Cited by 119International Student and Expatriate ChallengesTeam Dynamics and PerformanceCultural Differences and Values

The Culturally Intelligent Team: The Impact of Team Cultural Intelligence and Cultural Heterogeneity on Team Shared Values

Adair, Wendi L., Hideg, Ivona, Spence, Jeffrey R.·2013·Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology

Abstract

This study examines how the cultural heterogeneity of work teams moderates the way in which team cultural intelligence (CQ) affects the development of team shared values. Utilizing the four-factor model of CQ, we predict how each facet of CQ will impact the development of shared values in relatively early stages of team development differently for culturally homogeneous versus culturally heterogeneous work teams. We operationalize team shared values as the degree to which a broad set of cultural values are similarly endorsed by team members as guiding principles when working in their team. Results show that behavioral and metacognitive CQ had a positive effect on shared values in culturally heterogeneous teams; however, motivational and metacognitive CQ had a negative effect on shared values in culturally homogeneous teams. All effects were observed in the early stages of team development. Having uncovered positive and negative effects of CQ for shared values in work teams, we discuss implications for theory and practice around this form of cultural competence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0022022113492894

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Such metacognition shapes responsiveness to cues that help predict the process that is likely to become dominant in the diverse team.

    “Such metacognition, which can be cultivated by organizational diversity practices (Nishii et al., 2018), shapes responsiveness to cues that help predict the process that is likely to become dominant in the diverse team (Adair, Hideg, & Spence, 2013;Johnson, Lenartowicz, & Apud, 2006).”

    From Leading diversity: Towards a theory of functional leadership in diverse teams. (2020) · cites this paper as Adair, Hideg, & Spence, 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adair, W. L., Hideg, I., & Spence, J. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • Wilfrid Laurier University (CA)
  • University of Guelph (CA)
Venue
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
Published
2013-07-15
Volume
44
Issue
6
Pages
941-962
ISSN
  • 0022-0221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5422
OpenAlex
W2123845521
Cited by
119
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2
FWCI
26.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › International Student and Expatriate Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
Keywords
cultural heterogeneity, team development, cultural competence, behavioral cultural intelligence, metacognitive cultural intelligence, motivational cultural intelligence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review