Nowadays , economic , politicaland social cross cultural interacton has become common due to great diversity in the workforce and happen in a different conditions related to work situations, such as non work related situations including studying aborad together with short term business trips to overseas and long term tasks in foreign countries (Black & Mendenhall, 1990).
In a cross cultural environment , people are faced with different challenges when experiencing a change from well-known to unknown setting . They identify that emotional expression , attitudes , cultural values and behavioural patterns that are considered to be admissibe in their well known environment may not be considered the same in other enviornments and some things that are considered to be disagreeable to the sense in their own cultural setting may not be considered the same in the new cultural setting (Black & Gregersen, 1991; Chen, Lin, and Sawangpattanakul, 2011; Montabaur, 2002).
For instance , foreign people often come up with difficulties in an unfamiliar environment concerning language and communication , politics , religion , adjusting to a new culture , interaction with the host nationals and so on.
People must have knowledge of cultural differences and must improve the capability of creating mutual connections with those who are considered to be different from them in order to decrease the uncertainty brought about by cultural differences. This means that individuals who adapt oneself effectively are more likely to consent the disagreement. This type of intelligence can be regarded as an indicator for the ability to adpt oneself successfully to novel cultural context. Cultural intelligence (CQ) was introduced by Earley and colleagues for the purpose of explaining differences in the people interactions’ effectiveness between cultures (Earley ,2002 ; Earley & Ang ,2003 ) . CQ can be defined as the ability of collecting and processing message s , making decisions and the comparative approaches required for adujusting to a new setting.
CQ can be considered as the ability of individuals in detecting , assimilating and acting on cultural cues properly in conditions described by cultural differences . therefore , CQ is related to global context togtehr with multicultural settings and also considered to be domain specific (Earley & Ang ,2003 ). Hence , CQ is described as flexible ability that can be increased through active engagement in travel , education and international tasks together with other experiences involving two or more cultures ( Ag & Van Dyne ,2008 ;Ng ,Van Dyne & Ang ,2009). Cultural intelligence complete different types of intelligence including IQ or general mental ability ( Schmidt & Hunter ,2000 ) , EQ or emotional intelligence (Mayer & Salovey ,1993 ) social intelligence (Thorndike & Stein ,1973 ) and practical intelligence (Sternberg et al .,2000) due to the fact that intelligence is regarded more important than just the ability of understanding concepts and solving problems in academic enviornments (Ackerman, 1996; Gardner, 1993; Sternberg & Detterman, 1986). These types of intelligence are considered to be complementary since social interaction ‘s norms are different from one culture to another one and not either cognitive intelligence or EQ (emotional intelligence ) concentrates particularly on ability with unique relatedness to efficienty in cross cultural settings (See Rockstuhl et al., 2011, for empirical research that compare CQ , IQ and EQ in cross border leadership ).
Earley and Ang (2003) proposed C Q as a multidimensional construct with four elements on the basis of multiple loci of intelligence framework suggested by Stermberg and Detterman (1986). Four interconnected ways of understanding intelligence level of individuals including metacognitive intelligence , motivational intelligence , cognitive intelligence and behavioral intelligence proposed by Sternberg (1986) , synthesized dissimilar and detached views on intelligence. Cognition and Metacognition are regarded as the mental ability that stands for Individual’s cognitive functioning . motivation is also considered to be a mental capability that recognize drive and choice’s cognitive processes as the other important intelligence’s locus. In comparison with cognitive , motivational intelligence and metacognitive which cause to be connected with mental functioning , behavioral intelligence applies to the behavioral ability of flexing motor skills and displaying an extent of nonverbal and verbal activities.
Four basic factors of CQ were identified by Dyne (2008) through using different loci of intelligence’s notion in culturally diverse contexts. Metacognitive CQ express the mental ability of acquiring and evaluating cultural knowledge. It concentrats on awareness and cognitive processes’ supervision (Flavell,1979) . cognitive CQ express knowledge structure together with general knowledge concerning cultural differences . this is in agreement with intelligence as knowledge concept of Ackerman (1996) which makes analogous arguments concerning the significance of knowledge as a part of mental capacity. Motivational CQ express the intellect of directing and sustaining energy for performing and functioning in intercultural situations and addresses the conscious cognition’s motivated nature (Knafer , forthcoming ) which is important for problem solving in “ real-world” (Ceci ,1996) . behavioral CQ express the ability of flexing behaviours for the purpose of becoming fit in differentcultural context . it concentrates on the capacity in order to show the external manifestation or public actions that are suitable for calming others during intercultural interactions (Sternberg & Detterman,1986).
The previous research also stated that environment is an important conditioner of culture (Meggers, 1954; Gudykunst & Kim, 1984). This is because the environment also influences the process of adjustment among the international students who study abroad. In mixed enviornment’s nature where many stranger may face , Host receptivity , ethnic group strength and host conformity are the three environmental situations which has been recognized in the present theory as influencing the adjustment process of individual strangers (Wiseman , Gutterfreud & Itamar ,1995 ).
