upon this in different environments
“connecting knowledge to practice” (Story et al, 2014). The construct of cultural intelligence
involves four components: cognitive, motivational, metacognitive and behavioural (Early & Ang,
2003). Although, Story et al (2014), suggested that the construct of Global Mindset is related to the
Begley & Boyd (2003), Arora et al (2004) and more recently Mendenhall et all (2012), Felicio
(2015), Andersen & Bergdolt (2017) do consider behavioural aspects.
Global Business orientation describes the ability for a person to easily adjust to different
environments (Nummela et al, 2004; Levy et al, 2007) and makes decisions based on cross cultural
awareness and perspectives (Taylor et al 2008).
Story et al (2014) propose a conceptual model in which they assume a dynamic process in
which managers enter a cross cultural context with a set of characteristics: education, level of
management, number of languages spoken and number of international business trips contributing to role complexity and experience abroad and in the end, promote the development of Global Mindset.
In addition to these personal conditions they propose a second variable of Psychological Capital,
consisting of hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism. Through quantitative analysis they found that
international experience and international assignments only marginally contribute to the development
of Global Mindset. Just travelling abroad is not sufficient for the development of a Global Mindset
and counters previous conceptual models. An individual also can develop a Global Mindset by not
just living abroad. They also found that the number of languages spoken and in particular language
skills have important implications for Global Mindset relating to role complexity and the
development of Global Mindset. The level of education has not been found to have an effect on role
complexity and the development of Global Mindset, although one can argue the narrowness of ‘level
of education’ alone is not a valid variable for understanding the full effect of education on the
development of Global Mindset.
The role of education in the context of formal learning (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002; Smith
2012) and business schools in particular have been instrumental in providing measurable knowledge
business schools must also focus on the attitudes, skills and knowledge for students’ careers in an
ever-changing global business world (Aggarwal, 2011).
Facilitating knowledge building on cultures and global markets through formal learning at the
level of the individual are conceptualised as antecedents of Global Mindset (Gupta & Govindarajan,
2002). Formal Education in the broadest of terms is described as learning delivered by trained
teachers in a systematic intentional way within a school, academy/college/institute or university3.
Building diversity in the composition of the environment, be it a firm or a formal learning setting, further enhances the cultivation of a Global Mindset. Cultural experiences are invaluable in helping students to understand people from different cultures and enable them to have a better understanding of themselves, as well as further opportunities to learn more about other cultures (Smith, 2012).
Recent and continuing research under supervision of prof. Dr. Javidan at Thunderbird School of Global Management4 is making advances in conceptualising and operationalising Global Mindset.
Through a mixed method analysis Javidan & Walker (2013) developed the Global Mindset
Framework with the idea that a Global Mindset can be developed. This extensive research has been instrumental in understanding the development of Global Mindset. Adopting earlier research, the Global Mindset Framework builds on three critical components of Global Mindset: Global
Intellectual Capital, Global Psychological Capital and Global Social Capital (Beechler & Javidan,
2007). The Global Mindset Framework coded specific attributes to each Capital shaping the
framework with thirty-five different competencies in three meta competences that in some way relate to an individual’s Global Mindset. See figure 1 Global Mindset Framework for an illustration.
Global Intellectual Capital is described as the ability and knowledge of an individual to understand international business, business processes and cultural foundations (Javidan & Walker, 2013). Building on Levy et al. (2007) the framework recognises cosmopolitanism and cognitive
3 Source: OECD
complexity and adds global business savvy to its attributes. Intellectual Capital is very much about the knowledge one has about global business in other parts of the world, knowledge about political systems and customers and how to leverage that knowledge to make decisions on that information. Global Psychological Capital reflects an individual passion for diversity, quest of adventure and self-efficacy (e.g. self-confidence, being comfortable in uncomfortable situations). It is about the
emotional side of doing business in other parts of the world. Both Story et al (2007) and Clapp-Smith et al (2007) mention Psychological Capital as part of the construct of Global Mindset and describe this as an optimism about the future, goal driven and confident state (Clapp-Smit et all, 2007). Global Social Capital comprises of more behavioural elements and reflects intercultural empathy,
interpersonal impact and diplomacy. (Javidan & Walker, 2013). It very much relies on the ability of an individual to develop successful relationships with people from other parts of the world. It also refers to how skilled one is in listening and understanding others, as well as bringing divergent views together. Global Mindset is the combination of these three capitals (Javidan, 2010), see also figure 2.
