ChapterPDF Available

The concept of business expatriates

May 2017

DOI:10.4337/9781784718183.00010

In book: The Research Handbook of Expatriates
Publisher: Edward Elgar

Authors:

Yvonne Kallane

The University of Notre Dame Australia

Chris Brewster

University of Reading

Content uploaded by Yvonne Kallane

Content may be subject to copyright.

THE CONCEPT OF BUSINESS EXPATRIATES

Accepted for publication in

RESEARCH HANDBOOK OF EXPATRIATES (EDWARD ELGAR)

Citation:

McNulty, Yvonne & Chris Brewster (2016), ‘The concept of business expatriates’, In Yvonne

McNulty and Jan Selmer (eds.), Research Handbook of Expatriates, Cheltenham, Edward

Elgar (FORTHCOMING).

Do not quote, cite, disseminate or re-publish without permission from the authors.

Yvonne McNulty, Ph.D.

School of Business

SIM University

461 Clementi Road

Singapore 599491

Email: ymcnulty@expatresearch.com

Telephone: +65.9107.6645

2. The Concept of Business Expatriates

Yvonne McNulty and Chris Brewster

Introduction

We provide an overview of the conceptual development of business expatriates over

the past 50 years. We do so in order to clarify the terms and concepts used to define

business expatriates in the midst of an increasing level of “international mobility

confusion” about expatriates in general (Andresen, Bergdolt, Margenfeld, &

Dickmann, 2014, p. 2). We suggest this confusion has arisen from the absence of a

clear conceptual definition about expatriates, and business expatriates (those

employed in organizations) in particular (see Podsakoff, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff,

2016). Although past ideas in expatriate studies have been insightful (e.g., Guzzo,

Noonan, & Elron, 1994; Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985; Yan, Zhu, & Hall, 2002), recent

changes in our collective understanding about expatriates requires new theorizing (see

Locke, 2007). Our point of departure from prior summaries of international mobility

taxonomies (i.e., empirically driven categorizations; e.g., Andresen & Biemann,

2013), typologies of international work (i.e., theoretically driven categorizations; e.g.,

Andresen et al., 2014), and reviews of global work experiences (Shaffer, Kraimer,

Chen, & Bolino, 2012) is that we do not broaden the scope of global work beyond

expatriation as others have done. Rather, due to an increasing proliferation of terms

and sloppy application of concepts in the field of expatriate studies, most especially

over the last decade, our goal is to narrow the focus to establish construct clarity

(Locke, 2012) and to develop a theory-specific statement (Suddaby, 2010), in this

case about business expatriates. Our intention is three-fold: (1) to illustrate poor

construct clarity by demonstrating that the word ‘expatriate’ no longer adequately

describes the concept it claims to investigate in management studies (see Molloy &

Ployhart, 2012); (2) to assist the field of expatriate studies to be clearer about whom it

is actually researching (cf. Boddewyn, Toyne, & Zaida, 2004); and, (3) to stimulate

and provoke a necessary debate towards improving conceptualization of the business

expatriate concept, from which more relevant, and perhaps even novel, theoretical

insights can be gained in the future (see LePine & Wilcox-King, 2010).

In this chapter, we provide an overview of early academic research on

expatriates in general, and of business expatriates more specifically, in light of the

rapid growth in new forms of expatriates and other types of international work

(Bozkurt & Mohr, 2011; Collings, Scullion, & Morley, 2007). We use our own work

and the work of others to critically reflect upon a long history of conceptualizing that

has simultaneously contributed to new knowledge about business expatriates as well

as (in our opinion) limited its potential. To focus our critique, we first conducted an

extensive search of the academic literature, in English, from the most common

databases including Business Source Complete, Google Scholar and Web of Science

(including EBSCO Host, IngentaConnect, Emerald Fulltext, and PsychINFO among

others), as well as manual searches to locate chapters and monographs. As our

intention was to be as exhaustive as possible within the limits of searchable databases,

we searched for peer-reviewed and non-peer reviewed journal articles, chapters and

books and unpublished works/theses, regardless of year of publication, impact factor

and discipline as others might have done (see Andresen et al., 2014; Kraimer, Bolino,

& Mead, 2016). Following others (e.g., Tharenou, 2016), we used more than 20

keywords to search titles and abstracts for relevant articles dating back as far as could

be found, a sample of which includes the keywords expatriate(s), expatriation, global

mobility, international mobility, repatriate(s), repatriation, inpatriate(s),

impatriate(s), international assignment(s), assignee(s), global career(s), international

career(s), international work, migrant(s), migration, immigrant(s), immigration,

sojourner(s), business traveller(s), and flexpatriates(s). With these articles in hand,

we then adopted a branching approach to segment a range of common themes in this

literature about international workers and their international work experiences, which

suggests that the majority of articles and studies fall into one of four categories –

business expatriates, sojourners, migrants, and business travellers.

Based on extant literature and our overview, we begin by defining expatriates

more broadly and providing an overview of the categorization of international work

experiences. We then critique the conceptualization of business expatriates by first

discussing the problem of terminological confusion in the field of expatriate studies in

general and then developing a clearer theory-specific statement about business

expatriates in particular. Next, we examine business expatriates in the literature and

categorize them into two streams – organization-assigned expatriates (AEs) and self-

initiated expatriates (SIEs) – including in each stream their various types and forms.

Critiquing the literature to determine the distinction between business expatriates and

sojourners, migrants and business travellers follows this. Lastly we draw some

conclusions for future research.

Defining Expatriates More Broadly

In its simplest form, the broadest definition of ‘expatriate’ is that of a person living

outside their native country (Oxford Dictionary of English, 2015) or that has been

sent or exiled abroad (Collins Dictionaries, 2011). Green (2009, p. 308) contends that

expatriation is a contradictory concept whereby,

The meaning of expatriation … varies depending on who is initiating the act,

the state or the individual, and whether or not it is voluntary. The state

banishes; the subject can choose to depart.

In the last century, the term ‘expatriate’ was historically used to describe Westerners

that have lived abroad for varying lengths of time (Cleveland, Mangone, & Adams,

1960; Copeland & Griggs, 1985; Fechter, 2007; Lay, 1925), including artists,

musicians, colonials, writers (e.g., Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Stein), and generally

anyone else (e.g., small-scale entrepreneurs, teachers, those working for small local

NGOs, students, interns, journalists, and volunteers) with a mission of some kind

(Curnutt, 2000). If in paid employment, they are typically classified as ‘local hires’

and they received local salaries (Bickers, 2010; Cohen, 1977; Earnest, 1968;

Morrison, 1993). Recently, the term expatriate has also been used widely to describe

all categories of movers, including migrants (Al Ariss & Syed, 2011; Andresen et al.,

2014). Doing so suggests that the number of expatriates globally is extremely large,

e.g., perhaps over 200 million (Clarke, Akhentoolove, & Punnett, 2016). Fechter

(2007, p. 6) notes that,

the word ‘expatriate’ is recognized across the spectrum of different foreign

nationalities [despite the fact that] the term ‘expatriate’ is socially contested,

politically and morally charged, ambiguous, and is linked to particular notions

of ethnicity and class … [a] pertinent reason to employ the term is its

prominence in discourse among foreigners, whether through positive

identification or emphatic dissociation.

Green (2009) argues that a truly historical understanding of expatriates requires

interpretation of their contribution to the international labour market through various

phases that include ‘welcomed newcomer’ to ‘traitor’, and eventually ‘emissary’ (p.

307). In noting that the definition of expatriates can be contradictory, where

interpretations include expatriation as a form of exile by third parties (i.e., all foreign-

born persons living abroad, regardless of the current or eventual duration of their stay;

Dumont & Lemaitre, 2005), as well as a voluntary act on the part of individuals (i.e.,

withdrawing one's self from residence in, or allegiance to, one's native country;

Collins Dictionaries, 2011), common to most definitions is the idea that expatriates

engage in physical mobility by “geographically relocating across national borders”

(Andresen et al., 2014, p. 2303). Like migrants, expatriates have been conceptualized

as living somewhere other than in their home country – ‘home’ as determined by their

passport and citizenship1, thus undertaking a “change in their dominant place of

residence” (p. 2303). Based on a combination of extant literature (e.g., Andresen et

al., 2014; Aycan & Kanungo, 1997; Green, 2009), the broadest definition of an

‘expatriate’ is therefore of,

a person who lives outside their native country, and is physically mobile across

international borders, whether for professional or personal reasons, whether for

short or long periods of time, whether organizationally sponsored or not, and

regardless as to whether one is crossing an ocean (‘going overseas’, as one

might do from Brazil to Australia) or moving across land (‘going abroad’, as

one might do from the USA to Canada).

Importantly, this broad definition encompasses all the categories to which

expatriates can belong, i.e., anybody who ventures abroad for a finite (whether a

relatively short or long) period of time, including those who might eventually do so

permanently, and for purposes that range from paid and unpaid employment to

professional and personal aspirations, family and personal life, supply of and demand

for one’s occupation, politics, personal finances, and personality (Andresen, Biemann,

& Pattie, 2012; Dickmann, Doherty, Mills, & Brewster, 2008; Hippler, 2009; Selmer

& Lauring, 2011). Critically, the requirement for physical (as opposed to

psychological) mobility excludes employees whose roles do not require short or long-

term geographical relocation and/or movement, e.g., virtual expatriates (Collings et

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

1 There is an argument to be made, however, as to whether citizenship or legal residency status matters.

Consider, for example, that the children of expatriates, despite having a passport of their parents’

home-countr(ies), may never have lived there and view themselves as ‘expatriates’ when they visit

there with their parents. Conversely, these same children may consider a country in which they are

born and have lived most of their life as ‘home’, although technically their lack of citizenship to that

country deems them to be an expatriate. These children, as adults, might very well be viewed as global

citizens for whom ‘home’ could be anywhere, and ‘expatriate’ could be a constant state of being no

matter where they are, e.g., even if they repatriate to their passport country to attend university, for

example, they will likely feel more like an expatriate there than in the ‘host-country’ from which they

have come. "

al., 2007), global virtual team members and global domestics (Shaffer et al., 2012),

and domestic international managers (Tharenou & Harvey, 2006) and global

managers with worldwide co-ordination responsibilities (Cappellen & Janssens,

2010b) that do not engage in business travel.

Categorizing International Workers: An Overview

Prior research has categorised international workers and their international work

experiences using typologies and taxonomies in a number of ways. Some research has

classified international workers according to the purposes of their assignment (Derr &

Oddou, 1991; Edström & Galbraith, 1977, 1994; Hays, 1974; Mayrhofer, 2001;

Torbiörn, 1994), their profession (Mahroum, 2000), or their types (Andresen et al.,

2014). Others have focused on career trajectories including approaches to the

international experience (Andresen & Biemann, 2013; Siljanen & Lamsa, 2009) and

career orientations (Zikic, Bonache, & Cerdin, 2010); or the frequency of mobility,

i.e., the number of times they go abroad (Borg, 1988; Suutari, 2003), the number of

countries they work in or the businesses they work for (Banai & Harry, 2004;

Nasholm, 2014), and their length of stay in the host-country (Fukuda & Chu, 1994).

Still others have used classifications that focus on combinations that include the

length of the assignment and intensity of the individual’s cultural exposure (Baruch,

Dickmann, Altman & Bournois, 2013; Harris, Brewster, & Sparrow, 2003; Peiperl &

Jonsen, 2007; Suutari, Brewster, Riusala, & Syrjakari, 2013), assignment length,

number of assignments and commitment toward global assignments (McPhail, Fisher,

Harvey, & Moeller, 2012), and high or low degrees of non-work disruption, cognitive

flexibility and physical mobility (Shaffer et al., 2012).

For our purposes here, we are interested in business expatriates and that leads

us to exclude from our definition three other groups in our categorization: sojourners,

migrants and business travellers, which we explain later in the chapter. We use two

initial dimensions at the core of the expatriate definition – time and purpose – to

justify our categorization as well as our exclusion of these three categories when

defining business expatriates. Our goal in doing so is to overcome international

mobility confusion by providing greater construct clarity about the fundamental

concept which is, we believe, at the heart of our research: business expatriates. We

argue that sloppy and imprecise definitions threaten the construct validity of the

expatriate concept because the measures used in empirical studies may not accurately

represent the underlying concept being tested (Cappelli, 2012). It may then be

difficult to draw inferences from research and to quantitatively assess and compare

findings across studies (see Bono & McNamara, 2011).

Terminological Confusion

We detail below the recent interest in expanding analysis of the different forms of

expatriation. This has usefully widened the scope and depth of the subject and made a

valuable contribution to establishing the field of expatriate studies and in guiding

research. But it has also led to an increasingly sloppy use of language, the import of

meaningless jargon more appropriate to ‘consultancy’ reports, and general confusion

in the use of concepts. This seems to apply much more in the international

management (IM) and international human resource management (IHRM) fields,

though other disciplines that study expatriates (migration, population studies, human

geography, organizational psychology and behaviour) have not been immune. We

argue that there is now a considerable problem with ‘jangle fallacy’ (Molloy &

Ployhart, 2012) and a series of ill-thought through constructs that “do not necessarily

sum to a coherent whole” (Johnson, Rosen, Chang, Djurdjevic, & Taing, 2012, p. 63).

We contend that for serious academic endeavor construct clarity is vital. It is

necessary to challenge existing assumptions and to develop greater clarity in the

meaning attached to the term ‘business expatriate’ which, we argue, is the implied

focus of the majority of research conducted in the field of expatriate studies but which

is not made explicit. Our endeavor is especially necessary in light of a plethora of

different sets of authors defining expatriates in different ways in terms of the overall

scope of expatriation, the range of potential means of expatriation, and its various

types (e.g., Andresen & Biemann, 2013; Collings et al., 2007; Doherty & Dickmann,

2013; Mayrhofer et al., 2012; McPhail et al., 2012; Shaffer et al., 2012). Some of the

typologies contribute to theory building (see Doty & Glick, 1994 for a critique) and

some empirically examine the classificatory structures they propose (e.g., Andresen et

al., 2014; Andresen & Biemann, 2013; Cappellen & Janssens, 2010; Cappellen &

Janssens, 2010a). Andresen et al. (2014) systematically reviewed existing definitions

of AEs, SIEs and migrants in general and, as Tharenou (2016, p. 1) summarised it,

found 246 definitions of the terms. Their qualitative content analysis indicated no

consistency in how AEs, SIEs and migrants were defined, also revealing that

several criteria were used … They concluded that there were problems with

construct definition and validity, especially for the migrant construct: ‘migrant’

was an umbrella construct for all types of expatriate, but that some migrants were

not expatriates. The conclusion suggests that a careful initial conceptualization of

the constructs of AE, SIE and [skilled migrants] in empirical studies is required for

clarity and distinctiveness.

Other typologies and taxonomies suffer from familiar problems in expatriate research

(small samples, limited country coverage, atypical firms, unreliable measures of a

single informant, lacking in theoretical underpinnings; e.g., Al Ariss, 2010; Harrison

& Michailova, 2013; Richardson, McKenna, Dickie & de Gama, 2013; see Cascio,

2012 and Kraimer et al., 2016 for important critiques) and confuse different levels of

analysis. Some are just descriptive or even prescriptive (Baruch et al., 2013).

Many expatriate studies use different terminology to refer to the same thing: for

example, corporate expatriate/ corporate executive/ corporate manager/ expatriate

manager/ managerial expatriates/ managerial candidates (Andreason, 2008;

Hammer, Hart, & Rogan, 1998; Harvey, 1989; Harvey & Moeller, 2009; Linehan &

Scullion, 2002; Spiess & Wittmann, 1999; Tan & Mahoney, 2004; Thomas et al.,

2005); international manager/ international assignee/ international personnel/

internationally mobile managers (Andresen & Biemann, 2013; Arthur & Bennett,

1995; Forster, 1992; Harvey, 1997; Osman-Gani & Akmal, 2008); international

assignments/ international work assignments/ expatriate appointments/ overseas

assignments/ long-term assignments (Fish & Wood, 1996; Gomez-Mejia & Balkin,

1987; Kraimer et al., 2016; McNulty et al., 2013; Tung, 1981); expatriates of host

country origin /ex-host-country nationals/ ethnically similar-ethnically different

expatriates (Fan, Cregan, Harzing & Köhler, 2016; Fan, Zhang, & Zhu, 2013; Thite et

al., 2009; Tung, 2008; Tung & Lazarova, 2006); and, international expatriate

management/ international HRM/ expatriate HRM (Brewster & Scullion, 1997; Fish

& Wood, 1993). In other (even recent) instances terminology is redundant as, for

example, in the case of foreign expatriates (Holtbrugge & Ambrosius, 2015), or

foreign sojourns (Baruch et al., 2013) and foreign assignments (Anderzen & Arnetz,

1997; Daniels & Insch, 1998). The latter is an example of where meanings have been

poorly defined and terms are used interchangeably in the one article (see

'international,' 'expatriate,' 'overseas,' and 'foreign' assignment which are used

interchangeably in Kraimer et al., 2016, p. 17; Kraimer, Shaffer, Harrison & Ren,

2012, p. 404; Thomas et al., 2005, p. 341; Yan et al., 2002, p. 373). Other troubling

examples include using the term ‘expatriates’ (to imply ‘AEs’) to exclude other

groups that have already been conceptualised as business expatriates – see, for

10"

example (among a sample of many possibilities), how Collings et al. (2007, p. 204)

use self-initiated expatriates in contrast to expatriates, when in reality all are business

expatriates:

The key implication of the increasing number of SIEs who are joining the

global labor market is that MNCs can make use of these employees … at a

lower cost than expatriates.

Yanadori (2015, p. 195) also uses the term ‘expatriates’ but specifically excludes

TCNs (possibly implying that their compensation may differ from traditional

expatriates), despite that TCNs have for many years been conceptualized as business

expatriates:

When subsidiary managers are not expatriates – they could be either HCNs

or TCNs – the design of their compensation practices has attracted

researchers’ attention.

