Validity of the theory and application of CQ

So is CQ or Intercultural Competence (ICC) overrated? I was thinking that perhaps we are emphasizing too much on it when there are other more important factors at play, like individual personality and style, technical and professional skills and self and relationship management rather than cultural factors.

Maybe it is hard for me to understand this because as a Singaporean, I don't think we have a very strong national culture. Yes, society may have influenced my values and thinking, but basically I don't feel very tied to the Singapore or Chinese or Singaporean Chinese culture. I don't know, it is a blind spot. Maybe some aspects of Singapore culture which I may have adopted are: efficiency and task-focused rather than people-oriented which may have manifested in a rather brash and quick way of speaking, acceptance of diversity, more individualistic than communal and competitive. Maybe you speak to Indian, Chinese or Japanese and they feel strongly aligned with their national culture and yes, agree quickly that culture and ICC plays a difference. Then again, yea, maybe I am strongly influenced by the 'Singaporean Culture' after all.

So some 'facts' are established here:

1. Individuals have idiosyncrasies. At the level of friendship and informal interaction, esp in an intercultural environment, it is probably not accurate to perceive them on a cultural basis, which leads to stereotyping.
2. But as a group, cultural differences probably emerge because after all, culture is 'group speak'. This is especially so when it comes to formal business or tasks because though you may be dealing with an individual, her capacity (i shall stop using the chauvenistic pronoun) is representative of an organization or institution, which is influenced by 'group speak' or cultural values.
3. In a multinatinal organization, people's acculturation into the multinational culture or home culture of the organization depends on a. the duration of time she has been in the organization. b. her previous work experiences. c. the cultural distance between her national culture and the culture of the home organization and d. the salience of organizational identity and organizational culture.
4. The above is a more complex scenario. Of course when an expat is sent overseas, it is very clear that congnizance and acceptance of the other (one) culture has to be undertaken; it is a one way cultural exchange, and what needs to be done is probably more clear-cut (eg training programmes).
5. But in an MNO, a number of factors have to be managed by the HR (culture management): understanding of its own culture and how it may relate to/differ from employees, beneficiaries and sponsors' culture and expectations, taking time to build up its own organizational culture and choosing people carefully through recruitment process (minding past experiences and culture orientation besides techinical skills).  A scaled-down version of organizational cultural management will also take place at the level of multicultural teams. In other words, employees have to be chosen and trained into the organizational culture which is usually reflective of national culture in its values, mission and manner of doing things.

So my conclusion at this point of time could be that yes, professional skills and relationship management evidenced through a record of team work and recommendations are essential, but depending on the nature of the job, and the nature of the organization (if applicant is foreign), CQ serves an important facilitative role (for communication, negotation and 'knowledge transfers'). It thus has to be placed in its proper perspective as not core or primary, but a conduit or important complement to organizational strategy and goals.

In fact, one could say that the personal or career development of the employee is part of training her towards CQ or ICC if the org is an MNO because job effectiveness enables her to see that job motivation and acculturation to org culture can be pursued  despite or through leveraging on cultural diversity.


Phew. I may be writing the obvious here, but heck, it is not obvious to me all the time. I hope this helps to sort out my thoughts.