Home » cross-cultural management
Category Archives: cross-cultural management
AI is Reshaping Work. So are Global Teams. HR is Struggling with Both.
There is no shortage of conversation about how artificial intelligence is transforming organizations. Automated workflows, AI-assisted hiring, predictive analytics for talent management, large language models handling tasks that once required specialists. The discourse is loud, the investment is huge, and so is the pressure on HR functions to respond.
Amongst all this noise, a quieter transformation has been underway for much longer, and it still hasn’t received the strategic attention it deserves. Global teams, cross-border, multicultural, often virtual groups that do the real coordination work of international organizations, have been reshaping how work gets done for decades. Most multinational organizations rely on them heavily. Most HR functions have still not figured out how to support them properly.
That gap matters more now, not less. As AI takes over more of the transactional and analytical work that has historically occupied HR departments, what remains is precisely the kind of complex, relational, culturally-embedded challenge that global teams represent. The organizations that will get the most from AI are the ones that also get the human side of global work right. That is HR’s territory.
The model that no longer fits
The traditional architecture of international HRM was built around the expatriate assignment. Identify a high-potential employee, send them abroad for a year or two, provide cross-cultural training (sometimes), manage the repatriation, hope the organization retains them long enough to recoup the investment. This model made sense in a world where international work was episodic and expensive, where getting someone into a foreign market required physical presence and a significant organizational commitment.
That world has not disappeared, but it has been joined by something far more pervasive. The real international work in most organizations today is not happening through planned assignments. It is happening in global teams – distributed groups whose members coordinate across time zones, languages, and cultural contexts, often without ever meeting in person. These teams are not the exception. They are the infrastructure.
And yet the HR systems designed to support international work are still oriented largely toward the individual assignee. Selection, training, performance appraisal, compensation, repatriation: the whole apparatus assumes that international experience is something that happens to one person at a time, in one place at a time. It does not account for the collective, simultaneous, permanently ongoing nature of global team work.
The cost of getting this wrong
The consequences are not abstract. Research consistently shows that cross-cultural training programs, the kind organizations routinely offer to international assignees, typically one to two days in duration, have mixed effects at best. Generic approaches that do not engage with the specific cultural dynamics of a particular team, in a particular organizational context, tend to produce little measurable change. Meanwhile, seventy percent of firms do not even source international assignees from outside their traditional talent pools, meaning that international experience and the career advantages it brings remain concentrated in a small number of people, in a small number of locations.
Return on investment is rarely calculated rigorously, and when it is, the results are uncomfortable. When expatriates leave within a few years of returning home, taking their accumulated international knowledge with them, the organizational benefit of the assignment largely walks out the door. The costs, financial and human, were real. The returns were largely personal.
What global teams make possible
Global teams offer a fundamentally different model. They distribute international exposure across a much wider group of people, simultaneously, at considerably lower cost, and without the relocation risks, dual career complications, and repatriation failures that make traditional assignments so difficult to manage. A team whose members are working across Frankfurt, Singapore, Wellington, and Dublin is already engaged in sustained, task-based, cross-cultural collaboration that no training program can replicate. They are learning by doing, in real time, work that actually matters to the organization. This has implications across three dimensions that HR has been slow to fully appreciate.
On diversity, global teams are inherently diverse, and that diversity, when well-supported, generates creativity, broader perspective-taking, and more robust problem-solving. The challenge is not the diversity itself but the organizational climate surrounding it. Firms that design HR policies oriented toward actively leveraging difference, rather than simply managing it, that reward cross-border collaboration structurally and make it visible in performance systems, are the ones that turn the potential of global teams into actual organizational capability.
On talent, global team participation is one of the most effective development environments an organization can provide. High performers in these teams are demonstrating in real time exactly the competencies that organizations claim to want in future global leaders: cultural intelligence, the ability to build trust across distance, comfort navigating ambiguity, skill at integrating knowledge from multiple contexts simultaneously. HR systems that recognize and reward these contributions are identifying leadership potential far more accurately than any assessment center designed for a single-culture context.
On integration, global teams are a knowledge and coordination infrastructure, not just a staffing arrangement. Members learn from one another about local markets, institutional contexts, and ways of working, converting tacit knowledge into something the wider organization can access and use. They build lateral networks across units and geographies that no organizational chart can manufacture. In doing this, they are performing some of the most strategically valuable integration work in the firm. Most HR systems are not measuring it, let alone rewarding it.
Why this is urgent now
Here is where AI becomes relevant. As artificial intelligence absorbs more of the transactional work of HR, the routine screening, the scheduling, the compliance monitoring, the reporting, what is left is the work that requires genuine human judgment in complex, relational, culturally-variable and flexible situations. Global teams provide this. They cannot be managed by algorithm. They require investment in selection processes that identify people with the disposition to work across cultural boundaries. They require performance frameworks that capture collective contribution, not just individual output.
Organizations that are investing heavily in AI-driven HR tools while leaving their global team infrastructure unsupported are automating the easier problems while leaving the harder ones unaddressed. The human complexity of coordinating across cultures, building trust without physical proximity, and integrating genuinely different ways of thinking about problems is not going to be solved by technology.
What needs to change
HR functions that take global teams seriously invest in selection criteria that identify people with real cross-cultural capability, not just those who have already lived abroad or speak multiple languages. They design performance assessment processes that capture what teams produce collectively, not just what individuals contribute. They create development programs that use global team participation itself as a training environment, because sustained interaction across cultural boundaries builds competence far more effectively than any structured intervention. And they ensure that the experience and networks built through global teamwork are formally recognized, rewarded, and connected to visible career pathways.