A particularly big problem is that the field of expatriate studies seems to have a

penchant for inventing new labels that almost always refer to categories for which

there is an already perfectly serviceable term. Examples (again, among a sample of

many possibilities such as the above as well as others) include: flexpatriates

(Mayerhofer, Hartmann, & Herbert, 2004) for repeated or extended frequent travel;

propatriate/ glopatriate/ SICEs/ OSIEs/ intra-SIEs/ CAEs (Altman & Baruch, 2012;

Andresen et al., 2014; McNulty, De Cieri & Hutchings, 2009; McPhail et al., 2012;

Richardson et al., 2013) for AEs; inter-SIEs and drawn expatriates (Andresen et al.,

2014) for SIEs; and halfpats (Teagarden, 2010) for bi-culturals. The result is that,

rather than becoming clearer, the subject matter of expatriation has become

increasingly muddied. Not only do researchers often fail to define their terms

adequately, but they make (often unstated) assumptions about the people they are

researching; that, for example, they will all have been sent from their MNC’s

headquarters, or that they are all managers, or that they all know nothing about their

11"

new country before arriving there, or that forms of international experience that were

previously un-discussed in the literature are suddenly ‘new’ or ‘growing’ just because

there is more literature about them. This makes the comparison of findings difficult,

or worse, impossible because we cannot be sure whom it is that people are actually

researching.

While some would argue, inevitably, that a multitude of terms being used to

describe ‘business expatriates’ is of less consequence than the underpinning

characteristics and implied meanings they represent, we strongly suggest that

continued ambiguity surrounding the business expatriate term does not need to be

tolerated, nor should it be. If it were, then research in the area of expatriate studies

would continue to be compromised by terminological sloppiness and jangle fallacy

(Molloy & Ployhart, 2012) resulting in the worrying problems of construct

redundancy and construct proliferation, i.e., where “old and new constructs overlap to

such an extent they are largely interchangeable” resulting in a “proliferation of

definitions, indeterminate construct boundaries, and confounded measures” that

causes confusion and misinterpretation (Klein & Delery, 2012, p. 59). Based on our

overview of the literature, it has already led to a poor understanding of the

underpinning characteristics of business expatriates. It has further resulted in an

inability to compare specific research findings or, if they are compared, the risk is that

such comparisons are dubious, leaving the field developing a series of independent

projects from which we can learn little and, practically, of failing to support global

staffing practices for expatriates and the MNEs that employ them.

Building on other efforts (e.g., Andresen et al., 2014; Aycan & Kanungo, 1997;

Harrison, Shaffer & Bhaskar-Shrinivas, 2004; Shaffer et al., 2012), it is necessary to

challenge existing assumptions and to develop greater clarity in the meaning attached

12"

to the term business expatriate. Following Suddaby’s (2010) advice, while there are

likely to be additional descriptions and terms that can be found in extant literature

about business expatriates that will emerge in new research to add to those presented

here, especially needed is “clear agreement on the substantive definitional content” (p.

348) - in this case about business expatriates - and that it is linked to their core

characteristics. Molloy and Ployhart (2012) argue that the problems of construct

redundancy and construct proliferation exist not because a concept lacks sufficient

operationalization, but because “the theoretical argument as to what the construct is –

and why – is left implicit” (p. 154). This leads us to the conclusion that the field of

expatriate studies requires, as a starting point, a theory-specific statement about

business expatriates.

Defining Business Expatriates: A Theory Specific Statement

To establish a theory-specific statement about business expatriates, we first review for

what purpose they are used. Business expatriates have as their major purposes

(Edström & Galbraith, 1977; Harzing, 2001; Tharenou, 2013): (a) managerial control

of the foreign subsidiary and coordinating with headquarters; (b) transferring firm-

specific knowledge, skills and culture; (c) developing managers for international

positions; and (d) filling positions when qualified personnel are not available.

Notably, these purposes reflect the skills and abilities attributable to business

expatriates who are both AEs and SIEs. Tharenou (2013) suggests, for example, that

SIEs (defined as “professionals and managers who, unsupported by an organization,

expatriate to seek work in a host country for an indefinite period, usually over a year”;

p. 336) are not a suitable alternative to corporate assigned expatriates (also known as

AEs) for the purposes of control, transfer, running the foreign operation, and

management development (which require firm-specific competencies), but may be

13"

suitable for filling technical and lower and middle management positions (requiring

more generic, specialist competencies), managing within the subsidiary, and

responding to the local environment (which require cross-cultural and host location-

specific competencies).

Based on our literature search, we conclude that empirical studies show the

historical conceptualization of the business expatriate concept is borne out of business

employment, wherein the demand for business expatriates is “tailored to the

organizational context of working abroad” (Andresen et al., 2014, pp. 2303) and

arises from expatriates’ ability to help organizations meet their business objectives

(Bruning, Sonpar, & Wang, 2012; Edström & Galbraith, 1977; Mendenhall, Dunbar

& Oddou, 1987; Pruthi, Wright & Meyer, 2009; Tharenou & Harvey, 2006; Tung,

1984a; Tungli & Peiperl, 2009).

In much of the earliest literature, definitions had been in effect subcontracted to

practitioners. Research was done on IHRM specialists or through them with the

people they identified as expatriates – thus often implicitly excluding many who

would now be included. One of the earlier explicit definitions, from the late 1990s,

defined expatriates as being,

employees of business or government organizations who are sent by their

organization to a related unit in a country which is different from their own, to

accomplish a job or organization-related goal for a pre-designated temporary

time period of usually more than six months and less than five years in one term

(Aycan & Kanungo, 1997, p. 250).

The definition implies: (1) that expatriates are assigned by organizations; and, (2) that

employment by an organization is a key characteristic, thus distinguishing business

expatriates from non-business expatriates (e.g., tourists, immigrants, retirees,

refugees, sojourners) on the basis of the temporary, voluntary, and task-related nature

of their institutionally-sponsored employment.

14"

Aycan and Kanungo’s (1997) definition encompassed a number of potentially

different policies about international assignments. Companies could, for example,

apply ethnocentric policies (Heenan & Perlmutter, 1979; Perlmutter, 1969), sending

abroad parent country nationals (PCNs) who were imbued with the headquarters (HQ)

culture and understood the HQ ways of operating (e.g., Harzing, 2001). This was

important because one key rationale for sending them was coordination and control

(Edström & Galbraith, 1977) – best achieved by someone who already knew the HQ

mentality and operations. Authors of these studies also suggested that expatriation

could be used by the organization as a learning device – and there is now considerable

evidence (Dickmann & Doherty, 2010; Mendenhall, Kuhlmann, Stahl, & Osland,

2002) that the expatriate experience is the best possible mechanism for individual

development. Many businesses, for example, use it specifically for that purpose or as

a development and/ or evaluation mechanism in their talent management programs

(Cerdin & Brewster, 2014; Collings, 2014). Edström and Galbraith (1977) also noted

that expatriates were often used to provide technical knowledge and expertise where

these were not available in the local operation or in a particular country, e.g.,

pipework engineers, credit experts and information technology (IT) specialists.

The research that followed picked up on, and immediately confused, the

rationales for using expatriates with their seniority and qualifications. This resulted in

the first seeds of conceptual ambiguity being introduced about who business

expatriates were because definitions continued to be mostly implied rather than made

explicit. Thus, the coordination and control element meant that there was often an

assumption in the literature that business expatriates would be in managerial

positions, when many were not. A number of studies have conflated business

expatriates with managers (as examples, Chang, Gong, & Peng, 2012; Gomez-Mejia

15"

& Balkin, 1987; Imundo, 1974; Konopaske, Robie, & Ivancevich, 2005, 2009;

Lenartowicz & Johnson, 2007; Morris & Robie, 2001; Tan & Mahoney, 2004;

Thomas et al., 2005). The ‘filling of specialist positions’ rationale developed into

assumptions that business expatriates would inevitably be highly qualified technical

specialists (Harzing, 2001; Tharenou & Harvey, 2006), though there has been an

intriguing lack of attention paid to those who were sent for this purpose (see Kraimer

et al., 2016 for an important critique). Technical specialists were often, though by no

means always, sent just until the problem was fixed or local expertise had been

developed, thus having shorter assignments. Such business expatriates could be, and

often were, recruited from outside the organization (for example, as locally-hired

foreigners), unlike those who were sent for other reasons who were invariably

selected from existing staff and then sent abroad.

The next updated explicit definition of business expatriates continued to assume

these characteristics, defining them as,

employees of business organizations, who are sent overseas on a temporary

basis to complete a time-based task or accomplish an organizational goal

(Harrison et al., 2004, p. 203).

This definition has been more or less repeated in other (e.g., Tan & Mahoney, 2004,

p. 200) and more recent conceptualizations (e.g., Shaffer et al., 2012, p. 1286;

Haslberger et al., 2014, p. 2). Andresen et al., (2014, p. 2308) defined expatriates

more broadly as,

an individual who moves to another country while changing the dominant place

of residence and executes legal work abroad. As such, the expatriate has

migrant status.

Critically, Andresen et al. (2014) qualify their broad definition by providing

additional clarification of SIEs and AEs on the basis of dependent vs independent

employment, initiator of the job search (organization vs individual), work contract

16"

partner (current vs new), and organizational mobility (internal vs external), noting that

their conceptualization has “discourse limitations” and that “it might be hard to

overcome the preconceptions of some readers” (p. 2310).

Even though these definitions have attempted to bring more clarity to the

meanings of the word ‘expatriate’ in the fields of global mobility and international

management, we contend that confusion still remains and there is no consensus as to

how to define expatriates more broadly, and business expatriates more specifically.

We suggest that for researchers, while a clear definition about expatriates (in general)

would be helpful, the more urgent need is to develop a theory-specific statement

about business expatriates, given its implied focus (as the unit of analysis) in decades

of prior research in the field of management studies. In other words, if we claim to be

international management or international human resource management researchers,

then our focus must remain on individuals employed in, or impacted by, management

settings (e.g., expatriates, their families, and other key stakeholders). It is for this

reason that our chapter is focused on business expatriates in the context of legal

business employment in order to distinguish them from non-expatriates and unskilled

migrants.

Our focus does not ignore the fact that defining expatriates (as well as business

expatriates) is made more difficult when taking into account psychological and time

considerations that impact upon individual choice in the decision to expatriate,

migrate or to transition between the two (cf. Andresen et al., 2014; Shaffer et al.,

2012). Rather, we acknowledge that transitions between expatriate and migrant status,

for example, from business expatriate to skilled migrant or business expatriate to

immigrant entrepreneur/ ‘expatpreneur’, complicates any attempt to define the

meanings of expatriate more broadly. But acknowledging the occurrence of

17"

transitions from one category to another does not absolve us from clarifying the

meaning and boundaries of the categories.

We narrow our unit of analysis to business expatriates as a starting point on the

basis of several combined and necessary criteria: (1) that we are IM/IHRM scholars,

(2) interested in individuals that engage in international geographical mobility, (3)

with legal employment, (4) with organizations and businesses, and (5) to a country of

which he or she does not hold citizenship. We thus define business expatriates as,

legally working individuals who reside temporarily in a country of which

they are not a citizen in order to accomplish a career-related goal, being

relocated abroad either by an organization, by self-initiation, or directly

employed within the host country, some of whom are paid on enhanced

terms and conditions to recognize their being foreigners in that country.

Our definition builds on, but develops prior definitions of business expatriates,

whatever terminology was used, by: (a) using more appropriate terminology, i.e.,

‘business’ as opposed to ‘corporate’ thus being more inclusive of non-corporate

expatriates in non-corporate occupations such as those in government, military,

education, arts, sports, and aid organizations that have been the focus of recent

research (see Part IV of this Handbook), and (b) including in our conceptualization

the initiation to work abroad, thus extending prior definitions that have tended to limit

business expatriation to expatriates with only AE characteristics (Shaffer et al., 2012)

or to define AEs and SIEs separately as types of expatriates (Andresen et al., 2014).

By including all forms of initiation of the decision to move, our definition

encompasses expatriates that are AEs and SIEs, including those with AE and SIE

characteristics (see McNulty and Vance, 2016) that dictates the particular type of

international work he or she may choose to engage in. This, of course, can change

over the course of their career (i.e., the definition accounts for transitions). The

definition implies that business employment is a key characteristic, thus

18"

distinguishing business expatriates from non-business expatriates (e.g., tourists,

immigrants, retirees, refugees, sojourners) on the basis of the temporary, voluntary,

and task-related nature of their institutionally-sponsored employment.

The enhanced terms and conditions element of our definition is rarely stated,

but usually assumed. Whilst there are anecdotal discussions of companies, especially

in Europe, where work and residence permits are not required for European citizens

and there is a heavy reliance on sending staff to other countries on local terms and

conditions, these seem always to include some form of enhanced travel arrangements,

expenses and so on. It is also the case that government employees and employees of

intergovernmental organizations apply the same ‘international’ terms and conditions

in all countries, and invariably include salary adjustments and additional expenses for

accommodation, schooling, and other cost of living items. Our point is that, generally,

assigned business expatriates expect and invariably receive additions to their salary

package that are not made available to local employees doing the same job. For many

organizations, the enhanced package and the accompanying administration of the

transfer and the compliance requirements in themselves define assigned expatriation.

Our definition nonetheless does not distinguish expatriates on the basis of their

remuneration, i.e., it holds irrespective of whether he or she is (1) remunerated on a

home-based balance sheet (full package) or host-based local (no benefits) approach

(McNulty, 2016), or (2) may even be unpaid as in the case of some religious

expatriates. Nor does the definition depend on whether the individual is formally

recognized as an ‘expatriate’ for the purposes of policy and payroll by the

organizations that employ them.

We also note that expatriation requires the individual to be living in a country of

which they are not a citizen (see also Tan & Mahoney, 2004, p. 200). In some small

19"

(but perhaps growing) minority of cases this may be unnecessarily limiting – there

will be bi-cultural people (Furusawa & Brewster, 2014) with dual nationality and

children who have grown up with expatriate or migrant parents in one country whilst

having or being entitled to a passport from another – when they transfer there, the

experience may be so similar to that of other expatriates that we would want to

include them. These exceptions will be few however. We contend that this theory-

specific statement about business expatriates supports the major purposes for which

expatriates have been (and will likely continue to be) utilized in the IM and IHRM

disciplines.

The implications of our definition are significant. If we take as a starting point

that the vast majority of extant literature about expatriates has only vaguely defined

the unit of analysis or, worse, left it implied, then as studies progress into the future

there will be less certainty about who is actually being studied: Clearer definitions

about the unit of analysis need to be made explicit. The problem, unless checked, is

likely to become an even bigger one if the sheer amount of prior studies is any

indication.

Business Expatriates in the Literature

Serious academic research into our current understanding of business expatriates

began in the 1950s (Crowther, 1959; Howell & Newman, 1959; Huson, 1959;

Lysgaard, 1954, 1955; Mandell, 1958; Mandell & Greenberg, 1954; Penrose, 1959;

Thompson, 1959; Wallace, 1959) with the strong push towards corporate

internationalization (Coase, 1937; Dunning, 1958; Fouraker & Stopford, 1968; Kolde

& Hill, 1967; Perlmutter, 1969). A growing interest in expatriates continued into the

1960s with seminal publications by Gonzales & Negandhi (1967) and Ivancevich

20"

(1969)2 and other articles that examined the cross-cultural contact of business

managers (Gonzalez, 1967; Katz & Eisenstadt, 1960; Megginson, 1967; Oberg, 1960;

Useem, Useem, & Donoghue, 1963), expatriate selection (Borrmann, 1968; Haider,

1966; Hodgson, 1963; Lovell, 1966; Peter & Henry, 1962a; Steinmetz, 1965, 1966;

Stern, 1966; Triandis, 1963), compensation (Schollhammer, 1969), success factors

(Kiernan, 1963; Newton Parks, 1963; Vivian, 1968), knowledge transfer (Negandhi &

Estafen, 1965) and performance (Peter & Henry, 1962b). It included studies of

expatriates in non-corporate settings, e.g., the military (Campbell, 1969), aid

organizations (Taylor, 1968), and the Peace Corps (Hapgood & Bennett, 1968; Henry,

1966; Mischel, 1965).

Early development of the business expatriate concept (e.g., Black, Gregersen, &

Mendenhall, 1992; Tung, 1988) was undoubtedly borne out of research in the 1970s

that focused on why companies used expatriates (Baker & Ivancevich, 1970; Beeth,

1973; Edström & Galbraith, 1977; Shetty, 1971), their management practices (Brandt

& Hulbert, 1976; Negandhi, 1971; Sethi & Swanson, 1979; Toyne, 1976), their

selection (Alpander, 1973b; Howard, 1974a; Maddox, 1971; Miller, 1973, 1977;

Perlmutter & Heenan, 1974; Teague, 1970; Tucker, 1974), their communities (Cohen,

1977; Olden, 1979), and their compensation (Foote, 1977; Reynolds, 1972;

Sonnabend, 1975). Correspondingly, studies began to appear about expatriates

themselves – their decision making criteria when undertaking an international

assignment (Mincer, 1978), success and failure characteristics (Alpander, 1973a;

Baker & Ivancevich, 1971; Hays, 1971, 1974; Imundo, 1974; Lanier, 1979; Miller,

1972; Miller & Cheng, 1978; Negandhi, 1974; Newman, Bhatt, & Gutteridge, 1978),

"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

2"These texts are a fascinating time capsule in themselves: Note the terminology in the titles.

Ivancevich cheerfully assumes that the United Sates can be equated with the whole of America and is

plainly only interested in ‘executives’; Gonzales and Negandhi cheerfully assume that all such

executives will be men; both assume that the problem is ‘overseas’ – so that presumably there are no

issues with US executives in Canada, Mexico or other parts of Latin America."