Based on previous research , demographic factors are different from cross cultural adjustment and their differences are significant. In this study , the researcher concentrated on some demographic factors including gender , language proficiency , travelling experience and levels of education .
Some researchers believes that adjustment toward the culture is chiefly contingent upon gender , for instance , males were found to be less favorable toward Dutch culture than females (Ghaffarian, 1987; Ouarasse & Vijver, 2005).. However, this is contrary to the findings of research conducted by Ouarasse and Vijver (2005) which indicated that there is not any gender differences in the Moroccan people’s adjustment in the Netherlands .
On the basis of findings of previous research , as for travelling experience , students who had lived between three to twelve month in another country , were more aware of the culture and themselves and were better capable of facilitating communication (Abel ,2008) . others have connected prior experience with interaction adjustment (Yavas & Bodur ,1999) , general adjustment (Parker & McEvoy , 1993 ) and work adjustment (Black ,1988) . on the foundation of previous research , prior travel experience can not be considered as the predictor of participating in studying abroad. But in other studies , travel experience was found to be connected to greater perceived intercultural competence of temporary resident together with study abroad (Goldtein & Kim , 2006 )
The findindings of previous research shows that foreign students are inclined to experience a common student problems’ magnification such as difficulties with academic work , personal doubts about academic ability , social isolation , support needs and homesickness (Furnham & Bochner ,1986 ; Mullins ,Quintrell & Hancock ,1995). Moreover , many international students do not seem to make a practical connection with local students though they may have academic supports together with friendships within their cultural group and so their access to support inside and beyond the university will become limited and the acquisition of culturally important information will be impeded which will have a negative influence on adjustment outcome (Furnham,2004 ; Volet & Ang ,1998).
Additionally, a study conducted at Universiti Putra Malaysia on Indonesian students revealed that students who are unable to adapt to the new culture suffered a higher stress level and tended to adjourn their studies to go back to their hometown for a while (Hayani, 2004). Therefore, understanding cross-cultural adjustment is an important key for the international students to ensure that they can get the best experience and enjoy their learning in the new different environment.(2013 malaysia)
The construct equality of value concerning conative and evaluative cognitive structure has been validated by means of cross cultural research (Davidson and Thompson, 1980;Scribner and Cole, 1981). However , behavioural intention models’ operationaliation equivalence has not been shown . because it needs its measures to be utilized in cultures that best capture interests’s hidden construct (Adler, 1982; Hui and Triandis, 1985). Failure in creating equivalent operation will result in measurement error therefore obscuring real outcomes. For example , based on the findings of Scribner and Cole (1981) , african tribe people were able to do all logical reasoning which is very common in western but these capability were only apparent when was measured in culturally proper ways. Except for such measurement , the skills were not apparent.
The equivalence of construct is considered as an issue concerning normative latent construct ‘s measurement. Norms transfer the cultural influence (Bearden and Etzel, 1982; Triandis, 1972; Tse et al., 1988a); therefore , normative impact’s nature indicated by behavior intention models must be evaluated in a cross cultural environment . for instance , normative components’ utility together with nature have been investigated in the well known TRA ( Fishbein and Ajzen ,1975).
Based on the findings of Robust , satisfaction is favorably connected with behavioral responses such as negative or positive word of mouth , complaining behavior and repurchase intentions. (Athanassopoulos et al., 2001; Szymanski and Henard, 2001).
According to Bagozzi , value appraisals together with cognitively oriented service quality are the head of satisfaction (e.g., Anderson, Fornell, &Lehmann, 1994; Anderson & Sullivan, 1993; Chenet et al., 1999;Cronin & Taylor, 1992; Gottlieb et al., 1994; Patterson & Spreng,1997; Spreng & Mackoy, 1996; Woodruff, 1997). Service quality is expressed in evaluative perception of customer regarding service encounter at a specificpoint of time whereas customer satisfaction deals with process judgment together with end state and express cognitive as well as emotional factors (Cronin and Taylor ,1994 ).
Studing the consequences of value , satisfaction and quality construct was suggested by Rust and Oliver (1994). Due to that , several studies have been done that clearly described the relationship between these three constructs and suggested the influence of these variables on behavioural intentions results including word of mouth communication and repurchase intention.
However , there has been not been much consistency regarding consumer behavior intention is mostly influenced by which of the three variables of service evaluation which results in emerging several competing models . the first model which is clled value model is obtained from the service value literature where satisfaction and service quality are an antecedents to value and behavioural intention is the result of value (e.g.,Chang & Wildt, 1994; Sweeney, Soutar, & Johnson, 1999). The second model which is called satisfaction model is derived from satisfaction literature where service quality and vale are antecedents to satitsfaction and behavioural intentions is the result of customer satisfaction (e.g., Anderson & Fornell, 1994; Fornellet al., 1996; Mohr & Bitner, 1995; Spreng et al., 1996).