None of this is technically complicated. It does not require new AI tools or advanced analytics, though those can help at the margins. It requires a strategic decision to treat global teams as a core organizational capability.
The question worth asking
Every organization using global teams, and that is most of them, is already assuming that distributed, cross-cultural collaboration can work. The question is whether HR is providing any serious support, or whether it is still designing systems for a world where international work means one person, one country, one assignment at a time.
In an era currently preoccupied with what AI can do and the future of work, the more pressing question for most organizations should be what their people, spread across borders and cultures, are actually capable of together.
More reading:
Mockaitis, A. I., Zander, L., & De Cieri, H. (2018). The benefits of global teams for international organizations: HR implications. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(14), 2137–2158. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1428722
Understanding Openness to Change among Lithuanian Generations
VALUEHOST is a three-year research project funded by the Lithuanian Research Council. We explore changing Lithuanian values, with a focus on emigrants and their experiences in their host countries. In this post, I introduce some interesting findings from one of our studies on changing values at home.
We have analyzed data between the years 2010-2020, from the European Social Survey database on individuals’ values. In this study, we were interested in exploring whether values can change in the short term. Scholars have long held that values are enduring, and that they are very slow to change. In societies, this change would be steady, and progressive over generations. Typically, we notice these differences by comparing our own values with those of our parents’ generation.
But much of the research on values change has been in the context of relatively stable advanced economies. Generations here have labels which we all know: Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y, etc. Societies in the former USSR, though, have had different social, political, and economic transformations. Their process of modernization has been quite different.
In our study, we distinguish between generations which we link to political eras. People who grew up in these different eras in Lithuania acquired their values during vastly different historical periods. Some periods were more turbulent than others. We label them the Stalin generation for individuals born before 1945. The Soviet generation includes those born between 1945 and 1969. The late Soviet generation comprises those born from 1970 to 1989. The Independent EU generation includes individuals born after 1989. One of our aims was to compare the values of these different political generations to one another and over time.
Here we look at one of the results on Openness to Change values, derived from the work of Shalom Schwartz. This is a measure that combines three personal values: self-direction, stimulation and hedonism. Self-direction encompasses the extent to which individuals value independence in thought and action. Stimulation reflects how much people value excitement, novelty and challenges in life. And hedonism refers to the pursuit of personal pleasure or immediate gratification.
We compared six rounds of surveys across more than 11,000 individuals, starting in 2010, and every two years thereafter.
In the figure, we can see that openness to change appears to fluctuate over the years. Some generations are quite similar, but one stands out – the Independent EU generation. These are individuals, who, at the time of the survey, were between the ages of 18 and 30. For the other generations, openness to change declines slightly but increases over time by survey round 10 in 2020. We see the opposite in the youngest generation. Here, openness to change declines steadily over the years. In the final survey round, there is a slight increase. But overall, openness to change has declined for this generation during the 10 years up to 2020.
We would be interested in hearing your thoughts about why this has happened.
Explore the Elgar Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural Management
The Elgar Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural Management is available now! Access the first chapter and introductory content for FREE here.
The Elgar Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural Management, edited by Professor Audra I. Mockaitis (Maynooth University) and Professor Christina L. Butler (Kingston University), is the first reference book of its kind in the field. The book reflects the eclectic and interdisciplinary nature of cross-cultural management. It includes entries from scholars in cross-cultural psychology, business and management, anthropology, linguistics, sociology, and political science. These contributions form a collective discourse about the evolution and trajectory of the field. Authors present a range of perspectives, theories, and concepts. They challenge traditional paradigms. Together, they offer new multi-paradigmatic explanations to cross-cultural phenomena. Suitable for scholars, students and practitioners, the collection presents the state-of-the art in the cross-cultural management field.
Elgar Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural Management Launching in October 2024
The presses are still hot as a new book is coming out in October, 2024. Edited by me and Professor Christina L. Butler from Kingston University, UK, the Elgar Encyclopedia of Cross-Cultural Management is the first reference book of its kind in the field.
The book reflects the eclectic and interdisciplinary nature of the field of cross-cultural management, with entries from scholars in the cross-cultural psychology, business and management, anthropology, linguistics, sociology, and political science disciplines, contributing to a collective discourse about the evolution and trajectory of the field. Authors present a range of perspectives, theories, and concepts, challenge traditional paradigms, and collectively offer new multi-paradigmatic explanations to cross-cultural phenomena.
Suitable for: scholars from various disciplines, as a guide to new developments in the field; students in any major that has a cross-cultural component to the curriculum (e.g., psychology, management, international business, sociology….) as a useful reference; and anyone with a curiosity about cross-cultural management.
The collection presents the state-of-the art in the cross-cultural management field. Written by eminent scholars from across the globe, entries include summaries, commentaries, and new perspectives on both theory and research. There are 78 chapters, or entries, in eight subject groups:
- Conceptualizations and Components of Culture
- Similarities and Differences across Cultures
- Interacting across Cultures
- Developing Cultural Awareness
- Cultural Identity and Diversity
- The Cross-Cultural Management of People
- Organizational and Institutional Perspectives
- Perspectives on Cross-Cultural Management
Available to purchase on the publisher’s website , AMAZON, Barnes & Noble, and other places!
ISBN: 978 1 80392 817 3
Professor Audra I. Mockaitis 