21"

training needs (Jones, 1975), gender roles (Adler, 1979), assignment outcomes

(Miller, 1975; Misa & Fabricatore, 1979), role requirements (Daniels, 1974a, 1974b;

Keegan, 1974), and repatriation concerns (Comay, 1971; Gama & Pedersen, 1977;

Heenan, 1970; Howard, 1974b, 1979; Murray, 1973). Although there continued to be

a strong focus on Japanese management practices more broadly (Tung, 1984b),

research into Japanese MNEs also started to emerge (R. Peterson & Schwind, 1977;

Tsurumi, 1978; Yoshino, 1976).

As a result, attention was now focused on corporate expatriates and especially

those who were managers, i.e., business employees who relocated abroad to fulfil

some purpose for their company (Aycan & Kanungo, 1997; Harrison et al., 2004).

The corporate expatriate term is a label that has remained to this day, being defined

as “employees of business organizations, who are sent overseas on a temporary basis

to complete a time-based task or accomplish an organizational goal” (Shaffer et al.,

2012, p. 1286). This developed into a strong interest in people employed by

organizations who were engaged in long-term international assignments (see

Bonache, Brewster, Suutari, & de Saa, 2010; Briscoe, Schuler, & Claus, 2009 for

summaries) defined as lasting between one and five years (Harzing, 2004). Corporate

expatriates have been commonly referred to as traditional expatriates (Suutari &

Brewster, 2009) and long-term assignees (LTAs; McNulty et al., 2009), and less

frequently as business expatriates (Hudson & Inkson, 2006; Selmer & Leung, 2003,

2007). Haslberger et al. (2014, p. 2) define a corporate expatriate as,

someone who takes a job in a country other than his or her own for a period of

time, intending not to stay in that country after that period of time.

Most of the early studies (e.g., Black & Gregersen, 1991; Caligiuri, 2000; Harvey,

1985; Mendenhall et al., 1987; Shaffer & Harrison, 1998; Sieveking, Anchor, &

Marston, 1981; Tung, 1981, 1987; Zeira & Banai, 1984), that provided a valuable

22"

platform for later researchers, were conducted via the international HRM (IHRM)

departments of companies or amongst the heads of such departments. The result was

that questions of definition were in effect left to the companies: if the individual was

recognized as an expatriate by the IHRM department of the MNC then they were

studied as expatriates; if not, they were excluded. Further, because much of the early

research was thus led by practitioners, it was they who “dictated the research agenda,”

resulting in a large body of descriptive research that lacks theoretical rigor and

conceptual precision (Kraimer et al., 2016, p. 19).

Assigned Expatriates

The major contribution from the research on corporate expatriates has been the

concept of organizationally assigned expatriates (AEs) – people whose careers often

unfold within one organization which seek to help them improve their career

advancement within the company through multiple long-term assignments (Jokinen,

Brewster, & Suutari, 2008). They may also, during their career, move from one

organization to another – a familiar occurrence around repatriation time, according to

the research (Black & Gregersen, 1991; Suutari & Brewster, 2003). Organizationally

assigned expatriates have been referred to as assigned-expatriates (Andresen,

Bergdolt, & Margenfel, 2012; Andresen et al., 2014; Andresen et al., 2012; Biemann

& Andresen, 2010; Jokinen et al., 2008), company-assigned expatriates (CAEs;

McNulty, 2013; McNulty et al., 2013; Tharenou, 2013) and company-backed

expatriates (Doherty, Dickmann, & Mills, 2011). AEs usually relocate abroad for

periods of time of between two and five years (though longer for Japanese

expatriates), which is in line with them being provided traditional career management

that is controlled and directed by the organization to facilitate a match between

organizational and individual needs in pursuit of its continued competitive advantage,

23"

including the repatriation of AEs to the home-country as deemed necessary (Andresen

et al., 2012; Tharenou, 2013). The crucial part of the definition is that their employer

sends them.

Corporate expatriates can also, therefore, include those employed in another

country as short-term assignees (STAs): people engaged in an international

assignment lasting up to one year (Brookfield Global Relocation Services, 2016;

Harris, 2002; KPMG, 2011; ORC Worldwide, 2008; Shaffer et al., 2012; Suutari et

al., 2013). In practice many assignments are less than three months, especially for

project work where they are dependent on completing a particular task (Suutari et al.,

2013) and the cut-off point is usually six months, because after that, in a lot of

countries, STAs become liable to questions about where they should be paying tax,

national insurance and other fiscal requirements. In line with the usual confused

terminology in expatriate studies, STAs have also been referred to as secondees, i.e.,

people asked by the organization to temporarily relocate to another department for a

short period of time (Baruch et al., 2013; Baruch & Peiperl, 2000; Renshaw &

Ghobadian, 2015); and in the consulting field as talent swaps, i.e., short-term

assignments in which employees in the same company from different countries

temporarily switch jobs for up to a year (Mohn, 2015). STAs have been the subject of

much conceptual confusion being positioned as business expatriates (Baruch et al.,

2013; Starr & Currie, 2009; Tahvanainen, Welch, & Worm, 2005), business

travellers, i.e., non-expatriate global workers in the same category as international

commuters (Shaffer et al., 2012), and as both (Suutari et al., 2013). This is likely due

to STAs having some characteristics of both categories as determined by the purpose

of their assignment and the amount of regulatory cross-border compliance (e.g., work

permit, tax, residency, social security/pension) required for them to work abroad (see

24"

Dickmann & Debner, 2011 for a recent critique). For example, a few STAs on longer

assignments of up to one year may relocate with their families, although in general

this is rare, and STAs generally continue to be paid on a home-country basis and to

receive significantly more remuneration than they would receive at home (like

business expatriates).

Until recently, corporate expatriates have been conceptualized predominantly as

PCNs (employees who are citizens of the headquarters country location of the

company from which they are sent to an international subsidiary; Edström &

Galbraith, 1977; Harzing, 2004; Torbiörn, 1997), expatriating out of the parent-

company headquarters to which they are typically expected to return (Cerdin &

Pargneux, 2010; Colakoglu & Caligiuri, 2008; Gong, 2003; Jokinen et al., 2008).

Recent research (e.g., Andresen & Biemann, 2013; Baruch et al., 2013) has indicated

a growth in the utilization of third-country nationals (TCNs), individuals that are

citizens from neither the home country where corporate ‘headquarters’ is located, nor

the host country where they are employed, but a third country where they have lived

either temporarily or permanently before agreeing to move to the host country

(Briscoe, Schuler, & Tarique, 2012; Scullion & Collings, 2006; Selmer, 2002;

Torbiörn, 1997).

The use of host-country nationals (HCNs, citizens of the host-country employed

on ‘local’ terms and conditions; Scullion & Collings, 2006; Tungli & Peiperl, 2009) is

less clear – whether they are just local employees or whether they are replacing

expatriates or filling potential expatriate positions is unclear from the research that

has attempted to look at this issue (Pruthi et al., 2009).

Corporate expatriates engaging in sequential assignments from one foreign

location to another with or without first repatriating by stringing together re-

25"

assignments into meaningful sequences for their professional benefit have been

conceptualized as career expatriates (Dickmann & Harris, 2005; Stahl & Cerdin,

2004; Thomas et al., 2005), serial expatriates (Bozkurt & Mohr, 2011), repeat

expatriates (Nasholm, 2014) global careerists (Suutari, Tornikoski, & Mäkelä, 2012)

and the highly mobile (Forster, 2000). From a more ethnocentric point of view,

expatriates assigned from a subsidiary to headquarters have been called inpatriates

(Reiche, 2006; Reiche, Kraimer, & Harzing, 2009), or reverse expatriates; Binetter,

2010). The aim of such an assignment is to provide these people with an international

perspective and to expose them to the corporate culture and a network of contacts.

They are almost always expected to repatriate home (Pruthi et al., 2009; Tharenou &

Harvey, 2006).

Another contractual form within the category of assigned expatriate involves

expatriates of host-country origin (EHCOs), defined as belonging to the ethnicity of

the host country and being transferred by an organization to the host location on a

long-term assignment or permanent transfer (Thite et al., 2009). Most often (but not

always), EHCOs are thought of as originating from an emerging economy who study

or work in a developed country and then return to the emerging economy to plug

important skills gaps in those countries (Borjas & Bratsberg, 1996; Chacko, 2007;

Harvey, 2009; Saxenian, 2006). Tung (2008; and Tung & Lazarova, 2006)

conceptualise EHCOs as ex-host country nationals (EHCNs) and distinguishes three

types: those that have spent a considerable period of time outside their home-country

being heavily involved in international labour markets and then return (Chacko,

2007); those that have lived most of their life outside the home country and who then

return (Zweig, Changgui, & Rosen, 2004); and those that were born and raised abroad

(often by first-generation immigrants or expatriate parents) and who then return to

26"

their ‘homeland’ for the first time (Jain, 2012). None of these assigned expatriate

types should be confused with ‘returnees’ and those engaging in 'return migration'

(Comay, 1971; Dustmann & Weiss, 2007; King, 2000), which are terms reserved for

migrants. EHCOs often have dual-citizenship of the home and host location, or

permanent residency status in the home location from where they are being sent with

citizenship in the host location, which causes confusion as to whether they meet the

‘no citizenship’ critieria in our definition and can, in fact, be conceptualised as

business expatriates. In practice, ‘business expatriate’ status is determined by the

sending organization; for example, the former (EHCOs with dual-citizenship) usually

expatriate to the host country utlising the passport of the country from where they

have been sent, which then entitles them to be paid on enhanced terms and conditions

(if offered) to recognize their being ‘foreigners’ in that country. In the latter, the

sending organisation may decide to retain the EHCOs ‘foreign’ status even if he or

she is officially entering the host-country as a citizen of that country.

Self-Initiated Expatriates

In contrast to research about AEs, self-initiated expatriation has emerged as an

alternative and increasing pattern of international work among business expatriates

(Cerdin & Selmer, 2014; Doherty & Dickmann, 2013; Doherty, Richardson, & Thorn,

2013; Dorsch, Suutari, & Brewster, 2012; Thomas et al., 2005; see Chapter 9 for an

overview). Self-initiated expatriates (SIEs) are characterized more broadly as,

individuals who initiate and usually finance their own expatriation and are not

transferred by organizations. They relocate to a country of their choice to pursue

cultural, personal, and career development experiences, often with no definite

time frame in mind (Shaffer et al., 2012, p. 1286).

Although identified only recently in academic research (Suutari & Brewster, 2000),

they have been around for thousands of years. The past decade has spawned a mass of

research on SIEs leading to two summary books (Andresen, Al Ariss, Walther, &

27"

Wolff, 2012; Vaiman & Haslberger, 2013), a special issue (Doherty et al., 2013) and a

dedicated conference (May 2015, Toulouse). Research on SIEs has labeled them

simultaneously as self-selecting expatriates (Richardson & McKenna, 2002), self-

directed expatriates (Felker, 2011; Richardson, 2006; Richardson & Mallon, 2005;

Richardson & McKenna, 2006), self-initiated foreign workers (Harrison et al., 2004),

independent expatriates (McKenna, 2010), independent internationally mobile

professionals (McKenna & Richardson, 2007; Tharenou, 2013), and inter-

organizational SIEs (inter-SIEs; Andresen et al., 2014), with their experiences being

described as self-initiated foreign assignments (Suutari & Brewster, 2000) and self-

initiated foreign experiences (Myers & Pringle, 2005).

Shaffer et al. (2012) included in their conceptualization the early research that

defined SIEs as being typically of a younger age and primarily motivated to move

abroad more by curiosity and perceived adventure (tourism, traveling, backpacking)

than by pragmatic career capital development concerns (see Inkson & Myers, 2003;

Meyskens, von Glinow, Werther & Clarke, 2009; Thorn, 2009). The term overseas

experience was used to refer to the temporary move of young people to different

countries primarily for adventure and to explore the world and other cultures than to

gain international career experience (Inkson, Arthur, Pringle, & Barry, 1997). If

engaging in work while abroad, these SIEs are often remunerated ‘off the books’ as is

the case with many young people and migrant hopefuls whose ‘cash jobs’ and

unskilled temporary work often do not suit their qualifications or provide little career

value (see Al Ariss & Syed, 2011; Inkson & Myers, 2003), but who work in order to

stay alive and to support their travels (Lauring, Selmer & Steen Jacobsen, 2014). Many

of these groups do not fit our definition of business expatriates as they are not moving

abroad for work.

28"

Recent work on SIEs has included those who go abroad primarily for the

perceived value of international work experience to their long-term personal and

professional development (Doherty & Dickmann, 2013; Shaffer et al., 2012;

Tharenou, 2013), or who do so initially as an AE and then transition into SIE status

(Altman & Baruch, 2012; Andresen et al., 2014; McNulty & Vance, 2016). This is in

line with research showing that about half of SIEs work for MNCs and global

companies (e.g., Froese & Peltokorpi, 2013; Jokinen et al., 2008; Tharenou, 2013),

and that organizations deliberately seek to hire them as they can overcome some of

the difficulties of staffing with PCNs and HCNs (Tharenou, 2013; Tharenou &

Harvey, 2006). Notably, excluded from recent studies of SIEs are other skilled

occupations that fall under the remit of ‘business employment’ but whose work is not

necessarily in ‘corporations’ (see Bozionelos, 2009; Brown & Connell, 2004; see also

Andresen and Hippler, 2016 for a recent critique). Critically, while much of this

newer literature assumes that SIEs are professionals seeking work and/ or career

opportunities at a managerial level (Andresen et al., 2014; Cerdin & Pargneux, 2010;

Crowley-Henry, 2012; Doherty & Dickmann, 2013; McKenna & Richardson, 2007;

Tharenou, 2013), studies continue to use the all-encompassing term ‘SIE’ to describe

these individuals, with its implied and conceptualised meaning of anyone who moves

abroad independently whether for professional or other reasons, thus resulting in the

relocation-for-work distinction not being made clear. Because the meaning is implied,

it results in terminological confusion about the SIE concept in the context of business

employment.

Recent developments have further added to the confusion. Cerdin & Selmer,

(2014), although now conceptualizing employment as a criterion, continue to use the

original ‘SIE’ term to refer to those who are employed as well as not employed.

29"

Others (e.g., Howe-Walsh & Schyns, 2010) have done the same and, while using

employment as a defining criterion, have also delineated SIEs according to two types,

i.e., private SIEs vs career SIEs, but with poor theorizing to explain it. To overcome

the confusion, we characterize SIEs that work for MNCs and global companies as

employed SIEs, as distinct from the more general term ‘SIEs,’ which refers to anyone

who relocates abroad independently whether employed or not, or for private or career

reasons. The employment criterion for employed SIEs refers to their employment

status by an organization at the time at which they are being studied, thus

distinguishing between those who may be career-SIEs but who never (intend to) gain

employment vs those that are actually employed. Employed SIEs engage in some

form of employment as appropriate to their occupation, being legally employed on a

temporary basis in a country they view as hosting their career.

Unlike many AEs, employed SIEs tend to be uninhibited by organizational and

occupational constraints, and are motivated to take charge of their careers rather than

to wait for their organization to arrange for an appropriate career opportunity

involving international work experience (Andresen et al., 2012; Cerdin & Pargneux,

2010; Jokinen et al., 2008; Richardson & Mallon, 2005; Tharenou & Caulfield, 2010).

Employed SIEs have high agency and are usually externally recruited (Tharenou,

2013), taking control of their careers outside the confines of the organization and

thereby abandoning corporate intervention and security in favour of autonomy and

flexibility (Parker & Inkson, 1999). Unlike migrants, employed SIEs do not intend to

stay permanently even if their stay abroad exceeds the typical duration of an AE stay.

The consulting field has, as so often happens, added to the terminological jangle

factor by recently conceptualising the employment of SIEs as perma-pats (Dalai,

2015) in a low-cost process known as expatshoring (Harper, 2012), i.e., when a

30"

company employs skilled and highly qualified expatriate professionals already living

in a targeted host country but who originate from the company’s home country and

thus share the same language and culture. Other recent conceptualizations of

employed SIE types include:

• Foreign executives in local organizations (FELOs), foreign individuals at

executive level that hold local managerial positions supervising HCNs in local

organizations where they have their headquarters (Arp, 2014; Arp, Hutchings, &

Smith, 2013). These might include the much-studied cohort of academic

expatriates (Trembath, 2016), particularly those in executive administrative roles.

• Localized expatriates (LOPATs), defined as AEs who, after completing a home-

country based long-term assignment contract then transition to full local terms

and conditions in the host-country as directed by either the employer or at their

own request (McNulty, 2013; Tait, De Cieri, & McNulty, 2014).

• Permanent transferees (PTs; also known as 'one-way movers' or 'international

one-way transfers'; AIR Inc, 2016), defined as employees that resign from the

home-country office and are hired by the host-country office of the same MNE

but for which there is no return (repatriation) to the home-country, no guarantee

of company-sponsored reassignment elsewhere, and only local terms and

conditions offered in the host-country (Tait et al., 2014; Yates, 2011).

We add to the list of employed SIE types expatriates of host coutry origin (EHCOs)

who, whilst having been traditionally conceptualised as AEs, could also be SIEs in

the form of self-initiated repatriates (SIRs; Andresen & Sebahate, 2015; Begley,

Collings, & Scullion, 2008) undertaking self-initiated repatriation (Tharenou &

Caulfield, 2010) by returning to their home-country of their own volition.