Figure 2 Global Mindset Framework adopted from Javidan & Walker (2013) (own representation)
Global Mindset
Global Intellectual Capital • Global Business Savvy • Cognitive Complexity • Cosmopolitain Outlook Global psychological Capital • Passion for Diversity • Quest for Adventure • Self-Assurance Global Social Capital • InterCultural Empathy • Interpersonal Impact • DiplomacyIntercultural Competencies and the challenges of Global Mindset
Practitioners and scholars in the field of management are progressively concluding that
complex human capabilities of cognition and behaviour can successfully tackle global challenges
(Ashkenas et al 2002). Thus, as a prerequisite for being able to be successful in this globalised and
highly dynamic environment, it is of strategic importance for managers to obtain cross-cultural
competencies (Bucker & Poutsma, 2010; Johnson, Lenartowic, & Apud, 2006). These intercultural
competencies allow global managers to effectively deal with inter, - and cross-cultural business
situations and allow managers to think outside of their own cultural box when interacting with other
cultures and making global strategic business decisions (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017).
In the business and management literature, two main intercultural competencies that have
been widely referred to as of importance are Global Mindset (Lovvorn & Chen, 2011; Maznevski &
Lane 2004) and Cultural Intelligence (Ang et al, 2007). Recent literature is critical on the wide range
of approaches and the use of different scales in global mindset research (Arora et al, 2004; Story et
al, 2014, Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017). Moreover, the field lacks empirical evidence and there are still
many ambiguities and unanswered questions (Levy et al, 2007).
The concept and definition of Cultural Intelligence, however, are highly harmonious within
the literature and describes cognitive, motivational and behavioural components (Earley & Ang,
2003; Thomas, 2006). Current literature, nevertheless, define the Cultural Intelligence concept by
cognitive components only (Thomas et al., 2015). To operationalise Global Mindset research, the
Cultural Intelligence Scale (CQS) is often used as a proxy for Individual Global Mindset (Earley &
Ang, 2003; Story et al, 2007). More recent research describes the problems associated with both
Global Mindset and Cultural Intelligence where both are treated as more or less the same and show
Overview of literature
Overview of Global Mindset literature (definitions, contributions, perspectives and unit of
analysis). Adopted from Levy et al (2007); Osland, J. S., Bird, A., & Mendenhall, M. (2012)
Andresen & Bergdolt (2017). Appendix 8 contains a similar overview including specific
characteristics of the Global Mindset construct.
Table 1 Literature Overview Global Mindset
Author Definition Contribution to the field Perspective Unit of Analysis
Perlmutter (1969) Geocentrism is a global systems approach to decision making where HQ’s and subsidiaries see themselves as part of an organic worldwide entity. Superiority is not equated with nationality. Good ideas come from any country and go to any country within the firm. Perlmutter’s notion of geocentrism serves as an underlying construct for many of the contemporary conceptualisations of global mindset that focus on the challenge of overcoming ingrained ethnocentrism and transcending nationally-entrenched perceptions Cultural Individual & Organisational Prahalad & Doz (1987) Global Mindset is a cognitive process of balancing different in country, business and functional interest. Firms are faced with the challenge of successfully managing environmental and strategic complexity and incorporating geographically distant operations and markets, while concurrently acting in response to local demands. Strategic Individual & Organisational Bartlett & Ghosal (1989) A transnational mindset recognises that environmental demands and opportunities vary widely from country to country and also recognises that different parts of the company possess different capabilities. Classification of the transnational organisation as the ideal organisation which is not a distinct strategic stance or a specific organisational model but is rather a new management mentality. Strategic Individual & Organisational Rhinesmith (1992, 1996) A Global Mindset is a way of being rather than a set of skills. It is an orientation of the world that allows one to see certain things that others do not. A Global Mindset means the ability to scan the world from a broad perspective, always looking for unexpected trends and The first to approach Global Mindset in a multidimensional way. Multi-dimensional Individual
