Discussion: View Thread

In today's globalised world, cultural intelligence (CQ) has gained significant attention. Defined as the capability to function effectively in diverse cultural settings (Ang & Van Dyne, 2015; Thomas et al., 2015), CQ has been predominantly studied within business and management contexts, including corporate expatriation, global virtual teams, and global leadership in multinational firms (Groves, Feyerherm & Sumpter, 2023; Presbitero, 2021; Stoermer, Davies & Froese, 2021; Presbitero & Toledano, 2018; Lee & Sukoco, 2010). Furthermore, its value extends beyond the business and entrepreneurial domains, finding applications in areas such as the international education sector, migration and missionary work (Le, Jiang & Nielsen, 2018; Presbitero, 2016; Presbitero, 2017; Livermore, 2012). These varied applications highlight the versatility of CQ for individuals operating in cross-cultural environments.  

However, existing studies on CQ often overlook or neglect to fully articulate the context of the investigation. As Johns (2018) explains, context encompasses factors such as "ambient background stimuli, more salient situational features, and changes in these variables over time" (p. 22). Additionally, context can cover the salience and strength of the situation (Johns, 2006) as it can significantly influence people's actions and behaviours. Yet, many studies on CQ offer only a broad characterisation of cultural differences without thoroughly examining the specific contexts in which the research was conducted. Frequently, these studies simply state the existence of cultural differences, which justifies the need for CQ, without delving deeper into the nuanced contextual factors at play. This oversight limits our ability to fully understand and effectively apply CQ, as numerous contextual elements warrant closer examination.

This call for chapters seeks studies that explore CQ, placing specific focus and emphasis on context. The examples provided below demonstrate how this emphasis could be achieved. These examples are not exhaustive, and we are open to considering any studies that could deepen and advance our understanding of CQ, as long as the context is highlighted and emphasised.

First, studies that investigate novel or underexplored contexts for CQ would be of great interest; for instance, its applications in public policy and governance in multicultural societies, as well as its role in international humanitarian aid operations. Contexts such as within-country cultural differences and consideration of regional and/or indigenous cultures could also spark new perspectives and extend our understanding of CQ. Furthermore, these explorations may illuminate unique nuances and distinct mechanisms that may not be captured in examinations of CQ in formal business and conventional corporate settings.  

Second, studies that explore the influence of temporal-spatial context (e.g., history, geography, time); environmental context (e.g., technical, economic, political, social), and cultural context (e.g., behaviours, artifacts, values)(Shapiro, Von Glinow & Xiao, 2007) on CQ would also extend our current understanding and knowledge of this topic. Furthermore, examining how organisational, national, international, and supranational institutional (formal and informal) factors shape our conceptualisation and empirical investigation of CQ would be interesting and important avenues to explore.  

Third, studies that delve deeper into contextual nuances in settings where CQ has been previously examined (e.g., multinational companies; international education) are also encouraged, provided that these studies explore contextual factors beyond what has already been investigated before. For example, stretching the contextual nuances of CQ to surface the different layers and forms of "culture" beyond the usual societal, national or country-level culture would be valuable. This can inform and advance our understanding of CQ and its role in nurturing diversity and inclusion in contexts such as teams, organisations, and the wider society. Furthermore, new approaches to measuring CQ that take the context into consideration would also be a valuable addition to this body of work.       

We are open to considering any studies (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, conceptual, etc.) that could deepen and extend the scope of our understanding of CQ, as long as the context is highlighted and emphasised. Please don't hesitate to reach out to alfred.presbitero@deakin.edu.au for any questions. Thank you!