NOT Business Expatriates: Sojourners, Migrants and Business Travelers

31"

As mentioned earlier, the purpose of this chapter is to determine who is and who is

not a business expatriate. Doing so leads us to exclude from our theory specific

statement about business expatriates three other categories of international workers

that have commonly been confused with business expatriates: sojourners, migrants

and business travellers. In this section, we use the dimensions of time and purpose to

illustrate why sojourners, migrants and business travellers are NOT business

expatriates. While we do not deny that there is value in exploring international

movements that take forms other than business expatriation, a clear distinction

between these four categories is necessary in order to achieve construct clarity about

the business expatriate concept.

Sojourners

Sojourners were the basis of early academic research on expatriates, which began

during the 1960’s. Sojourners are people who voluntarily and temporarily travel to a

foreign country for a non-business purpose such as short-term unpaid missionary and

charity work, tourism, exile, education, retirement or simply to see and experience the

world (Brein & David, 1971; Church, 1982; Green, 2009; Lorente, Piper, Hsui-Hua,

& Yeoh, 2005; Navara & James, 2002). Sojourners may work - in legal or illegal paid

employment - but do so predominantly, and often intermittently, to fund their travels/

stay as in the case of a gap year before or after university, or during retirement. Like

expatriates, sojourners do not travel abroad for the purposes of permanent settlement.

Sojourners include students studying abroad who may do so for a few weeks, a

semester or their entire degree (De Verthelyi, 1995; Hao & Wen, 2016; Pedersen,

Neighbors, Larimer, & Lee, 2011; Pitts, 2009). The latter is widespread and is

particularly common among expatriate children who return to their ‘passport country’

to complete their university education (B. Peterson & Plamondon, 2009; Quick,

32"

2010). Student mobility remains an under-researched area and while students have

been simultaneously conceptualized as both migrants and expatriates (Al Ariss, 2010;

de Wit, Agarwal, Said, Sehoole, & Sirozi, 2008), and expatriates and sojourners

(Pedersen et al., 2011), more clarification is needed. Sojourners continue to be

confused with business expatriates (Furnham, 1987; James, Hunsley, Navara, &

Alles, 2004; Lance & Richardson, 1988). For IB and IHRM researchers, however, the

fact that they are not employed in any meaningful way puts them outside the scope of

our interest as business expatriates.

Migrants

Also falling outside our scope of interest are migrants. The distinction between

expatriates and migrants in the field of expatriate studies has been controversial and

murky (see Al Ariss & Syed, 2011; Andresen et al., 2012; Andresen et al., 2014),

especially in regions such as the European Union where the free movement of labour

is a foundational principle (Brewster & Harris, 1999; Favell, 2004; Smith & Favell,

2006; Salt & Millar, 2006). In expatriate studies, definitions of migration are often

drawn widely so as to include expatriates (Andresen et al., 2014). Examples are

Agozino (2000), Boyle, Halfacree and Robinson (1998), Briscoe et al. (2009), Wiles

(2008), and the United Nations (1998, p. 17) which defines migrants as “any person

who changes his or her country of usual residence,” with the ‘country of usual

residence’ representing the place where the person has the center of his life. It has

been argued that migrants may be temporary or permanent stayers (Borjas &

Bratsberg, 1996; Castles, 2000; Comay, 1971; King, 2000; Lavenex, 2006; Yeoh,

2006) further adding to the confusion, as migrants can now also at the same time be

expatriates. The confusion is not limited to only our field. The migration literature

33"

provides even less clarity where, as the following example shows, the terminology

used to distinguish expatriates from migrants is just as unclear (emphasis ours):

This paper focuses on case studies of long-term Western settlers - those in

the city more than five years - and how they situate themselves in the city

through their ‘narratives of emplacement’ or stories of a personalised

relationship to the city. Settler stories reference both a postcolonial

nostalgia for the lifestyles of the 1930s Shanghailanders, and a newer post-

socialist model of cosmopolitan citizenship for mobile urban elites,

related to the state-sponsored ideal of the ‘New Shanghainese.’ Taken as a

whole expatriate narratives of emplacement construct an idealised image

of a culturally cosmopolitan, locally integrated and economically

successful immigrant entrepreneur. Few settlers may actually live up to

this ideal, but these narrative strategies allow settlers to construct imagined

links to a place and polity that substitute for more substantive forms of

urban citizenship, while excluding other categories of migrants (Farrer,

2010, p. 1211).

Generally the management literature has preferred to have single terms for

single phenomena and has defined migrants as people who leave their home

country on a long-term to permanent basis in order to live and work abroad,

most with the specific intent of attaining citizenship of, and settling in, a new

country (Al Ariss & Syed, 2011; Berry, 1997; Castles, de Haas & Miller, 2013;

Massey & Bartley, 2006; Waldinger, 2008). They are often (but by no means

always) motivated by the push of economic and socio-political necessity (Khosa

& Kalitanyi, 2015; Saxenian, 2002; Tharmaseelan, Inkson, & Carr, 2010). They

may be unskilled (poor, uneducated, as refugees) or skilled, highly educated and

experienced individuals (Al Ariss & Crowley-Henry, 2013; Al Ariss & Syed,

2011; Cerdin, Abdeljalil-Diné, & Brewster, 2014; Smith & Favell, 2006;

Findlay, Li, Jowett, & Skeldon, 1996; Iredale, 2001). They may be lifestyle

migrants, for example, US veterans relocating to the Philippines or Mexico for

cheaper healthcare (McNulty, Fisher, Hicks, & Kane, 2016), or retirement/

leisure migrants, very common now in Europe where pensions are portable and

comparatively generous in northern Europe whilst the weather and lifestyle that

34"

can be bought with them are much higher in the warmer southern European

states (Butler & Richardson, 2013; King, Warnes, & Williams, 2000; Knowles,

2005; Oliver, 2012). Migrants may also be non-privileged (economic) migrants

(or refugees) at the bottom of the economic scale. These latter, however, have

been largely ignored in the business literature, which concentrates on highly

skilled and privileged migrants, often discussed in terms of brain drain and brain

gain (see Al Ariss & Syed, 2011). Again, the terminology describing highly

skilled migrants is confusing referring to them simultaneously as transnational

elites (Beaverstock, 2002, 2005; Willis, Yeoh, & Fakhri, 2002), transnational

knowledge workers (Colic-Peisker, 2010), skilled transients (Findlay, 1988),

qualified immigrants (QIs; Cerdin et al., 2014; Zikic et al., 2010), and immigrant

professionals (Batalova & Lowell, 2006).

In principle the distinction between business expatriates and migrants is clear:

Unlike expatriates, migrants, in the broadest and continuing definitions of the

concept, intend to move to another country on a permanent basis (Al Ariss &

Ozbilgin, 2010; Hugo, 2002; Iredale, 2001; Yeoh & Lin, 2013). In practice, the

boundaries are more fungible and, like the distinctions between AE and SIE

categories, individuals may move between them. Some AEs fitting the definition

exactly decide to stay on indefinitely in the host country after their assignment as

localized expatriates (by negotiating a non-expatriate or significantly reduced

expatriate contract with their existing employer or a new one; McNulty, 2016; ORC

Worldwide, 2004), while others stay on permanently as skilled migrants. Al Ariss and

Ozbilgin (2010) found for example that many SIEs stay in a new country on a

permanent basis and become migrants. Conversely, some migrants, although

intending to stay permanently, return home within a short period (Harvey, 2009;

35"

Toren, 1976). Further muddying the waters are studies that show, for example,

returnees (reverse migrants) often consider re-expatriation despite holding better

professional positions in their home-country as a result of their international or study

abroad experiences (Gama & Pedersen, 1977; Gill, 2005; Tung, 2007), while

companies in Asia will consider relocating again an expatriate that has been localized

to host-country conditions (Mercer, 2010).

It has been argued that migration, once conceived as permanent, has

increasingly become a temporary condition (Borjas & Bratsberg, 1996; Findlay, 1988;

Sayad, 2004), but if we are to be clear about our terms we have to be clear about our

constructs, even as we accept that individuals may move between the categories. The

key distinction between migrants and AEs is much clearer than between migrants and

SIEs; in both instances, however, a migrant does not conceive of a ‘host country’ as

providing only a temporary stay as do business expatriates; rather, the new country is

intended to become their home country. Business expatriates, on the other hand,

perceive their stay as temporary and do not view the host country as their permanent

home.

Business Travelers

In contrast to sojourners, business travelers do travel to a foreign country for a

purpose determined by their work role (Nicholas & McDowall, 2012; Suutari &

Brewster, 2009; Suutari et al., 2013), but they only stay there a short time, usually

ranging from a few hours and overnight to a few days or weeks (see Chapter 14).

Work is defined in the context of legal paid employment for career purposes. This

will include those typically conceived as executives travelling in business class and

staying in good quality hotels whilst they visit subsidiary operations of their company

or customers or suppliers. The defining characteristic of business travelers is that they

36"

and/ or their bosses believe that this is the best way to get their work done, although

often they may have their own budgets and considerable autonomy in deciding

whether or not they travel or how much travelling they do. Importantly, unlike

business expatriates, business travelers go abroad, often at short notice, and maintain

their family and personal lives in their nominated home country.

While business travelers, like sojourners, have existed for centuries,

developments in international transport, particularly in the airline industry, have made

such travel much more cost-efficient mainly in terms of executives’ time. In Europe,

where there are many relatively rich countries with good transport links in a

comparatively small geographical space, international business trips are common

(Beaverstock, Derudder, Faulconbridge & Witlox, 2010; Demel & Mayrhofer, 2010;

Westman & Etzion, 2002), as is cross-border daily or weekly commuting; for

example, high-skilled workers commuting between London/ Paris or Brussels/

Rotterdam (Green, Hogarth, & Shackelton, 1999; Huber, 2014), and low and

unskilled factory and domestic workers and manual labourers commuting daily across

borders in Europe and between Malaysia-Singapore, Hong Kong-China, or Mexico-

USA (Huber & Nowotny, 2013).

Business travelers have only recently been conceptualized in the management

literature (Mayrhofer, Reichel, & Sparrow, 2012; Mayrhofer, Sparrow, &

Zimmerman, 2008; Meyskens et al., 2009). However, as in other categories of

international workers, terminological and conceptual confusion persists about who

they are. For example, business travelers have been segregated according to who

initiates the business trip (company or self), being referred to as assigned travellers

when they are sent by the company in which they are employed (Andresen et al.,

2014) versus globetrotters (Baruch et al., 2013) and self-initiated travellers (Andresen

37"

et al., 2014) when they self-initiate their international work, for example, as

independent consultants. These categories may complete some academic box-creation

exercise but what they mean in practice is, erring on the side of generosity, unclear.

Different terminology to mean the same thing has likewise contributed to construct

proliferation about the business traveler concept, with them being simultaneously

referred to as: (1) frequent business travelers (Baker & Ciuk, 2015; Demel &

Mayrhofer, 2010), frequent flyers (Sparrow, Brewster, & Harris, 2004), international

business travellers (Andresen & Bergdolt, 2016; Beaverstock et al., 2010; Gustafson,

2014; Shaffer et al., 2012; Striker, Luippold, Nagy, Liese, Bigelow & Mundt, 1999),

or even domestic international managers! (Tharenou & Harvey, 2006); (2) extended

business travelers (KPMG, 2008) and flexpatriates (Mayerhofer et al., 2004;

Mayerhofer, Hartmann, Michelitsch-Reidl, & Kollinger, 2004); and (3) international

commuters, i.e., employees who retain a permanent residence status in their home

country but work unaccompanied (by family members) on a semi-permanent to

permanent basis in another country (Brewster, Harris, & Petrovic, 2001; Suutari &

Brewster, 2009). International commuters may just be people who work half an hour

from the family home, but that happens to be across a border, relatively common in

Europe for example. They may be people who leave their home for rather longer

periods of time but still return home on a frequent basis, perhaps travelling to work on

a Monday and being home on a Thursday or Friday to spend the weekend there. This

can be the case in high-stress expatriation where families stay in safer countries whilst

the expatriate spends days or weeks in a dangerous one nearby. The gaps may be

longer, i.e., per the typical 30-day on-off arrangements in the oil and gas industry

(Danehl, 2015) or they may be some other form of rotational assignees (Baker &

Ciuk, 2015). The literature is generally unspecific about the definitions of these

38"

various kinds of business traveller, often collating or confusing them as shown (see

Chapter 14 for an overview).

Conclusion

We began this chapter by suggesting that the field of expatriate studies needs a new

paradigmatic focus as to the meanings of the term ‘business expatriate’ if it is to

continue to develop in a way that helps researchers and practitioners to increase their

understanding of the phenomenon. The research base defining business expatriates is

still relatively small (Andresen et al., 2014; Aycan & Kanungo, 1997; Harrison et al.,

2004; Haslberger et al., 2014; Shaffer et al., 2012), with much of the evidence of a

descriptive nature in terms of expatriates’ experiences (see the review by Shaffer et

al., 2012) or with theory developed (Kraimer & Wayne, 2004; Yan et al., 2002) but

often untested. Despite the enormous empirical literature on business expatriates (see

reviews by Andreason, 2008; Black & Mendenhall, 1990; Littrell, Salas, Hess, Paley,

& Riedel, 2006; Mol, Born, Willemsen, & van der Molen, 2005; Thomas & Lazarova,

2006), few studies have attempted to address how business expatriates are, or could

be, defined in comparison to other concepts, with the exception of a recent push to

distinguish SIEs from other types of international workers (such as AEs; Tharenou,

2013), albeit with an emphasis only on how to broadly define AEs and SIEs without

taking into account their many types.

By proposing a clarification of the term ‘business expatriate’ and including

within it AEs, SIEs and other examples of people moving to another country to work

for a limited amount of time, we hope to have contributed to cutting through some of

the confusion and to creating something to chew on beyond the existing ‘alphabet

soup’ of terminology. We are firmly of the belief that without construct clarity,

studies of expatriates (and expatriation more broadly) will fail to make any significant

39"

progress. We are conscious of the limited number of articles on expatriates of the

quality necessary for publication in top academic journals, and we wonder if this is

due, in part, to the lack of a theory specific statement about who business expatriates

are, which we have attempted to address here. We are undoubtedly more concerned,

however, that without clearer definitions as to what we are studying, and perhaps far

more importantly what we are not studying, the field of expatriate studies may be

sabotaging its own efforts to add to new knowledge about this increasingly important

segment of the global labour pool.

References

Adler, N. (1979), ‘Women as adrogynous managers: A conceptualization of the

potential for American women in international management’, International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3 (4), 407-436.

Agozino, Biko (2000), ‘Theoretical and methodological issues in migration research:

Interdisciplinary, intergenerational, and international perspectives’, Aldershot

Hants, Ashgate.

AIR Inc. (2016), ‘Mobility outlook survey’, Cambridge, MA, AIR Inc.

Al Ariss, A. (2010), Modes of engagement: migration, self-initiated expatriation, and

career development’, Career Development International, 15 (4), 338-358.

Al Ariss, A. & M. Crowley-Henry (2013), ‘Self-initiated expatriation and migration

in the management literature: present theorizations and future research directions’,

Career Development International, 18 (1), 78-96.

Al Ariss, A., & M. Ozbilgin (2010), ‘Understanding self-initiated expatriates: Career

experiences of Lebanese self-initiated expatriates in France, Thunderbird

International Business Review, 52 (4), 275-285.

Al Ariss, A. & J. Syed (2011), ‘Capital mobilization of skilled migrants: A relational

perspective’, British Journal of Management, 22 (2), 286-304.

Alpander, G. (1973a), ‘Drift to authoritarianism: The changing managerial styles of

the US executive overseas’, Journal of International Business Studies, 4 (2), 1-14.

Alpander, G. (1973b), ‘Foreign MBA: Potential managers for American international

corporations’, Journal of International Business Studies, 4(1), 1-13.

Altman, Y. & Y. Baruch (2012), ‘Global self-initiated corporate expatriate careers: A

new era in international assignments?’, Personnel Review, 41 (2), 233-255.

Anderzen, I. & B. Arnetz (1997), ‘Psychophysiological reactions during the first year

of a foreign assignment: Results of a controlled longitudinal study’, Work and

Stress, 11 (4), 304-318.

Andreason, A. (2008), ‘Expatriate adjustment of spouses and expatriate managers: An

intergrative research review’, International Journal of Management, 25 (2), 382-

395.

40"

Andresen, Maike, Akram Al Ariss, Matthias Walther & Karen Wolff (2012), ‘Self-

initiated expatriation: Mastering the dynamics’, Oxon, Routledge.

Andresen, Maike & Franziska Bergdolt (2016), ‘Global mindset development of

international business travelers: an empirical analysis of its antecedents based on

the constructivist learning theory’, In proceedings of the EURAM conference,

Paris, France, 1-4 June.

Andresen, Maike, Franziska Bergdolt & Jil Margenfel (2012), ‘What distinguishes

self-initiated expatriates from assigned expatriates and migrants?’, In Maike

Andresen, Akram Al Ariss & Matthias Walther (eds.), Self-initiated expatriation:

Individual, organizational and national perspectives (pp. 166-194). Oxon,

Routledge.

Andresen, M., F. Bergdolt, J. Margenfeld & M. Dickmann (2014), ‘Addressing

international mobility confusion – developing definitions and differentiations for

self-initiated and assigned expatriates as well as migrants’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(16), 2295-2318.

Andresen, M. & T. Biemann (2013), ‘A taxonomy of internationally mobile

managers’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(3),

533-557.

Andresen, M., T. Biemann & M. Pattie (2012), ‘What makes them move abroad?

Reviewing and exploring differences between self-initiated and assigned

expatriation’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(7),

932-947.

Andresen, M. and T. Hippler (2016), ‘What does it mean to be a “self-initiated”

expatriate? A critical review of existing research and call for rigorous sampling’,

In proceedings of the EURAM conference, Paris, France, 1-4 June.

Andresen, M. & S. Sebahate (2015), ‘Self-initiated repatriates' employability in the

German and French career field: a qualitative study of German and French

returnees’, In proceedings of the EURAM conference, Warsaw, Poland, 17-20

June.