Author Definition Contribution to the field Perspective Unit of Analysis or an opportunity to achieve personal, professional or organisational objectives Estienne (1997) An international mindset is willing to learn and able to adapt. Global competence is defined in terms of eight specific dimensions of knowledge, abilities, and personality characteristics. Knowledge can be developed. Personality characteristics do Multi-dimensional Individual Kedia & Mukherjee (1999) Global Mindset is the ability to manage complexity, showing a “glocal” orientation, openness to diversity and ability to show empathy. Three components that distinguish a Global Mindset: (1) unique times perspective (2) unique space perspective (3) general disposition to be open minded toward other people and cultures. Multi-dimensional Individual Paul (2000) Companies with a Global Mindset should possess: (1) the capability to enter any market in the world it chooses to compete. (2) the capability to take advantages of its worldwide resources in any competitive situation it finds itself. Key issues are that companies constantly look for market opportunities worldwide, process information on a global and constitutes a constant threat to competitors. Strategic Organisatio nal Gupta & Govindarajan (2002) Building on the language of differentiation and integration they define Global Mindset as high D -High I mindset in the context of different cultures and markets. More concretely they define a Global Mindset as one that combines an openness to and awareness of diversity across cultures and markets with a propensity and ability to synthesis across this diversity Global Mindset at the corporate level as the combined global mindset of the individuals that is then adjusted for the distribution of power and mutual influence among the group. To maintain global market leadership the firm must drive to develop a global mindset in every unit and every employee. Strategic Individual & Organisational Begley & Boyd (2003) Global Mindset is the ability to develop and interpret criteria for business performance that are not dependent on the assumptions of a single context and to implement those criteria appropriately in different context Organisational global mindset is the sum of the individual global mindset in an organisation. Cultural Organisatio nal Maznevski & Lane (2004) The ability to develop and interpret criteria for personal and business performance that are independent from the assumptions of a single country, culture or context; and to implement those criteria appropriately in different countries, cultures and contexts. Global Mindset allows managers to make decisions in a way that increases the ability of the firm to compete internationally. Multi-dimensional Individual Arora et al (2004) A person with a Global Mindset may be defined as one who can analyse concepts in a broad global array and one who has the flexibility to adapt to local environment and be sensitive to context. From a sample of managers they found that managers are better in thinking globally than acting locally. Global Mindset is related to different characteristics o.a. Demographics and Managers’ background. Strategic Individual
Author Definition Contribution to the field Perspective Unit of Analysis Numemela et al (2004) A Global Mindset is said to describe a manager’s openness to and awareness of cultural diversity and the ability to handle it. proactiveness on international markets, managers’s commitment to internationalist, and an international focus. A significant relationship was found between managers international work experience, firms’ market characteristics and global mindset, but no relations between education and global mindset. Strategic Individual Friedman (2005) Globalisation is defined in highly complex at the inexorable integration of markets, transportation systems and communication systems to a degree never witnessed before. Erosion of boundaries. The world is getting flatter. Multi-dimensional Individual & Organisational Beechler & Javidan (2007) Global mindset is an individual’s stock of knowledge, cognitive and psychological attributes that enable him/her to influence individuals, groups, and organisations from diverse sociocultural systems. The critical components of global mindset are intellectual capital, social capital and psychological capital. Multi-dimensional Individual Clapp-Smith et al. (2007) The cognitive ability that helps individuals figure out how to best understand and influence individuals, groups, and organisation from diverse social/cultural systems. The core construct that inform the influence from cognitive ability are cognitive complexity, cultural intelligence and positive psychological capital. Multi-dimensional Individual Levy et al. (2007) Define Global Mindset as a highly complex individual level cognitive structure characterised by an openness to and articulation of multiple cultural and strategic realties on both, global and local levels, and the cognitive ability to edit and integrate across this multiplicity. Intensive literature review on the construct of Global Mindset. Studies global mindset in relation to salient dimensions of the global environments 1. Cultural and national diversity and/or 2. Strategic complexity associated with globalisation Multi-dimensional Individual Story et al. (2007) The combination of having high scores on cultural intelligence (cognitive, motivational and metacognitive cultural intelligence and global business orientation represents global mindset. A global mindset is that of an individual who has a global business orientation and is adaptable to the local environment and culture. Multi-dimensional Individual Osland, Bird & Mendenhall (2012) Global Mindset is a cognitive structure composed of two constructs, cosmopolitanism (an enthusiastic appreciation of other cultures) and cognitive complexity (the ability to perceive situation as highly differentiated and to integrate these differentiated constructs). Suggest research in the field of Global Mindset on basis of an analysis of trends. One of the main problems with literature on Global Mindset is the use of international work experience as a surrogate measure. Cultural Individual & Organisational