These studies have a common factor which is cross-cultural factor. We focused on cross-cultural factor in this research as well. this study tries to look deeper into the process of cross-cultural adjustment in an international setting and its influence on student satisfaction as moderators; and student satisfaction impact on behavioral intention by a new capability that is called “cultural intelligence”; and investigating the influence of multi-generational demographic as mediator variable.
We are answering to these primary questions:
1.1 How dose cognitive effect on general adjustment?
1.2 Does meta-cognitive effect on general adjustment?
1.3 Does motivational effect on general adjustment?
1.4 Does behavioral effect on general adjustment?
1.5 Does cognitive effect on interaction adjustment?
1.6 Does meta-cognitiveeffect on interaction adjustment?
1.7 Does motivational effect on interaction adjustment?
1.8 Does behavioral effect on interaction adjustment?
1.9 Does cognitive effect on work adjustment?
1.10 Does meta-cognitive effect on work adjustment?
1.11 Does motivational effect on work adjustment?
1.12 Does behavioral effect on work adjustment?
2. How dose adjustment effect on student satisfaction among international student in Malaysia?
2.1 How dose general adjustment effect on student satisfaction?
2.2 How dose interaction adjustment effect on student satisfaction?
2.3 How does work adjustment effect on student satisfaction?
3. How dose student satisfaction effect on behavioral intention among interaction student in Malaysia?
3.1 How dose student satisfaction effect on word of mouth?
3.2 Does student satisfaction effect on search of alternative?
3.3 Does student satisfaction effect on intention to stay?
4. How dose multi-generational demographic moderate therelationship between cultural intelligence and adjustment among international student in Malaysia?
5. Is there any significant difference in this model between private universities and public in Malaysia?
Based on background of study and what we are searching in this study, we want to develop a framework about cultural intelligence and behavioral intention and examine those between international students in Malaysia. There is not any research taht eaxmines the impact of cultural intelligence on behavioral intention; in fact we also have adjustment as a mediator and multi-generational demographic as a moderate. Therefore, we follow these objectives during the research:
This research contributes to cultural intelligence knowledge through highlighting the significance of understanding the values of other cultures and applies the knowledge in treating people as well as in local. We want to see how much cultural adjustment influece student’s behavioral intentions. This research increases theoretical and empirical evidence that enhance understanding differentiations between cultures and motivation to act according specific cultural differentiations. International students should learn and improve their cultural intelligence capability and be able to adjust themselves to different people from different countries. The final output and result of this research is leading student’s behavioral intentions to stay in the same university they are studying and do not change that for studying in next level, and suggest the university to the other people to choose by exit students, and by improving CQ competency and cultural adjustment of international students. In fact, academic setting would be able to use the result of this study in public and private universities in Kuala Lumpur.
1.8 Scope of research
We conducted this study on international students in public and private universities located in Kuala Lumpur. We implied quantitative method in order to attain scientifically valid data in CQ and student’s behavioral intentions. The quantitative method will be in the form of questionnaires to identify the cultural intelligence, cross-cultural adjustment, student satisfaction and behavioral intentions.
The quantitative methods include the CQ survey (CQS) (Ang et al, 2007), cross-cultural adjustment survey (Black et al, 19991), customer satisfaction (), and revisit intention , search for alternatives,and word-of-mouth (BI ) measures were adaptedfrom Cronin et al. (2000), Eggert and Ulaga (2002), Kashyap andBojanic (2000), and Patterson and Spreng (1997).
– Cognitive : the differences and similarities between over come prejudices and stereotypes and cultures can be understood ny a person with high cognitive CQ. It is very close to being culturally literate’s concept indicating understanding one’s own and others cultures and valuing it and being culturally self aware (Rosen et al, 2000).
– Metacognitive : it can be described as cultural awareness of individual while interacting with people from various cultural backgrounds . it expresses the procedures that individuals utilize to obtain and understand cultural knowledge and happens when people judge their own thought procedures and those of others.
– Motivation : it can be described as a drive of person to learn more about culturally different situations and function efficiently . it can be interpreted as the direction of energy used to learn about and function in cross cultural situations .
– Behavior : it is conceptualized as the flexibility of individual in showing the suitable actions when interacting with people from different cultural backgrounds and including both nonverbal and verbal behaviors .
Chapter 1 was about introduction and including background of cultural intelligence, adjustment, and behavioral intention; problem statement which explain reasons that caused to conduct this research, objectives to be achieved , questions to be answred , scope of study together with significance of this study.
Chapter 2 covers almost all literature about cultural intelligence, adjustment, and behavioral intention. Different theories and models that are already existing in these variables. And the end, we provide our framework.
Chapter 3 talks about the methodology that we use in this research. How to measureCQ, cultural adjustment, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intention, which kind of method this research follows, which tools we use to gather data, and which statistic will be used to analyze data.
Chapter 4 , the results of data analyzed through SPSS is depicted in this chapter using tables and graphs.
Chapter 5 : conclusion together with suggestions achieved from gathered data in chapter 3 and analyzed in chapter 4 are resented in this chapter.
References and appendix are presented after the five chapters.