Arp, F. (2014), ‘Emerging giants, aspiring multinationals and foreign executives:

Leapfrogging, capability building, and competing with developed country

multinationals’, Human Resource Management, 53(6), 851-876.

Arp, F., K. Hutchings & W. Smith (2013), ‘Foreign executives in local organisations:

An exploration of differences to other types of expatriates’, Journal of Global

Mobility, 1(3), 312-335.

Arthur, W. & W. Bennett (1995), ‘The international assignee: The relative importance

of factors perceived to contribute to success’, Personnel Psychology, 48(1), 99-

114.

Aycan, Zeynep & Rabrindra N. Kanungo (1997), ‘Current issues and future

challenges in expatriate management’, In Zeynep Aycan (ed.), Expatriate

management: Theory and research (pp. 245-260), Greenwich, CT, JAI Press.

Baker, C. & S. Ciuk (2015), ‘“Keeping the family side ticking along”: An exploratory

study of the work- family interface in the experiences of rotational assignees and

frequent business travellers’, Journal of Global Mobility, 3(2), 137-154.

Baker, J. & J. Ivancevich (1970), ‘Multinational management staffing with American

expatriates’, Economic and Business Bulletin, 23(1), 35-39.

41"

Baker, J. & J. Ivancevich (1971), ‘The assignment of American executives abroad:

Systematic, haphazard, or chaotic?’, California Management Review, 13(3), 39-44.

Banai, M. & W. Harry (2004), ‘Boundaryless global careers: The international

itinerants’, International Studies of Management and Organization, 34(3), 96-120.

Baruch, Y., M. Dickmann, Y. Altman & F. Bournois (2013), ‘Exploring international

work: Types and dimensions of global careers’, The International Journal of

Human Resource Management, 24(12), 2369-2393.

Baruch, Y. & M. Peiperl (2000), ‘Career management practices: An empirical survey

and theoretical implications’, Human Resource Management, 39(4), 347-366.

Batalova, Jeanne & B. Lindsay Lowell (2006), ‘'The best and the brightest':

immigrant professionals in the US’, In Michael P. Smith and Adrian Favell (eds.),

The human face of global mobility: international highly skilled migration in

Europe, North America and the Asia-Pacific (pp. 81-102), New Brunswick, NJ,

Transaction Publishers.

Beaverstock, J. (2002), ‘Transnational elites in global cities: British expatriates in

Singapore’s financial district’, Geoforum, 33(4), 525-538.

Beaverstock, J. (2005), ‘Transnational managerial elites in the city: British highly-

skilled inter-company transferees in New York City’s financial district’, Journal of

Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(2), 245-268.

Jonathan V. Beaverstock, Ben Derudder, James Faulconbridge and Frank Witlox

(2010), ‘International business travel in the global economy’, Surrey, Ashgate

Publishing Ltd.

Beeth, Gunnar (1973), ‘International management practice: An insider’s view’, New

York, NY, AMACOM.

Begley, A., D. Collings & H. Scullion (2008), ‘The cross- cultural adjustment

experiences of self-initiated repatriates to the Republic of Ireland’, Employee

Relations, 30(3), 264-282.

Berry, J. (1997), ‘Immigration, acculturation and adaptation’, Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 46(1), 5-34.

Bickers, Robert A. (2010), ‘Settlers and expatriates: Britons over the seas’, Oxford,

UK, Oxford University Press.

Biemann, T. & M. Andresen (2010), ‘Self-initiated foreign expatriates versus

assigned expatriates: Two distinct types of international careers?’, Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 25(4), 430-448.

Binetter, T. (2010), ‘Non-traditional expatriate practice, knowledge transfer and

organizational learning: An examination of the potential of reverse expatriation’,

Sydney, University of Sydney.

Black, J.S. & H. Gregersen (1991), ‘The other half of the picture: Antecedents of

spouse cross-cultural adjustment’, Journal of International Business Studies, 22(3),

461-477.

Black, J.S., H. Gregersen & M. Mendenhall (1992), ‘Toward a theoretical framework

of repatriation adjustment’, Journal of International Business Studies, 23(4), 737-

758.

Black, J. S. & M. Mendanhall (1990), ‘Cross-cultural training effectiveness: A review

and a theoretical framework for future research’, Academy of Management Review,

15(1), 113-136.

42"

Boddewyn, J., B. Toyne & M. Zaida (2004), ‘The meanings of 'international

management'’, Management International Review, 44(2), 195-212.

Bonache, J., C. Brewster, V. Suutari & P. de Saa (2010), ‘Expatriation: Traditional

criticisms and international careers’, Thunderbird International Business Review,

52(4), 263-274.

Bono, J. & G. McNamara (2011), ‘Publishing in AMJ - Part 2: Research design’,

Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 657-660.

Borg, Malcolm (1988), ‘International transfer of managers in multinational

corporations’, Uppsala, Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

Borjas, G. & B. Bratsberg (1996), ‘Who leaves? The outmigration of the foreign-

born’, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(1), 165-176.

Borrmann, W. (1968), ‘The problem of expatriate personnel and their selection in

international enterprises’, Management International Review, 8(4/5), 37-48.

Boyle, Paul, Keith Halfacree & Vaughan Robinson (1998), ‘Exploring contemporary

migration’, Harlow, Addison Wesley Longman.

Bozionelos, N. (2009), ‘Expatriation outside the boundaries of the multinational

corporation: A study of expatriate nurses in Saudi Arabia’, Human Resource

Management, 48(1), 111-134.

Bozkurt, Ö. & A.T. Mohr (2011), ‘Forms of cross-border mobility and social capital

in multinational enterprises’, Human Resource Management Journal, 21(2), 138-

155.

Brandt, W. & J. Hulbert (1976), ‘Patterns of communications in the multinational

corporation: An empirical study’, Journal of International Business Studies, 7(1),

57-64.

Brein, M. & K. David (1971), ‘Intercultural communication and the adjustment of the

sojourner’, Psychological Bulletin, 76(3), 215-230.

Brewster, Chris & Hillary Harris (1999), ‘International HRM: Contemporary issues

in Europe’, Oxon, Routledge.

Brewster, C., H. Harris & J. Petrovic (2001), ‘Globally mobile employees: managing

the mix’, Journal of Professional HRM, 25, 11-15.

Brewster, C. and H. Scullion (1997), ‘A review and agenda for expatriate HRM’,

Human Resource Management Journal, 7(3), 31-41.

Briscoe, Dennis, Randall Schuler & Lisbeth Claus (2009), ‘International human

resource management’, (2nd ed.), Oxon, Routledge.

Briscoe, Dennis, Randall Schuler & Ibraiz Tarique (2012), ‘International human

resource management: policies and practices for multinational enterprises (2nd

ed.), Oxon, Routledge.

Brookfield Global Relocation Services (2016), ‘Global mobility trends survey:

Breakthrough to the future of global talent mobility’, Woodridge, IL, Brookfield

Global Relocation Services.

Brown, R. & J. Connell (2004), ‘The migration of doctors and nurses from South

Pacific Island Nations’, Social Science and Medicine, 58(11), 2193-2210.

Bruning, N., K. Sonpar & X. Wang (2012), ‘Host-country national networks and

expatriate effectiveness: A mixed-methods study’, Journal of International

Business Studies, 43(4), 444-450.

43"

Butler, G. & S. Richardson (2013), ‘Working to travel and long-term career

dilemmas: Experiences of Western lifestyle migrants in Malaysia’, Tourist Studies,

13(3), 251-267.

Caligiuri, P. (2000), ‘Selecting expatriates for personality characteristics: A

moderating effect of personality on the relationship between host national contact

and cross-cultural adjustment’, Management International Review, 40(1), 61-80.

Campbell, R. (1969), ‘United States military training for cross-cultural interaction’,

Office of Naval Research, June.

Cappellen, T. & M. Janssens (2010), ‘The career reality of global managers: an

examination of career triggers’, The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 21(11), 1884-1910.

Cappellen, T. & M. Janssens (2010a), ‘Characteristics of international work:

Narratives of the global manager’, Thunderbird International Business Review,

52(4), 337-348.

Cappellen, T. & M. Janssens (2010b), ‘Enacting global careers: Organizational career

scripts and the global economy as co-existing career referents’, Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 31(5), 687-706.

Cappelli, P. (2012), ‘A cautionary view of construct validity’, Human Resource

Management Review, 22(2), 149-151.

Cascio, W. (2012), ‘Methodological issues in international HR management

research’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(12),

2532-2545.

Castles, Stephen (2000), ‘Ethnicity and globalization: From migrant worker to

transnational citizen’, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Castles, Stephen, Hein de Haas & Mark J. Miller (2013), ‘The age of migration:

International population movements in the modern world’, New York, NY, The

Guildford Press.

Cerdin, J.-L., M. Abdeljalil- Diné & C. Brewster (2014), ‘Qualified immigrants'

success: Exploring the motivation to migrate and to adjust’, Journal of

International Business Studies, 45(2), 151–168.

Cerdin, J.-L. & M. Pargneux (2010), ‘Career anchors: A comparison between

organization-assigned and self-initiated expatriates’, Thunderbird International

Business Review, 52(4), 287-299.

Cerdin, J.-L. & J. Selmer (2014), ‘Who is a self-initiated expatriate? Towards

conceptual clarity of a common notion’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 25(9), 1281-1301.

Cerdin, J.-L. & C. Brewster (2014), ‘Talent management and expatriation: Bridging

two streams of research and practice’, Journal of World Business, 49(2), 245-252.

Chacko, E. (2007), ‘From brain drain to brain gain: Reverse migration to Bangalore

and Hyderabad - India's globalizing high tech cities’, GeoJournal, 68(2), 131-140.

Chang, Y.-Y., Y. Gong & M. Peng (2012), ‘Expatriate knowledge transfer, subsidiary

absorptive capacity, and subsidiary performance’, Academy of Management

Journal, 55(4), 927-948.

Church, A. (1982), ‘Sojourner adjustment’, Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 540-572.

Clarke, Lisa, Akhentoolove Corbin & BettyJane Punnett (2016), ‘Expatriates to and

from developed and developing countries’, In Yvonne McNulty & Jan Selmer

44"

(eds.), The Research Handbook of Expatriates (this volume), London, Edward

Elgar.

Cleveland, H., C.J. Mangone & J.C. Adams (1960), ‘The overseas Americans’, The

International Executive, 2(3), 5-6.

Coase, R. (1937), ‘The nature of the firm’, Economica, 4(16), 386-405.

Cohen, E. (1977), ‘Expatriate communities’, Current Sociology, 24(23), 5-133.

Colakoglu, S. & P. Caligiuri (2008), ‘Cultural distance, expatriate staffing and

subsidiary performance: The case of US subsidiaries of multinational

corporations’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(2),

223-239.

Colic-Peisker, V. (2010), ‘Free floating in the cosmopolis? Exploring the identity-

belonging of transnational knowledge workers’, Global Networks, 10(4), 467-488.

Collings, D. (2014), ‘Integrating global mobility and global talent management:

Exploring the challenges and strategic opportunities’, Journal of World Business,

49(2), 253-261.

Collings, D., H. Scullion & M. Morley (2007), ‘Changing patterns of global staffing

in the multinational enterprise: Challenges to the conventional expatriate

assignment and emerging alternatives’, Journal of World Business, 42(2), 198-213.

Collins Dictionaries. (2011), ‘Collins English Dictionary’, Glasgow, UK, Collins.

Comay, Y. (1971), ‘Determinants of return migration: Canadian professionals in the

US’, Southern Economic Journal, 37(3), 318-322.

Copeland, Lennie & Lewis Griggs (1985), ‘Going international: How to make friends

and deal effectively in the global marketplace’, New York, NY, Plume/Random

House.

Crowley-Henry, M. (2012), ‘Re-conceptualizing career development of self-initiated

expatriates: rivers not ladders’, Journal of Management Development, 31(2), 130-

141.

Crowther, F. (1959), ‘Organizing for overseas operations’, The International

Executive, 1(2), 13-14.

Dalai, Rashmi J. (2015, 16 September). ‘Does Asia need expats, or 'perma-pats'?’ The

Wall Street Journal. Accessed on 20 September 2015, from

http://www.wsj.com/articles/does-asia-need-western-expats-or-perma-pats-

1442445094

Danehl, Joanne (2015), ‘It’s time for rotators to come out of the shadows’, London,

Crown World Mobility.

Daniels, J. (1974a), ‘The education and mobility of European executives in US

subsidiaries: A comparative study’, Journal of International Business Studies, 5(1),

9-24.

Daniels, J. (1974b), ‘The non-American manager, especially as third country national,

in US multinationals: A separate but equal doctrine?’, Journal of International

Business Studies, 5(2), 25-40.

Daniels, J. and G. Insch (1998), ‘Why are early departure rates from foreign

assignments lower than historically reported?’, Multinational Business Review,

6(1), 13-23.

45"

De Verthelyi, R. (1995), ‘International students' spouses: Invisible sojourners in the

culture shock literature’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 19(3),

387-411.

de Wit, Hans, Pawan Agarwal, Mohsen E. Said, Molatlhegi T. Sehoole & Muhammad

Sirozi (2008), ‘The dynamics of international student circulation in a global

context’, Rotterdam, Sense Publishers.

Demel, B. & W. Mayrhofer, W. (2010), ‘Frequent business travelers across Europe:

Career aspirations and implications’, Thunderbird International Business Review,

52(4), 301-311.

Derr, B. & G. Oddou (1991), ‘Are US multinationals adequately preparing future

American leaders for global competition?’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 2(2), 227-244.

Dickmann, Michael & Chris Debner (2011), ‘International mobility at work:

Companies' structural, remuneration, social security and risk considerations’, In

Michael Dickmann & Yehuda Baruch (eds.), Global Careers (pp. 268-293), Oxon,

Routledge.

Dickmann, M. & N. Doherty (2010), ‘Exploring organizational and individual career

goals, interactions, and outcomes of developmental international assignments’,

Thunderbird International Business Review, 52(4), 313-324.

Dickmann, M., N. Doherty, T. Mills & C. Brewster (2008), ‘Why do they go?

Individual and corporate perspectives on the factors influencing the decision to

accept an international assignment’, The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 19(4), 731-751.

Dickmann, M. & H. Harris (2005), ‘Developing career capital for global careers: The

role of international assignments’, Journal of World Business, 40(4), 399-408.

Doherty, Noeleen & Michael Dickmann (2013), ‘Self-initiated and assigned

expatriates: talent management and career considerations’, In Vlad Vaiman &

Arno Haslberger (eds.), Managing talent of self- initiated expatriates: a neglected

source of the global talent flow (pp. 234–255), Basingstoke, Palgrave McMillan.

Doherty, N., M. Dickmann & T. Mills (2011), ‘Exploring the motives of company-

backed and self-initiated expatriates’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 22(3), 595-611.

Doherty, N., J. Richardson & K. Thorn (2013), ‘Self-initiated expatriation and self-

initiated expatriates: Clarification of the research stream’, Career Development

International, 18(1), 97-112.

Dorsch, Michael, Vesa Suutari & Chris Brewster (2012), ‘Research on self-initiated

expatriation: history and future directions’, In Maike Andresen, Akram Al Ariss &

Matthias Walther (eds.), Self-initiated expatriation: individual, organizational, and

national perspectives (pp. 42-58), Oxon, Routledge.

Doty, D. & W. Glick (1994), ‘Typologies as a unique form of theory building:

Toward improved understanding and modeling’, Academy of Management Review,

19(2), 230-251.

Dumont, Jean-Christophe & G. Lemaitre (2005), ‘Counting immigrants and

expatriates in OECD countries: A new perspective’, New York, NY, United

Nations Expert Group Meeting on International Migration and Development

(Population Division).

46"

Dunning, John (1958), ‘American investment in British manufacturing industry’,

London, George Allen and Unwin.

Dustmann, C. & Y. Weiss (2007), ‘Return migration: Theory and empirical evidence

from the UK’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 45(2), 236-256.

Earnest, Ernest (1968), ‘Expatriates and patriots: American artists, scholars and

writers in Europe’, Durham, NC, Duke University Press.

Edström, A. & J. Galbraith (1977), ‘Transfer of managers as a coordination and

control strategy in multinational organisations’, Administrative Science Quarterly,

22(2), 248-263.

Edström, A. & J. Galbraith (1994), ‘Alternative policies for international transfers of

managers’, Management International Review, 1(1), 71-82.

Fan, S. X., C. Cregan, A.-W. Harzing and T. Köhler (2016), ‘The benefits of being

understood: the role of ethnic identity confirmation in expatriate-local employee

interactions’, In Proceedings of the EURAM Annual Conference, Paris, France,

June 1-4.

Fan, D., M. Zhang & C. Zhu (2013), ‘International human resource management

strategies of Chinese multinationals operating abroad’, Asia Pacific Business

Review, 19(4), 526-541.

Farrer, J. (2010), ‘“New Shanghailanders” or “New Shanghainese”: Western

expatriates' narratives of emplacement in Shanghai’, Journal of Ethnic and

Migration Studies, 36(8), 1211-1228.

Favell, A. (2004), ‘Eurostars and eurocities: Free moving professionals and the

promise of European integration’, European Studies Newsletter, 6(3-4), 1-10.

Fechter, Anne-Meike (2007), ‘Transnational lives: Expatriates in Indonesia’,

Hampshire, UK, Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Felker, J. (2011), ‘Professional development through self-directed expatriation:

Intentions and outcomes for young, educated Eastern Europeans’, International

Journal of Training and Development, 15(1), 76-86.

Findlay, A. (1988), ‘From settlers to skilled transients: the changing structure of

British international migration’, Geoforum, 19(4), 401-410.

Findlay, A., L. Li, A. Jowett & R. Skeldon (1996), ‘Skilled international migration

and the global city: a study of expatriates in Hong Kong’, Transactions of the

Institute of British Geographers, 21, 49-61.