Author Definition Contribution to the field Perspective Unit of Analysis Complexity, Cosmopolitan Outlook), Global Psychological Capital (Passion for Diversity, Quest for Adventure, Self-Assurance) and Global Social Capital (Intercultural empathy, Interpersonal Impact, Diplomacy) Andresen & Bergdolt (2017) A global mindset is defined as the capacity to function effectively within environments that are characterised by high cultural and business complexity. In order to function effectively within cross-cultural environments that are also characterised by high strategic business complexity, it is vital to possess - in addition to cognitive and motivational prerequisites - a specific attribute (mindset) characterised particularly by openness and cosmopolitanism Global Mindset shows major overlap with the cultural intelligence. Cultural Intelligence is a sufficient cross-cultural competency for operative management a global mindset becomes relevant at the strategic and normative management levels. Multi-dimensional Individual
3 | Theoretical
Framework
The Global Mindset Framework (Javidan & Walker, 2013) study showed that all three global capitals are interrelated and correlate highly among each other. Or put in different words, the capitals don’t develop in isolation. Developing one part of your Global Mindset influences in some way the development of other parts (Javidan & Walker, 2013). This further demonstrates the configurational complexity of a Global Mindset.
According to the researchers (Javidan & Walker, 2013) the cognitive dimension of Global Mindset is straightforward to develop. Knowledge is relatively easier to access through reading, listening and watching. Higher education in the Netherlands, especially Universities of Applied Sciences which embrace a practical approach to formal learning, focus on knowledge building in combination with behavioural aspects. Or as the mission of Amsterdam School of International Business portrays: ‘we create graduates with the hands-on skills, knowledge and global mindset to thrive in the world of international business5.
This research builds on some of the questions posed by key authors in the field “…I can’t help wonder how we should be preparing for such a [dynamic] global environment. Can a business school improve the Global Mindset of its student…” (Javidan, 2010) or for example Levy et al (2007) who leave us with a research agenda suggesting that Global Mindset as a capability can be developed but little is known about the dynamics of how this happens. Also, more recent research
starts out by questioning the components and different configurations that make up Global Mindset (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017) and point out the lack and contradiction in empirical research.
Formal learning has been positively associated with the promotion of Global Mindset in
individuals (Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999; Story et al, 2014). Also, knowledge building through Global
Intellectual Capital promotes Global Mindset through interrelated framework of capitals (Javidan &
Walker, 2013). Moreover, education in general, number of languages spoken and exposure through
travel abroad have been related to promoting Global Mindset in managers (Story et al, 2014).
Although the focus traditionally always has been on managers this research seeks to break open the
black box of international higher education through the lens of Individual Global Mindset.
This study, following an intensive literature review (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017), adopts the multidimensional approach of Global Mindset:
“A global mindset is defined as the capacity to function effectively within environments that are characterised by high cultural and business complexity. In order to function effectively within cross-cultural environments that are also characterised by high strategic business complexity, it is vital to possess - in addition to cognitive and motivational prerequisites - a specific attribute (mindset) characterised by openness and cosmopolitism” (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017)
The main goal of this research is to uncover core conditions and configuration of conditions of the construct of Global Mindset in a formal learning (university) setting. The main research
question “Which conditions or configurations of conditions of Formal Learning promote
Individual Global Mindset in undergraduate business students?” centres around Individual Global Mindset of students studying international business at Amsterdam School of International
Business. The researcher assumes that different conditions and configurations of conditions together
form a “solution” or insight into how Global Mindset is developed. This proposition recognises the
interrelation of Capital (Javidan & Walker, 2013) and the complexity of the construct of Global
Mindset. This research’s configurational approach emphasis that developing an Individual Global
Mindset does not necessarily follow a single path but can be achieved by different pathways of
conditions in Formal Learning. These individual pathways are reflected by the individual nature of
Global Mindset in students. Kedia & Mikherji, (1999) underlined the shift of managers’ orientation
from hard skills to soft skills through formal learning. These “soft skills” are described as manager’s
individual development of leadership styles, the notion of strong vision and the importance of values
and organisational culture (Tichy, 1992). In other words, individual different pathways or
configurations of conditions of Formal Learning may lead to Individual Global Mindset.