Fish, A. & J. Wood (1993), ‘HRM and international expatriate management: A

strategic link for Australian business’, International Journal of Career

Management, 5(4), 25-36.

Fish, A. & J. Wood (1996), ‘What motivates Australian business managers to

undertake expatriate appointments in East Asia?’, Career Development

International, 1(7), 34-43.

Foote, M. (1977), ‘Controlling the cost of international compensation’, Harvard

Business Review, 55(6), 123-132.

Forster, N. (1992), ‘International managers and mobile families: The professional and

personal dynamics of transnational career pathing and job mobility in the 1990s’,

The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 3(3), 605-623.

Forster, N. (2000), ‘The myth of the 'international manager'’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(1), 126-142.

47"

Fouraker, L. & J. Stopford (1968), ‘Organizational structure and the multinational

strategy’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 13(1), 47-64.

Froese, F. & V. Peltokorpi (2013), ‘Organizational expatriates and self-initiated

expatriates: Differences in cross-cultural adjustment and job satisfaction’, The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(10), 1953-1967.

Fukuda, K. & P. Chu (1994), ‘Wrestling with expatriate family problems: Japanese

experience in east Asia’, International Studies of Management and Organization,

24(3), 36-47.

Furnham, Adrian (1987), ‘The adjustment of sojourners’, In Young Yun Kim &

William B. Gudykunst (eds.), Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches,

Newbury Park, CA, Sage.

Furusawa, M. & C. Brewster (2014), ‘The bi-cultural option for global talent

management: the Japanese/ Brazilian Nikkeijin example’, Journal of World

Business, 50(1), 133-143.

Gama, E. & P. Pedersen (1977), ‘Readjustment problems of Brazilian returnees from

graduate studies in the United States’, International Journal of Intercultural

Relations, 1(4), 46-59.

Gill, B. (2005), ‘Homeward bound? The experience of return mobility for Italian

scientists’, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 18(3),

319-341.

Gomez-Mejia, L. & D. Balkin, D. (1987), ‘The determinants of managerial

satisfaction with the expatriation and repatriation process’, Journal of Management

Development, 6(1), 7-17.

Gong, Y. (2003), ‘Subsidiary staffing in multinational enterprises: Agency, resources,

and performance’, Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 728-739.

Gonzalez, R. (1967), ‘Expatriates’, MSU Business Topics, 15(2), 69-73.

Gonzalez, Richard F. & Anant R. Negandhi (1967), ‘The United States overseas

executive: his orientations and career patterns’, East Lansing, MI, Michigan State

University.

Green, A., T. Hogarth & R. Shackelton (1999), ‘Longer distance commuting as a

substitute for migration in Britain: A review of trends, issues and implications’,

International Journal of Population Geography, 5(1), 49-67.

Green, N. (2009), ‘Expatriation, expatriates, and expats: The American

transformation of a concept’, American Historial Review, 114(2), 307-319.

Gustafson, P. (2014), ‘Business travel from the traveller’s perspective: Stress,

stimulation and normalization’, Mobilities, 9(1), 68-83.

Guzzo, R., K. Noonan & E. Elron (1994), ‘Expatriate managers and the psychological

contract’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 617-627.

Haider, M. (1966), ‘Tomorrow’s executive: A man for all countries’, Columbia

Journal of World Business, 2(1), 106–113.

Hammer, M., W. Hart & R. Rogan (1998), ‘Can you go home again? An analysis of

the repatriation of corporate managers and spouses’, Management International

Review, 38(1), 67-86.

Hao, J. & W. Wen (2016), ‘When sojourners return: Employment opportunities and

challenges facing high-skilled Chinese returnees’, Asian and Pacific Migration

Journal, 25(1), 22-40.

48"

Hapgood, David and Meridan Bennett (1968), ‘Agents of change: A close look at the

Peace Corps’, Boston, MA, Little, Brown and Co.

Harper, J. (2012, 2 July), ‘Expatshoring creates jobs for emigrants’, The Telegraph.

Accessed on 20 October 2015, from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/expat-

money/9369500/Expatshoring-creates-jobs-for-emigrants.html

Harris, H. (2002), ‘Strategic management of international workers’, Innovations in

International HR, 28(1), 1-5.

Harris, Hillary, Chris Brewster & Paul Sparrow (2003), ‘International human

resource management’, Wimbledon, CIPD.

Harrison, D., M. Shaffer & P. Bhaskar-Shrinivas (2004), ‘Going places: Roads more

and less traveled in research on expatriate experiences’, Research in Personnel and

Human Resources Management, 23, 199-247.

Harrison, Edelweiss & Snejina Michailova (2013), ‘Female self-initiated expatriates

in the United Arab Emirates: An unexpected trifecta’, In Vlad Vaiman & Arno

Haslberger (eds.), Talent management of self-initiated expatriates: a neglected

source of global talent (pp. 117-135), Basingstoke, Palgrave-Macmillan.

Harvey, M. (1985), ‘The executive family: An overlooked variable in international

assignments’, Columbia Journal of World Business, 20(2), 84-92.

Harvey, M. (1989), ‘Repatriation of corporate executives: An empirical study’,

Journal of International Business Studies, 20(1), 131-144.

Harvey, M. (1997), ‘Focusing the international personnel performance appraisal

process’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, 8(1): 41-62.

Harvey, M. & M. Moeller (2009), ‘Expatriate managers: A historical review’,

International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(3), 275-296.

Harvey, W. (2009), ‘British and Indian scientists in Boston considering returning to

their home countries’, Population, Space and Place, 15(6), 493-508.

Harzing, A.-W. (2001), ‘Of bears, bumble-bees, and spiders: The role of expatriates

in controlling foreign subsidiaries’, Journal of World Business, 36(4), 366-379.

Harzing, Anne-Wil (2004), ‘Composing an international staff’, In Anne-Wil Harzing

& Joris Van Ruysseveldt (eds.), International human resource management (2nd

ed., pp. 251-282), Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

Haslberger, Arno, Chris Brewster & Thomas Hippler (2014), ‘Managing performance

abroad: a new model for understanding expatriate adjustment’, Oxon, Routledge.

Hays, R. (1971), ‘Ascribed behavioral determinants of success-failure among US

expatriate managers’, Journal of International Business Studies, 2(1), 40-46.

Hays, R. (1974), ‘Expatriate selection: Insuring success and avoiding failure’, Journal

of International Business Studies, 5(1), 25-38.

Heenan, D. (1970), ‘The corporate expatriate: Assignment to ambiguity’, Columbia

Journal of World Business, 5(3), 49-54.

Heenan, David A. & Howard V. Perlmutter (1979), ‘Multinational organisation

development’, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley.

Henry, E. (1966), ‘Lessons from Peace Corps selection and training’, The

International Executive, 8(1), 9-10.

49"

Hippler, T. (2009), ‘Why do they go? Empirical evidence of employees' motives for

seeking or accepting relocation’, The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 20(6), 1381-1401.

Hodgson, F.X. (1963), ‘The selection of overseas management’, MSU Business

Topics, 11(2), 49-54.

Holtbrugge, D. & J. Ambrosius (2015), ‘Mentoring, skill development, and career

success of foreign expatriates’, Human Resource Development International,

18(3), 278-294.

Howard, C. (1974a), ‘Model for the design of a selection program for multinational

executives’, Public Personnel Management, 3(2), 138-145.

Howard, C. (1974b), ‘The returning overseas executive - culture shock in reverse’,

Human Resource Management, 13(2), 22-26.

Howard, C. (1979), ‘Integrating returning expatriates into the domestic organisation’,

The Personnel Administrator, 24, 61-65.

Huber, P. (2014), ‘Are commuters in the EU better educated than non-commuters but

worse than migrants?’, Urban Studies, 51(3), 509-525.

Huber, P. & K. Nowotny (2013)., ‘Moving across borders: who is willing to migrate

or to commute?’, Regional Studies, 47(9), 1462-1481.

Hudson, S. & K. Inkson (2006), ‘Volunteer overseas development workers: the hero's

adventure and personal transformation’, Career Development International, 11(4),

304-320.

Hugo, Graeme (2002), ‘Emigration of skilled Australians: Patterns, trends and

issues’, Paper presented at the DIMIA Immigration and Population Issues

Conference, Sydney, 7 May.

Huson, G. (1959), ‘How a foreign subsidiary can win friends in Canada’, The

International Executive, 1(1), 17-18.

Imundo, L. (1974), ‘Problems associated with managerial mobility’, Personnel

Journal, 53(12), 910-914.

Inkson, K., M. Arthur, J. Pringle & S. Barry (1997), ‘Expatriate assignment versus

overseas experience: Contrasting models of international human resource

development’, Journal of World Business, 32(4), 351-368.

Inkson, K. & B. Myers (2003), ‘"The big OE": Self-directed travel and career

development’, Career Development International, 8(4), 170-181.

Iredale, R. (2001), ‘The migration of professionals: theories and typologies’,

International Migration, 39(5), 7-26.

Ivancevich, J. (1969), ‘Selection of American managers for overseas assignments’,

Personnel Journal, 48(3), 189-200.

Jain, S. (2012), ‘For love and money: second-generation Indian-Americans 'return' to

India’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(5), 896-914.

James, S., J. Hunsley, G. Navara & M. Alles (2004), ‘Marital, psychological, and

sociocultural aspects of sojourner adjustment: Expanding the field of enqiry’,

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 28(2), 111-126.

Johnson, R., C. Rosen, C.-H. Chang, E. Djurdjevic & M. Taing (2012),

‘Recommendations for improving the construct clarity of higher-order

multidimensional constructs’, Human Resource Management Review, 22(2), 62-

72.

50"

Jokinen, T., C. Brewster & V. Suutari (2008), ‘Career capital during international

work experiences: Contrasting self-initiated expatriate experiences and assigned

expatriation’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(6),

979-998.

Jones, L. (1975), ‘Training in the jungle - CALTEX style’, Education + Training,

17(1/2), 45-48.

Katz, E. & S. Eisenstadt (1960), ‘Some sociological observations on the response of

israeli organizations to new immigrants’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 5(1),

113-133.

Keegan, W. (1974), ‘Multinational scanning: a study of the information sources

utilized by headquarters executives in multinational companies’, Administrative

Science Quarterly, 19(3), 411-421.

Khosa, R. & V. Kalitanyi (2015), ‘Migration reasons, traits and entrepreneurial

motivation of African immigrant entrepreneurs: Towards an entrepreneurial

migration progression’, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places

in the Global Economy, 9(2), 132-155.

Kiernan, P. (1963), ‘What it takes to be a successful international manager’, The

International Executive, Fall(3).

King, Russell (2000), ‘Generalizations from the history of return migration’, In Bimal

Ghosh (ed.), Return migration: Journey of hope or despair? (pp. 7-55), Geneva,

United Nations International Organization for Migration.

King, Russell, Tony Warnes & Allan M. Williams (2000), ‘Sunset lives: British

retirement migration to the Mediterranean’, Oxford, Bloomsbury Academic.

Klein, H. & J. Delery (2012), ‘Construct clarity in human resource management

research: Introduction to the special issue’, Human Resource Management Review,

22(2), 57-61.

Knowles, Caroline (2005), ‘Making whiteness: British lifestyle migrants in Hong

Kong’, In Claire Alexander & Caroline Knowles (eds.), Making race matter:

Bodies, space and identity (pp. 90-110), Basingstoke, Palgrave-Macmillan.

Kolde, E. & R. Hill (1967), ‘Conceptual and normative aspects of international

management’, Academy of Management Journal, 10(2), 119-128.

Konopaske, R., C. Robie & J. Ivancevich (2005), ‘A preliminary model of spouse

influence on managerial global assignment willingness’, The International Journal

of Human Resource Management, 16(3), 405-426.

Konopaske, R., C. Robie & J. Ivancevich (2009), ‘Managerial willingness to assume

traveling, short-term and long-term global assignments’, Management

International Review, 49(3), 359-387.

KPMG (2008), ‘Thinking beyond borders: Management of extended business

travelers’, Geneva, KPMG.

KPMG (2011), ‘Global assignment policies and practices survey’, Geneva, KPMG.

Kraimer, M., M. Bolino & B. Mead (2016), ‘Themes in expatriate and repatriate

research over four decades: What do we know and what do we still need to learn?’,

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1),

1-27.

Kraimer, M., M. Shaffer, D. Harrison and H. Ren (2012), ‘No place like home? An

identity strain perspective of repatriate turnover’, Academy of Management

Journal, 55(2), 399-420.

51"

Kraimer, M. & S. Wayne, S. (2004), ‘An examination of perceived organizational

support as a multidimensional construct in the context of an expatriate

assignment’, Journal of Management, 30(2), 209-237.

Lance, C. & D. Richardson (1988), ‘Correlates of work and non-work stress and

satisfaction among American insulated sojourners’, Human Relations, 41(10), 725-

738.

Lanier, A.R. (1979), ‘Selecting and preparing personnel for overseas transfers’,

Personnel Journal, 58(3), 160-163.

Lauring, J., J. Selmer & J.K. Steen Jacobsen (2014), ‘Business or pleasure? Blurring

relocation categories and motivation patterns among expatriates’, Scandinavian

Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 14(2), 170-186.

Lavenex, Sandra (2006), ‘The competition state and multilateral liberalization of high

skilled migration’, In In Michael P. Smith and Adrian Favell (eds.), The human

face of global mobility: international highly skilled migration in Europe, North

America and the Asia-Pacific (pp. 29-52), New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction

Publishers.

Lay, Tracy H. (1925), The Foreign Service of the United States’, New York, NY,

Prentice Hall Inc.

Lenartowicz, T. & J. Johnson, J. (2007), ‘Staffing managerial positions in emerging

markets: A cultural perspective’, International Journal of Emerging Markets, 2(3),

207-214.

LePine, J. & A. Wilcox-King (2010), ‘Developing novel theoretical insight from

reviews of existing theory and research, Academy of Management Review, 35(4),

506-509.

Linehan, M. & H. Scullion (2002), ‘Repatriation of European female corporate

executives: An empirical study’, The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 13(2), 254-267.

Littrell, L., E. Salas, K. Hess, M. Paley & S. Riedel (2006), ‘Expatriate preparation: A

critical analysis of 25 years of cross-cultural training research’, Human Resource

Development Review, 5(3), 355-388.

Locke, E. (2007), ‘The case for inductive theory building’, Journal of Management,

33(6), 867-890.

Locke, E. (2012), ‘Construct validity vs. concept validity’, Human Resource

Management Review, 22(2), 146-148.

Lorente, Beatriz P., Nicola Piper, Shen Hsui-Hua & Brenda Yeoh (2005), ‘Asian

migrations: Sojourning, displacement, homecoming & other travels’, Singapore,

Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.

Lovell, Enid B. (1966), ‘The changing role of the international executive’, New York,

NY, National Industrial Conference Board.

Lysgaard, Sverre (1954) ‘A study of intercultural contact: Norwegian Fulbright

grantees visiting the United States’, Oslo, Norwegian Institute for Social Research.

Lysgaard, S. (1955), ‘Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees

visiting the United States’, International Social Science Bulletin in Journal of

Social Issues, 11(1-4), 58.

Maddox, R. (1971), ‘Problems and trends in assigning managers overseas’,

Personnel, 48(1), 53-56.

52"

Mahroum, S. (2000), ‘Highly skilled globetrotters: mapping the international

migration of human capital’, R&D Management, 30(1), 23-31.

Mandell, M. M. (1958), ‘Selecting Americans for overseas assignments’, Personnel

Administration, 21(6), 25-30.

Mandell, M.M. & S. Greenberg (1954), ‘Selecting Americans for overseas

employment’, Personnel, 32(3), 356-366.

Massey, D. & K. Bartley (2006), ‘The changing legal status distribution of

immigrants: A caution’, International Migration Review, 39(2), 469-484.

Mayerhofer, H., L. Hartmann & A. Herbert (2004), ‘Career management issues for

flexpatriate international staffing’, Thunderbird International Business Review,

46(6), 647-666.

Mayerhofer, H., L. Hartmann, G. Michelitsch-Reidl & I. Kollinger (2004),

‘Flexpatriate assignments: a neglected issue in global staffing’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 15(8), 1371-1389.

Mayrhofer, W. (2001), ‘Organizational International Career Logics (OICLs): A

conceptual tool for analyzing organizational expatriation patterns and their

consequences for the management of organizations’, Thunderbird International

Business Review, 43(1), 121-144.

Mayrhofer, Wolfgang, Astrid Reichel & Paul Sparrow (2012), ‘Alternative forms of

international working’, In Günter Stahl, Ingmar Björkman & Shad Morris (eds.),

Handbook of research into international HRM, London, Edward Elgar.

Mayrhofer, Wolfgang, Paul Sparrow & Angelika Zimmerman (2008), ‘Modern forms

of international working’, In Michael Dickmann, Chris Brewster & Paul Sparrow

(eds.), International human resource management - the European perspective (pp.

219-239), Oxon, Routledge.

McKenna, S. (2010), ‘Adjustment of the independent expatriate: A case study of

Doug’, Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 5(3), 280-298.

McKenna, S. & J. Richardson (2007), ‘The increasing complexity of the

internationally mobile professional: Issues for research and practice’, Cross

Cultural Management: An International Journal, 14(4), 307-320.

McNulty, Yvonne (2013), ‘Are self-initiated expatriates born or made? Exploring the

relationship between SIE orientation and individual ROI’, In Vlad Vaiman & Arno

Haslberger (eds.), Talent management of self-initiated expatriates: a neglected

source of global talent (pp. 30-58), Basingstoke, Palgrave-McMillan.

McNulty, Yvonne (2016), ‘Why expatriate compensation will change how we think

about global talent management’, In Ying Guo, Peter Dowling & Rammal Hussain

(eds.), Global talent management and staffing in MNEs (International Business &

Management, pp. 123-148), Volume 32, Bingley, Emerald.

McNulty, Y., H. De Cieri & K. Hutchings (2009), ‘Do global firms measure

expatriate return on investment? An empirical examination of measures, barriers

and variables influencing global staffing practices’, The International Journal of

Human Resource Management, 20(6), 1309–1326.

McNulty, Y., H. De Cieri & K. Hutchings (2013), ‘Expatriate return on investment in

Asia Pacific: An empirical study of individual ROI versus corporate ROI’, Journal

of World Business, 48(2), 209-221.

McNulty, Yvonne, Kelly Fisher, Louis Hicks & Tim Kane (2016), ‘Military

expatriates: US veterans living abroad’, In Louis Hicks, Eugenia L. Weiss & Jose

53"

E. Coll (eds.), The civilian lives of US veterans: Issues and identities (pp.

forthcoming), Santa Barbara, CA, Praeger.

McNulty, Y. & C. Vance (2016), ‘Dynamic global careers: A new conceptualization

of expatriate career paths’, Personnel Review, forthcoming.

McPhail, R., R. Fisher, M. Harvey & M. Moeller (2012), ‘Staffing the global

organization: “Cultural nomads”’, Human Resource Development Quarterly,

23(2), 259-276.

Megginson, L. (1967), ‘The interrelationship and interaction between the cultural

environment and managerial effectiveness’, Management International Review,

7(6), 65-70.

Mendenhall, M., E. Dunbar & G. Oddou (1987), ‘Expatriate selection, training and

career-pathing: A review and critique’, Human Resource Management, 26(3), 331-

345.

Mendenhall, Mark, Torsten M. Kuehlmann, Günter Stahl & Joyce Osland (2002),

‘Employee development and expatriate assignments’, In Martin J. Gannon &

Karen Newman (eds.), The Blackwell handbook of cross-cultural management (pp.

154-183), Oxford, Blackwell.

Mendenhall, M. & G. Oddou (1985), ‘The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A

review’, Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 39-47.

Mercer. (2010), ‘Localization Practice Survey: China, Hong Kong and Singapore’,

Geneva, Mercer.

Meyskens, M., M. von Glinow, W. Werther & L. Clarke (2009), ‘The paradox of

international talent: Alternative forms of international assignments’, The

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(6), 1439-1450.

Miller, E. (1972), ‘The selection decision for an international assignment: A study of

the decision maker's behavior’, Journal of International Business Studies, 3(2), 49-

65.

Miller, E. (1973), ‘The international selection decision: A study of some dimensions

of managerial behavior in the selection decision process’, Academy of

Management Journal, 16(2), 239-252.

Miller, E. (1975), ‘The job satisfaction of expatriate American managers: A function

of regional location and previous international work experience’, Journal of

International Business Studies, 6(2), 65-73.

Miller, E. (1977), ‘Managerial qualifications of personnel occupying overseas

management positions as perceived by American expatriate managers’, Journal of

International Business Studies, 8(1), 57-69.

Miller, E., & J. Cheng (1978), ‘A closer look at the decision to accept an overseas

position’, Management International Review, 18(3), 25-33.

Mincer, J. (1978), ‘Family migration decisions’, Journal of Political Economy, 86(5),

749-773.

Misa, K. & J. Fabricatore (1979), ‘Return on investment of overseas personnel’,

Financial Executive, 47(4), 42-46.

Mischel, W. (1965), ‘Predicting the success of Peace Corps volunteers in Nigeria’,

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(5), 517-520.

Mohn, T. (2015, 19 May), ‘Swaps ease disruption of overseas assignments’, The New

York Times. Accessed on 27 October 2015, from

54"

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/business/talent-swaps-help-develop-skills-

and-careers.html?_r=0.

Mol, S., M. Born, M. Willemsen & H. van der Molen (2005), ‘Predicting expatriate

job performance for selection purposes: A quantitative review’, Journal of

Crosscultural Psychology, 36(5), 590-620.

Molloy, J. & R. Ployhart (2012), ‘Construct clarity: Multidisciplinary considerations

and an illustration using human capital’, Human Resource Management Review,

22(2), 152-156.

Morris, M. & M. Robie (2001), ‘A meta-analysis of the effects of cross-cultural

training on expatriate performance and adjustment’, International Journal of

Training and Development, 5(2), 112-125.

Morrison, Alastair (1993), ‘Fair land Sarawak: Some recollections of an expatriate

official’, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press.

Murray, J. (1973), ‘International personnel repatriation: Culture shock in reverse’,

MSU Business Topics, 21(3), 59-66.

Myers, B. & J. Pringle (2005), ‘Self-initiated foreign experience as accelerated

development: Influences of gender’, Journal of World Business, 40(4), 421-431.

Nasholm, M. (2014), ‘A comparison of intra- and inter-organizational global careers’,

Journal of Global Mobility, 2(2), 183-202.

Navara, G. & S. James (2002), ‘Sojourner adjustment: does missionary status affect

acculturation?’, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26(6), 695-709.

Negandhi, A. & B. Estafen (1965), ‘A research model to determine the applicability

of American management know-how in differing cultures and/or environments’,

Academy of Management Journal, 8(4), 309-318.

Negandhi, A. (1971), ‘American management abroad: A comparative study of

management practices of American subsidiaries and local firms in developing

countries’, Management International Review, 11(4/5), 97-107.

Negandhi, A. (1974), ‘Cross-cultural management studies: Too many conclusions, not

enough conceptualization’, Management International Review, 14(6), 59-72.

Newman, J., B. Bhatt & T. Gutteridge (1978), ‘Determinants of expatriate

effectiveness: A theoretical and empirical vacuum’, Academy of Management

Review, 3(3), 655-661.

Newton Parks, F. (1963), ‘Executive trouble abroad’, The International Executive,

5(4), 5-6.

Nicholas, H. & A. McDowall (2012), ‘When work keeps us apart: a thematic analysis

of the experience of business travellers’, Community, Work and Famkily, 15(3),

335-355.

Oberg, K. (1960), ‘Cultural shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments’,

Practical Anthropology, 7(4), 177-182.

Olden, A. (1979), ‘Expatriates’, Library Review, 28(4), 247-253.

Oliver, Caroline (2012), ‘Retirement migration: Paradoxes of ageing’, Oxon,

Routledge.

ORC Worldwide (2004), ‘Survey of localization policies and practices’, New York,

NY, ORC Worldwide.

ORC Worldwide (2008), ‘Worldwide survey of international assignment policies and

practices’, New York, NY, ORC Worldwide.

55"

Osman-Gani, A.A.M. & S.H. Akmal (2008), ‘Repatriation readjustment of

international managers’, Career Development International, 13(5), 456.

Oxford Dictionary of English (2015), (3rd ed.), Oxford University Press.

Parker, P. & K. Inkson (1999), ‘New forms of career: The challenge to human

resource management’, Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 37(1), 76-85.

Pedersen, E., C. Neighbors, M. Larimer & C. Lee (2011), ‘Measuring sojourner

adjustment among American students studying abroad’, International Journal of

Intercultural Relations, 35(6), 881-889.

Peiperl, Maury & Karsten Jonsen (2007), ‘Global careers’, In Hugh P. Gunz & Maury

Peiperl (eds.), Handbook of of career studies (pp. 350-372), Thousand Oaks, CA,

Sage.

Penrose, Edith T. (1959), ‘The theory of the growth of the firm’, Oxford,

Blackwell/Oxford University Press.

Perlmutter, H. (1969), ‘The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation’,

Journal of World Business, 4(1), 9-18.

Perlmutter, H. & D. Heenan (1974), ‘How multinational should your top managers

be?’, Harvard Business Review, 52(6), 121-132.

Peter, H. & E. Henry (1962a), ‘Steps to better selection and training for overseas

jobs’, Personnel, 39(1), 18-25.

Peter, H. & E. Henry (1962b), ‘Measuring successful performance overseas’, The

International Executive, 4(1), 17-18.

Peterson, B. & L. Plamondon (2009), ‘Third culture kids and the consequences of

international sojourns on authoritarianism, acculturative balance, and positive

affect’ Journal of Research in Personality, 43(5), 755-763.

Peterson, R. & H. Schwind (1977), ‘A comparative study of personnel problems in

international companies and joint ventures in Japan’, Journal of International

Business Studies, 8(1), 45-56.

Pitts, M. (2009), ‘Identity and the role of expectations, stress, and talk in short-term

student sojourner adjustment: An application of the integrative theory of

communication and cross-cultural adaptation’, Journal of Intercultural Relations,

33(6), 450-462.

Podsakoff, P., S. MacKenzie & N. Podsakoff (2016), ‘Recommendations for creating

better concept definitions in the organizational, behavioral, and social sciences’,

Organizational Research Methods, 19(2), 159-203.

Pruthi, S., M. Wright & K. Meyer (2009), ‘Staffing venture capital firms' international

operations’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(1),

186-205.

Quick, Tina (2010), ‘The global nomad's guide to university transition’, Great Britain,

Summertime Publishing.

Reiche, B.S. (2006), ‘The inpatriate experience in multinational corporations: an

exploratory case study in Germany’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 17(9), 1572-1590.

Reiche, B.Sebastian, Maria Kraimer & Anne-Wil Harzing (2009), ‘Inpatriates as

agents of cross-unit knowledge flows in multinational corporations’, In Paul

Sparrow (ed.), Handbook of international human resource management:

integrating people, process and context (pp. 151-170), Chichester: Wiley.

56"

Renshaw, P., & Ghobadian, A. (2015). An infusion of the new. Accessed on 26

October 2015, from http://financialworld.co.uk: 57-58.

Reynolds, C. (1972), ‘Career paths and compensation in MNCs’, Columbia Journal of

World Business, 7(6), 77-87.

Richardson, J. (2006), ‘Self-directed expatriation: Family matters’, Personnel Review,

35(4), 469-486.

Richardson, J. & M. Mallon (2005), ‘Career interrupted? The case of the self-directed

expatriate’, Journal of World Business, 40(4), 409-420.

Richardson, J. & S. McKenna (2002), ‘Leaving and experiencing: Why academics

expatriate and how they experience expatriation’, Career Development

International, 7(2), 67-78.

Richardson, J. & S. McKenna (2006), ‘Exploring relationships with home and host

countries: A study of self-directed expatriates’, Cross Cultural Management: An

International Journal, 13(1), 6-22.

Richardson, Julia, Steve McKenna, Carolyn Dickie & Nadia de Gama (2013), ‘The

organizational self-initiated expatriate: a case study of a professional services

firm’, In Vlad Vaiman & Arno Haslberger (eds.), Talent management of self-

initiated expatriates: a neglected source of global talent (pp. 59-87), Basingstoke,

Palgrave-Macmillan.

Salt, J. & J. Millar (2006), ‘International migration in interesting times: the case of the

UK’, People and Place, 14(2), 14-25.

Saxenian, A. (2002), ‘Silicon Valley’s new immigrant high-growth entrepreneurs’,

Economic Development Quarterly, 16(1), 20-31.

Saxenian, AnnaLee. (2006). ‘The new argonauts: Regional advantage in a global

economy’, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

Sayad, Abdelmalek (2004), ‘The suffering of the immigrant’, Cambridge, Polity Press.

Schollhammer, H. (1969), ‘Compensation of international executives’, MSU Business

Topics, 17(1), 19-30.

Scullion, Hugh & David Collings (2006), ‘Global staffing’, Oxon, Routledge.

Selmer, J. (2002), ‘Adjustment of third country national expatriates in China’, Asia

Pacific Business Review, 9(2), 101-117.

Selmer, J. & J. Lauring (2011), ‘Acquired demographics and reasons to relocate

among self-initiated expatriates’, The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 22(10), 2055-2070.

Selmer, J. & A. Leung (2003), ‘Personal characteristics of female versus male

business expatriates’, International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(2),

195-212.

Selmer, J. & A. Leung (2007), ‘Symptom and problem focused coping strategies of

business women expatriates and their socio-cultural adjustment in Hong Kong’,

Women in Management Review, 22(7), 588-605.

Sethi, S.P. & C. Swanson (1979), ‘Hiring alien executives in compliance with US

civil rights laws’, Journal of International Business Studies, 10(2), 37-50.

Shaffer, M. & D. Harrison (1998), ‘Expatriates' psychological withdrawal from

international assignments: Work, non-work, and family influences’, Personnel

Psychology, 51(1), 87-118.

57"

Shaffer, M., M. Kraimer, Y.-P. Chen & M. Bolino (2012), ‘Choices, challenges, and

career consequences of global work experiences : A review and future agenda’,

Journal of Management, 38(4), 1282-1327.

Shetty, Y. (1971), ‘International manager: A role profile’, Management International

Review, 11(4), 19-25.

Sieveking, N., K. Anchor & R. Marston (1981), ‘Selecting and preparing expatriate

employees’, Personnel Journal, 60(3), 197-202.

Siljanen, T. & A.-M. Lamsa (2009), ‘The changing nature of expatriation: exploring

cross-cultural adaptation through narrativity’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 20(7), 1468-1486.

Michael P. Smith and Adrian Favell (2006), ‘The human face of global mobility:

international highly skilled migration in Europe, North America and the Asia-

Pacific’, New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction Publishers.

Sonnabend, H. (1975), ‘Tax-planning for overseas employees’, The Practical

Accountant, 8(4), 163-125.

Sparrow, Paul, Chris Brewster & Hillary Harris (2004), ‘Globalizing human resource

management’, Oxon, Routledge.

Spiess, E. & A. Wittmann (1999), ‘Motivational phases associated with the foreign

placement of managerial candidates: an application of the Rubicon model of action

phases’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 10(5), 891-

905.

Stahl, G. & J.-L. Cerdin (2004), ‘Global careers in French and German multinational

corporations’, Journal of Management Development, 23(9), 885-902.

Starr, T. & G. Currie (2009), ‘'Out of sight, but still in the picture': Short-term

international assignments and the influential role of family’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 20(6), 1421-1438.

Steinmetz, L. (1965), ‘Selecting managers for international operations: The wife's

role’, Human Resource Management, 4(1), 26-29.

Steinmetz, L. (1966), ‘Cutting foreign managers from the domestic herd’, Human

Resource Management, 5(3), 11-16.

Stern, A. H. (1966), ‘Selection of overseas personnel’, Personnel, 45(4), 224-228.

Striker, J., R. Luippold, L. Nagy, B. Liese, C. Bigelow & K. Mundt (1999), ‘Risk

factors for psychological stress among international business travellers’,

Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56(4), 245-252.

Suddaby, R. (2010), ‘Construct clarity in theories of management and organization’,

Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 346-357.

Suutari, V. (2003), ‘Global managers: Career orientation, career tracks, life-style

implications, and career commitment’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(3),

185-207.

Suutari, V. & C. Brewster (2000), ‘Making their own way: International experience

through self-initiated foreign assignments’, Journal of World Business, 35(4), 417-

436.

Suutari, V. & C. Brewster (2003), ‘Repatriation: evidence from a longitudinal study

of careers and empirical expectations among Finnish repatriates’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(7), 1132-1151.

58"

Suutari, Vesa & Chris Brewster (2009), ‘Beyond expatriation: different forms of

international employment’, In Paul Sparrow (ed.), Handbook of international

human resource management: integrating people, process and context (pp. 131-

150), Chichester, Wiley.

Suutari, V., C. Brewster, K. Riusala & S. Syrjakari (2013), ‘Managing non-standard

international experience: evidence from a Finnish company’, Journal of Global

Mobility, 1(2), 118-138.

Suutari, V., C. Tornikoski & L. Mäkelä (2012), ‘Career decision making of global

careerists, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(15-16),

3455-3478.

Tahvanainen, M., C. Welch & V. Worm (2005), ‘Implications of short term

international assignments’, European Management Journal, 23(6), 663-673.

Tait, E., H. De Cieri & Y. McNulty (2014), ‘The opportunity cost of saving money:

An exploratory study of permanent transfers and localization of expatriates in

Singapore’, International Studies of Management and Organization, 44(3), 79-94.

Tan, D. & J. Mahoney (2004), ‘Explaining the utilization of managerial expatriates

from the perspectives of resource-based, agency, and transaction costs theories’,

Advances in International Management, 15, 179-205.

Taylor, A. (1968), ‘The selection of N.Z. volunteers for service abroad: an appraisal

of the first five years’, Personnel Psychology, 21(3), 345-357.

Teagarden, M. (2010), ‘Expats, halfpats, glopats, and other emerging forms of

international work’, Thunderbird International Business Review, 52(4), 261-262.

Teague, F.A. (1970), ‘International management selection and development’,

California Management Review, 12(3), 1-6.

Tharenou, P. (2013), ‘Self-initiated expatriates: an alternative to company-assigned

expatriates?’, Journal of Global Mobility, 1(3), 336-356.

Tharenou, Phyllis (2016), ‘Methodological issues in expatriate studies and future

directions’, In Yvonne McNulty & Jan Selmer (eds.), Research handbook of

expatriates (this volume), Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Tharenou, P. & N. Caulfield (2010), ‘Will I stay or will I go? Explaining repatriation

by self-initiated expatriates’, Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1009-1028.

Tharenou, P. & M. Harvey (2006), ‘Examining the overseas staffing options utilized

by Australian headquartered multinational corporations’, The International Journal

of Human Resource Management, 17(6), 1095-1114.

Tharmaseelan, N., K. Inkson & S. Carr (2010), ‘Migration and career success: Testing

a time-sequenced model’, Career Development International, 15(3), 218-238.

Thite, M., V. Srinivasan, M. Harvey & R. Valk (2009), ‘Expatriates of host-country

origin: 'Coming home to test the waters'’, The International Journal of Human

Resource Management, 20(2), 269-285.