Proposition 1: Different conditions of Formal Learning and configurations of conditions
form different solutions for promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Considering the importance of Personal Characteristics (Story et al, 2014) in the context of
international background this research assumes that these characteristics have a fundamental impact
on cross cultural awareness and thus forms a key condition in the conceptual model (see figure 2) and
overall research design. Story et al (2014) empirically found the importance of positive psychological
capital in the development of an Individual Global Mindset. Positive Psychological Capital is
characterised by (1) strong confidence or self-efficacy to make things work (2) an optimism about the
future (3) perseverance and (4) resilience (Luthans et al., 2007). The assumption is that students with
applied sciences. In sum and in accordance with Story et al (2014) and Luthans et al (2007), these
students with international backgrounds are characterised by positive psychological capital and are
believed to have a head start in developing a Global Mindset.
Proposition 2: Student’s personal characteristics in the form of having an International
Background is a sufficient condition for promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Moreover, by addressing the importance of Personal Characteristics these conditions form an important part of any configuration with Formal Learning promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Proposition 1 B: Student’s personal characteristics in the form of having an International
Background configured with Formal Learning conditions form a solution for promoting
Individual Global Mindset.
Taking international context and cross-cultural opportunities along the lines of Formal
Learning, the researcher assumes that an international classroom and highly diverse student body
provides a sufficient condition for the promotion of Individual Global Mindset. An international
classroom is believed to benefit international students by enabling them to learn from each other and
share different cultural perspectives on business. These cross-cultural opportunities in Formal
Learning aid the development of a global perspective through intercultural interactions, knowledge
building of cultures, and acquiring skills and behaviour to make successful intercultural interactions
(Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999). Also, Smith (2012) recognises developing Global Mindset through
cultural experiences. Through purposeful training designed around interactions among international
students, students can learn from each other and develop cultural sensitivity, knowledge and
a Global Mindset with a Cosmopolitan Outlook through engaging with, and learning from others
different than yourself.
Proposition 3: An International Classroom is a sufficient condition for promoting
Individual Global Mindset.
Although Story et al (2014) found that international experience in the sense of travelling abroad only moderately correlated to the development of Global Mindset, Deloach et al (2003) found empirical evidence for short-term study abroad programmes to influence the development of a Global Mindset in students. Business programmes at Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences offer Study and Internship abroad modules as part of their study programmes. These conditions forces students not only to travel abroad but also to settle and live abroad. Story et al. (2014) conclude that individuals living abroad are more likely to increase their Global Mindset.
Proposition 4: Study Abroad and International Internship are sufficient conditions for
promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Both Story et al (2014) and Clapp-Smith (2007) support language proficiency and number of language spoken as a vehicle for the development of an Individual Global Mindset. In the model of Story et al (2014) the number of languages spoken was one of the few conditions relevant for developing an Individual Global Mindset. Although empirically the number of languages and
language proficiency are supported in Global Mindset academic literature (Story et al. 2014;
Clapp-Smith, 2007), little explanation is given about why this influences the development. Drawing from
the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (Kay & Kempton, 1984), learning a language influences how we think
learning process has the ability to change our mindset and may explain why languages and language
proficiency support the development of Individual Global Mindset. This research assumes on basis of
the findings of Story et al. (2014), Clapp-Smith (2007) and the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis that students who take on more than one language course and speak different languages with a high proficiency develop an Individual Global Mindset.
Proposition 5: Language courses and Language Proficiency in a Formal Learning setting
are a sufficient condition for promoting Individual Global Mindset.