Thomas, David & Mila Lazarova (2006), ‘Expatriate adjustment and performance: A

critical review’, In Günter Stahl & Ingmar Björkman (eds.), Handbook of research

in international human resource management (pp. 247-264), Cheltenham, Edward

Elgar.

Thomas, D., M. Lazarova & K. Inkson (2005), ‘Global careers: New phenomenon or

new perspectives?’, Journal of World Business, 40(4), 340-347.

59"

Thompson, D. (1959), ‘Contracts for Americans working abroad’, The International

Executive, 1(1), 19-20.

Thorn, K. (2009), ‘The relative importance of motives for international self-initiated

mobility’, Career Development International, 14(5), 441-464.

Torbiörn, I. (1994), ‘Operative and strategic use of expatriates in new organizations

and market structures’, International Studies of Management & Organization,

24(3), 5-17.

Torbiörn, I. (1997), ‘Staffing for international operations’. Human Resource

Management Journal, 7(3), 42-52.

Toren, N. (1976), ‘Return to Zion: Characteristics and motivations of returning

emigrants’, Social Forces, 54(3), 546-558.

Toyne, B. (1976), ‘Host country managers of multinational firms: An evaluation of

variables affecting their managerial thinking patterns’, Journal of International

Business Studies, 7(1), 39-56.

Trembath, J.-L. (2016), ‘The professional lives of expatriate academics’, Journal of

Global Mobility, 4(2), 112-130.

Triandis, H. (1963), ‘Factors affecting employee selection in two cultures’, Journal of

Applied Psychology, 47(2), 89-96.

Tsurumi, Y. (1978), ‘The best of times and the worst of times: Japanese management

in America’, Columbia Journal of World Business, 13(2), 56-61.

Tucker, M. (1974), ‘Screening and selection for overseas assignments: Assessment

and recommendations to the U.S. Navy’, Center for Research and Education, July.

Tung, R. (1981), ‘Selection and training of personnel for overseas assignments’,

Columbia Journal of World Business, 16(1), 68-78.

Tung, R. (1984a). Strategic management of human resources in the multinational

enterprise. Human Resource Management, 23(2), 129-143.

Tung, R. (1984b), ‘Human resource planning in Japanese multinationals: A model for

US firms?’, Journal of International Business Studies, 15(2), 139-149.

Tung, R. (1987), ‘Expatriate assignments: Enhancing success and minimizing failure’,

Academy of Management Executive, 1(2), 117-126.

Tung, R. (1988), ‘Career issues in international assignments’, Academy of

Management Executive, 11(3), 241-244.

Tung, R. (2007), ‘The human resource challenge to outward foreign direct investment

aspirations from emerging economies: the case of China’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(5), 868-889.

Tung, R. (2008), ‘Human capital or talent flows: Implications for future directions in

research on Asia Pacific’, Asia Pacific Business Review, 14(4), 469-472.

Tung, R. & M. Lazarova (2006), ‘Brain drain versus brain gain: An exploratory study

of ex-host country nationals in Central and Eastern Europe’, The International

Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(11), 1853-1872.

Tungli, Z. & M. Peiperl (2009), ‘Expatriate practices in German, Japanese, UK, and

US multinational companies: A comparative survey of changes’, Human Resource

Management, 48(1), 153-171.

United Nations (1998), ‘Recommendations on statistics of international migration’,

New York, NY, United Nations.

60"

Useem, J., R. Useem & J. Donoghue (1963), ‘Men in the middle of the third culture:

The roles of American and non-Western people in cross-cultural administration’,

Human Organization, 22(3), 169-179.

Vaiman, Vlad & Arno Haslberger (2013), ‘Talent management of self-initiated

expatriates: a neglected source of global talent’, Basingstoke, Palgrave-McMillan.

Vivian, J. (1968), ‘Expatriate executives: Overpaid but undercompensated’, Columbia

Journal of World Business, 3(1), 29–40.

Waldinger, R. (2008), ‘Between 'here' and 'there': Immigrant cross-border activities

and loyalties’, International Migration Review, 42(1), 3-29.

Wallace, W. (1959), ‘How to maintain productive working relationships with

overseas managers’, The International Executive, 1(2), 17-18.

Westman, M. & D. Etzion (2002), ‘The impact of short overseas business trips on job

stress and burnout’, Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(4), 582-592.

Wiles, J. (2008), ‘Sense of home in a transnational social space: New Zealanders in

London’, Global Networks, 8(1), 116-137.

Willis, K., B. Yeoh & S.M.A.K. Fakhri (2002), ‘Transnational elites’, Geoforum,

33(4), 505-507.

Yan, A., G. Zhu & D. Hall (2002), ‘International assignments for career building: A

model of agency relationships and psychological contracts’, Academy of

Management Review, 27(3), 373-391.

Yanadori, Yoshio (2015), ‘Compensation and benefits in the global organization’, In

David Collings, Geoffrey Wood and Paula Caliguiri (eds.), The Routledge

companion to international human resource management (pp. 190-209), Oxon,

Routledge.

Yates, J. (2011), ‘Putting down roots: How localization can help reduce expatriate

program costs, Mobility, 32(10), 92-97.

Yeoh, B. (2006), ‘Bifurcated labour: The unequal incorporation of transmigrants in

Singapore’, Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 97(1), 26-37.

Yeoh, B. & W. Lin (2013), ‚Chinese migration to Singapore: Discources and

discontents in a globalizing nation state’, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal,

22(1), 31-54.

Yoshino, Michael Y. (1976), ‘Japan's multinational enterprises’, Cambridge, MA,

Harvard University Press.

Zeira, Y. & M. Banai (1984), ‘Present and desired methods of selecting expatriate

managers for international assignments’, Personnel Review, 13(3), 29-35.

Zikic, J., J. Bonache & J.-L. Cerdin (2010), ‘Crossing national boundaries: A

typology of qualified immigrants’ career orientations’, Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 31(5), 667-686.

Zweig, D., C. Changgui & S. Rosen (2004), ‘Globalization and transnational human

capital: overseas and returnee scholars to China, The China Quarterly, 179, 735-

757.

Skilled Labour Migration: A Proposal of the Conceptual Framework for the Study of Expatriates in Brno

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2018

Expatriates are one type of international skilled labour migration. This text will focus on conceptualising and defining categories of expatriates for research purposes. A closer examination requires a definition that reflects theoretical definitions, but also takes into account the local delimitation and even the self-concept of the immigrants themselves. In this text, these perspectives are laid out side by side. Our conceptualisation is comprised of four basic attributes that refer to the centre of personal life (life strategies), the temporary aspect of residence, professional or working skills, and the motivation to migrate. At the local level, the Brno Expat Centre (BEC) operating in the South Moravian Region, is monopolistically involved in the definition of expatriates on a practical scale. The processes of globalisationand trans-nationalisation have led to the diversification of forms of labour migration, which, together with interdisciplinarity, has resulted in a considerable ambiguity of terms and concepts. Thus, for research purposes, one must bear in mind that despite the uniform designation, we are dealing with a very diversified phenomenon. If expatriates are distinguished from skilled migrants, we usually emphasise the undefined length of their stay as opposed to permanent residence and the very important self-concept of expatriates. Brno has become one of the most important places of concentration of expats in the Czech Republic. From the pre-research of the Indian expats case, it shows that the different transnational strategies are very diverse. For further research, it is important to explore the social and demographic characteristics of expats, and we need qualitative research that focuses on the structural conditions of the life of expats and the self-evaluation of expats themselves, considering ethno-cultural factors and gender. Their family members also cannot be ignored.

Beyond global mobility: how human capital shapes the MNE in the 21st century

Article

Nov 2024
J INT BUS STUD

The global mobility of people has transformed how multinational enterprises (MNEs) manage and benefit from multiple locations. We examine the changing locational boundedness of human capital with globalization and how this has impacted the competitiveness of MNEs. The growing use of quasi-internalization through the active reliance on global value chains and outsourcing has altered the way MNEs spatially organize their activities to optimize their access to human capital, a key source of ownership advantages. We identify areas for further research, including new strategies for managing human resources using these new forms of cross-border governance. Collectively, the papers in this special issue provide insights into how MNEs can leverage the movement and reorganization of their human capital to enhance their unique capabilities and succeed in international business.

Expatriate managers in hospitality: A systematic literature review

Article

Full-text available

May 2024

This systematic review endeavors to offer a comprehensive analysis of the research on expatriate managers in the hospitality industry, elucidate contemporary issues, and identify prominent trends that are important for both researchers and practitioners. This study utilizes bibliometric and thematic analytic methodologies to trace the development of academic scholarship on expatriate managers over time, highlighting emerging themes at critical points in the literature. A review of 43 articles published between 1990 and 2023 reveals that researchers have paid disproportionate attention to issues that arise and encounter managers during their international assignments, while giving far less attention to issues related to returning home, expatriate work‐life balance, family dynamics, and female expatriates. Imperative voids in the literature on hospitality expatriation are revealed and theoretical and practical consequences are advanced, including suggestions for future research and methods for improving expatriate managers' journeys in international hospitality assignments. To the best of our knowledge, this review is a groundbreaking effort in this academic field, paving the way for future studies that aim to shed light on the complex realities faced by hospitality industry expatriate managers..

Key Factors of Corporate Expatriates' Cross-Cultural Adjustment - an Empirical Study

Article

Full-text available

May 2024

Transformaciones urbanas y gentrificación transnacional: El caso de los barrios del Poblenou y el Parc i la Llacuna (Barcelona)

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2024

El acceso a la vivienda y la inseguridad residencial son algunas de las principales preocupaciones de muchos ciudadanos que viven en grandes urbes europeas y mundiales. En ciudades como Barcelona o Madrid, los precios de la vivienda no han parado de crecer desde 2014. Dicho aumento de precios ha provocado que toda la población deba destinar una proporción creciente de sus ingresos al pago de la vivienda, lo que agrava la inseguridad residencial, especialmente entre los grupos sociales más desfavorecidos, e intensifica las dinámicas de vulnerabilidad urbana. Ciudades como Barcelona, Madrid, París, Londres, Nueva York o Lisboa se han consolidado como importantes centros económicos, financieros, logísticos y de innovación. Concretamente, Barcelona se ha transformado en un espacio destacado del sur de Europa que atrae numerosas inversiones en el ámbito de las nuevas tecnologías y en la creación de start-ups. Este proceso de reestructuración y globalización ha comportado, entre otros aspectos, la llegada creciente de población internacional con niveles de cualificación elevados y con ingresos medios significativamente superiores a la media de los ciudadanos locales. Esta tendencia se ha intensificado de forma significativa a partir de la pandemia de la COVID-19 y ha facilitado el crecimiento del trabajo remoto. Así mismo, a este fenómeno cabe sumarle el fuerte incremento turístico que ha experimentado la ciudad en la última década, realidad que ha contribuido a tensionar de forma significativa el mercado de la vivienda, sea por el uso turístico de la misma (Cocola-Gant, 2016) o por el turismo laboral (Cook, 2023) y el nomadismo digital (Vagena, 2021; Reichenberger, 2018). La confluencia de estos procesos, en el marco de las transformaciones urbanas desarrolladas en determinadas zonas de Barcelona, bajo el paraguas del proyecto del 22@, no han hecho más que exacerbar las dinámicas de gentrificación, en este caso transnacional, que experimentan algunos barrios de la ciudad de Barcelona, como son el Poblenou y el Parc i la Llacuna. El presente artículo tiene un doble objetivo: por un lado, analizar la correlación los nómadas digitales en la transformación sociodemográfica y económica de los barrios del Parc i la Llacuna y el Poblenou, y su hipotética relación con una dinámica de gentrificación. Y, por otro lado, explorar la caracterización de este grupo social, haciendo hincapié en las motivaciones e intereses propios que prevalecen para instalarse en estos barrios. El trabajo combina el análisis cualitativo y cuantitativo, para favorecer un análisis más integrado de los datos cuantitativos y cualitativos (Moscoloni, 2005), lo cual facilita la profundización temática y un mejor acercamiento al objeto de estudio. Las principales técnicas de recogida de datos desarrolladas han sido: i) Un análisis estadístico-descriptivo, a partir de datos secundarios oficiales; ii) Un cuestionario de preguntas abiertas, dirigido a personas con un perfil de migrante transnacional y nómada digital, para perfilar de forma preliminar sus principales características; iii) Y una entrevista grupal, que profundiza sobre las dimensiones de estudio, como son el perfil socioeconómico del migrante, la motivación de la migración con relación a los hábitos de consumo, el estilo de vida y la experiencia personal, y la percepción sobre la gentrificación, relacionada con el acceso a la vivienda y la relación con los residentes. Los principales resultados de este trabajo son una evidencia incipiente de que en los barrios del Parc i la Llacuna y el Poblenou se empiezan a observar procesos de gentrificación transnacional, vinculados al nomadismo digital y la expatriación de negocios (expats), los cuales conviven con las dinámicas de gentrificación más consolidadas, relacionadas con la turistificación y la renovación urbana. La confluencia de dichos procesos, sumada a la especulación financiera y falta de oferta de vivienda, principalmente social, provocan el aumento del precio de ésta, de los alquileres o la escasez de oferta; lo cual, intensifica cambios importantes en las dinámicas tradicionales del empleo, la vivienda y la transformación sociodemográfica y urbana de estos contextos. Estos cambios se traducen en tensiones y conflictos en cuestiones como la disponibilidad y acceso de la vivienda, la cohesión social y la sostenibilidad urbana. Así mismo, los datos empíricos aportan matices sobre la problematización del perfil de nómadas digitales o expats, señalando en primer lugar, la diversidad de este colectivo. Los datos analizados retratan jóvenes entre los 20 y los 30 años, estudiantes y trabajadores, provenientes de países privilegiados. Sin embargo, sus testimonios también se hacen eco de cómo ellos sufren dinámicas de precarización, tanto habitacional como laboral, lo cual los distingue de élites de sectores de alto valor, e invita a ponderar su influencia en el encarecimiento del mercado inmobiliario, y la generación de enclaves de extranjeros gentrificadores (López-Gay, 2020).

The new HCN-expatriate context: a multi-source, multi-method investigation of American HCN support for BRICS expatriates

Article

Aug 2024

INVESTIGATION OF THE CULTURAL ADAPTATION EXPERIENCES OF EXPAT TEACHERS IN OMAN

Article

Jun 2024

This study examines the cultural adaptation experiences of expat teachers living in Oman, focusing on the impact of cultural differences on intercultural adaptation and communication. Using the Cultural Intelligence Scale CQS, the study investigates how expat teachers navigate Oman's significantly different cultural landscape. It also explores the role of cultural intelligence in successful adaptation by examining the multifaceted nature of culture and its stages of adaptation. Prior to the research, a literature review was conducted on cultural adaptation and the display of emotions in intercultural experiences. Interviews with 16 expat teachers in higher education were conducted using six questions based on the cultural intelligence scale to uncover the difficulties encountered and the strategies used to manage cultural differences in communication in both professional and social contexts. The aim was to highlight the experiences of expat teachers in responding to the cultural differences they encounter and their adaptation processes by emphasizing the distinct cultural differences between Omani culture and other cultures.

Resilience or decline of informal networks? Examining the role of trust context in network societies

Article

Full-text available

Jun 2024
INT BUS REV

The nature of informal networks in various societies, and particularly whether they recede or tend to persist over time, has long been a subject of discussion in international business studies. However, empirical research on trust in network-oriented societies, where individuals typically maintain somewhat different relationships with their in-group, out-group, and non-specified others, remains limited. Drawing on insights from informal network research and intergroup contact theory to model trust relationships in network societies, 882 respondents from three network societies-China, Russia, and South Korea-were surveyed, and confirmatory factor and path analyses applied. The results suggest that as network importance increases, both in-group trust and out-group trust also increase. Individuals who more commonly draw upon out-group trust ties attach less importance to in-group trust ties. Increases in non-specific trust, however, are associated with increases in both in-group and out-group trust, pointing towards the boundary spanning function of non-specific trust. Consequently, rather than finding a clear indication of whether informal networks persist or recede, ambivalent trust relationships were observed. This calls for a reexamination of the conventional 'either/or' perspective on the nature of informal networks. This network heterogeneity can be attributed to individuals, especially in developing network societies, utilizing a 'both/and' approach to trust and networking, and yielding more economic opportunities.

Judicial Mobilities: Travelling Judges in the Pacific

Article

Jan 2024

Anna Dziedzic

The Imperative for Arabic Language Proficiency among Foreign Workers in Gulf Countries and Strategies for Enhancement l Ahammiyyatu Itqan al-Lughah al-‘Arabiyyah baina al-‘Ummal al-Ajnabi fi Duwali al-Khalij wa Istiratijiyyatu Ta’ziziha

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2023

In both Eastern and Western societies, proficiency in the local language and an understanding of cultural nuances were traditionally considered essential prerequisites for employment. However, a marked deviation from this norm was evident in the Gulf states, where communication with foreign workers became sporadic and, in many cases, was limited to specific roles or enforced through punitive measures. This linguistic neglect perpetuated the erosion of Arab heritage, contributing to the gradual loss of identity. This research aimed to thoroughly analyze the importance of foreign workers in the Gulf countries mastering Arabic. It investigated the impact of neglecting this linguistic aspect and proposed viable solutions to encourage learning, thus contributing to the preservation and enhancement of cultural values, identity, and society in the Gulf region. Using a literature study methodology, the research drew on a variety of sources, including previous research, newspapers, expert studies, and reports. The findings of this research underscored the need for collaborative efforts among countries in the region, drawing inspiration from experiences in the East and West. An important solution identified was activating the principle of shared responsibility, which included the establishment of training centers for expatriates to acquire essential Arabic vocabulary. The implications of this research extended to the establishment of stronger communication links within the country, the creation of international bridges, and the opening of employment opportunities for Arabic language and literature experts.