Bringing these propositions together the following conceptual model can be drawn from the
existing literature and empirical findings. Figure 3 encompasses all propositions, conditions and the
Individual Global Mindset outcome.
Conceptual Model
Figure 3 Conceptual Model Conditions promoting Individual Global Mindset. See Table 2 for explanation of abbreviation of micro level conditions.
Conditions leading to the promotion of Individual Global Mindset are supported in the
Global Mindset and Intercultural Competence literature. This approach follows a comprehensive
approach, building on existing theories, explanations and hypotheses (Amenta & Poulsen, 1994).
Formal learning as a super set condition has been championed as the antecedent of Global Mindset in
managers (e.g. Kedia & Mukherjee, 1999; Story et al, 2014).
Breaking open the black box of formal learning allows for looking at more micro level
conditions. The conditions follow the international business curriculum of Amsterdam School of
International Business closely and are supported in literature as causally related to promoting
Individual Global Mindset. Although intended learning outcomes (ILO) of the curriculum and thus
the formulated conditions are multidimensional in approach (knowledge, cognition and behaviour
outcomes) the main idea of the conditions is grounded in literature (see table 2 Variables as
Conditions). Drawing from this body of theory, tools and insights this research proposes a
conceptual model with conditions promoting Individual Global Mindset in a university setting (see
Figure 3 Conceptual Model Promoting Individual Global Mindset). Table 2 Variables as Conditions
Meta concept Micro level condition Condition description Grounded in literature l L ea rni ng . ( Ke di a & Mu kh er je e,1 99 9; S to ry et a l, 20 14 ) International Classroom (IC) Number of foreign students in class. Studying with and among international student from different cultural backgrounds. Cosmopolitan outlook. (Javidan, 2000; Andresen & Bergdolt, 2017). Cultural experiences (Smith, 2012) Cross Cultural Awareness (CCA) Knowledge and awareness of how cultures work through purposefully designed training. Cosmopolitan outlook. (Javidan 2000; Andresen & Bergdolt 2017). Global Intellectual Capital (Javidan & Walker, 2013). Language Proficiency (LP) Number of languages spoken or being learned and language proficiency. Language skills. (Story et al., 2007; Clapp-Smith & Hughes 2007)
Personal Development (PD) Development of student’s capacity to evolve into a capable leader. E.g. global career services, personal branding, management behaviour. Global Social Capital (Javidan & Walker, 2013) Study Abroad (SA) Semester abroad at a partner university outside of the country of undergraduate study. Designed around building knowledge and experiences. Foreign travel. (Gregerson et al. 1998.) Cultural experiences. (Smith 2012). Global knowledge (Arora et al. 2004; Gupta et al. 2002). Living Abroad (Story et al, 2014; Deloach, 2003) International Internship (II) In company learning experience within multicultural teams and focussed on global assignments. Cultural Experiences. (Smith 2012). Global business savviness (Gregersen et al 1998). Global knowledge elements (Arora et al, 2004; Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002) Living Abroad (Story et al, 2014; Deloach, 2003) Working in International Team (IT) The opportunity to work in multi-cultural teams within a purposeful training setting. Cultural Experiences. (Smith, 2012). Global Social Capital (Javidan & Walker, 2013). Current Issues in Business (CI) By addressing the current issues in global business ILO focusses on global knowledge, business savviness and general awareness of global issues. Global knowledge elements (Arora et al, 2004; Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002). Global Intellectual Capital. (Javidan & Walker, 2013). Pe rs on al C ha ra cte ri st ic s. (S to ry e t a l. 20 14 ) International Friends (IF) Having international friends are the pivotal point of perfect cross-cultural interactions. Cosmopolitanism. (Andresen & Bergdolt 2017; Javidan 2010) International High School (IHS) Having studied at an international school or secondary education outside of the home university dominant background. Students from abroad have first-hand cross-cultural experiences. Cultural Experiences. (Smith, 2012). Relative international background (IB) International background as in birth place, growing up, parents background relative to the home universities dominant background. Diversity. Gupta & Govindarajan (2002). Social Psychological Capital (Story et al 2014; Javidan & Walker, 2013). Living Abroad (Story et al, 2014; Deloach, 2003)
