Despite being one of the most used dependent variables in expatriate management research, no clear-cut understanding exists of what expatriate success means. Thus, this study aims to propose an integrative definition of expatriate success by providing an overview of expatriate success's dimensions, antecedents, and their interplay.
A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to achieve the purpose. A total of 249 empirical studies (quantitative 111, qualitative 50, mixed-methods 17), literature reviews (67) and meta-analyses (4) on expatriate success were reviewed from Web of Science and Scopus databases published from 1990 until December 2021. The study selection criteria followed the PRISMA flowchart steps, and then descriptive and network analyses were performed to identify expatriates' success dimensions, antecedents and their interplay.
The findings show the interplay among antecedents and dimensions of expatriate success across three levels (individual, interpersonal and organisational) to clarify the concept of expatriate success. Also, the study offers a comprehensive definition of expatriate success based on the dimensions identified.
The suggested definition of expatriate success elucidates the “atheoretical”, multidimensional and socially constructed nature of the construct and hence, calls for more “theoretical”, multidimensional and subjective considerations of the term to ground human resource management practices addressed to attain expatriates' success.
This paper provides an integrative definition of expatriate success, giving greater insight into the construct, in addition to critically reflecting on it.
Introduction
Despite the worldwide crises and current global turmoil (PWC Global Crisis Survey, 2021), organisations largely remain dependent on expatriates for business success and expansion. They rely on them to establish business relations, transfer knowledge, control the subsidiary, or achieve goals set before the assignment (DeNisi and Sonesh, 2016). Accordingly, expatriate success demonstrates a prominent position in the literature on expatriate management as the primary dependent variable (e.g. Kraimer and Wayne, 2004; Reiche and Harzing, 2011).
Nevertheless, this literature presents no consensus on what expatriate success means or how it is measured (Hemmasi et al., 2010). Expatriate success has been conceptualised in various ways, from individual and organisational perspectives and through objective and objectivist measures. Traditionally success depended on whether the expatriate stayed or left the mission (Caliguiri and Cascio, 1998) which is a direct, objective and observable fact from the organisational perspective. Next, the second and most extended conception of expatriate success has been an adjustment-defined as the extent to which expatriates are comfortable living abroad (e.g. Black, 1990; Black and Gregersen, 1991)– to the new assignment and environmental context. However, this is an “objectivist measure” of career success since respondents rate their level of adjustment with researcher-imposed expatriate success criteria without considering the concept's subjective nature (Briscoe et al., 2021). A third and more contemporary conception of expatriate success is based on achieving the organisational goals for the assignment (Harzing and Christensen, 2004). Even though this measure of success is not standard but adapts to the nature of each organisation and international mission, it still leaves out the phenomenological and subjective nature of the construct. The lack of consensus on expatriate success measures and definitions extends to the studies investigating their antecedents. For instance, they associated expatriate success with one or more of the following: adjustment (Black et al., 1991), withdrawal cognitions (Shaffer and Harrison, 1998), job performance (Caligiuri, 1997), organisational commitment (Florkowski and Fogel, 1999) and assignment completion (Reiche and Harzing, 2011). The most widely used dimension as a proxy measure of expatriate success is cross-cultural adjustment (CCA), performance, satisfaction and organisational commitment, respectively (Hemmasi et al., 2010). Also, this disagreement is evident in how studies used one concept (e.g. adjustment) as either a measure (e.g. DeNisi and Sonesh, 2016) or antecedent of success (e.g. Benson and Pattie, 2009; Templer, 2010; van Bakel et al., 2011). Regarding this, a more comprehensive understanding of expatriate success that considers its multidimensionality is needed.
On another note, according to the dictionary, success is “the fact that an individual has achieved something they want and have been trying to do or get” (Oxford University, 2022). Also, contemporary careers literature suggests that career success is “the experience of achieving goals that are personally meaningful to the individual, rather than those set by parents, peers, organisation, or society” (Mirvis and Hall, 1994, p. 366). Both definitions are synonymous with individual achievement and depend on objectives, which are subjective and differ from one individual to another. Hence, being “successful” holds different meanings for different people (Nugin and Onken, 2010. Furthermore, success is a socially constructed phenomenon (Dries, 2011). However, this socially constructed, phenomenological and subjective nature has been overlooked in the extant definitions of expatriate success often disregarding various aspects of expatriate success depending on whether it's explored from an individual or organisational perspective (e.g. Kraimer and Wayne, 2004; Van der Laken et al., 2016). For instance, defining expatriate success as the completion of the assignment (Tung, 1981) overlooks the expatriate performance throughout, the repatriate turnover from the organisational perspective (e.g. Mezias and Scandura, 2005), expatriate subjective perceptions of success (e.g. Mello et al., 2020) or their perceived career expectations from the individual's perspective (Haski–Leventhal et al., 2020; Sokro et al., 2021). Thus, this “objective” conception is insufficient to capture the multidimensionality of the construct of expatriate success particularly when recently the subjective dimension of expatriate success expressed as forms of work satisfaction, life satisfaction, or well-being related to career (Canhilal et al., 2015) has gained importance. Therefore, a broader conception of expatriate success that considers its subjective nature is needed.
Therefore, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of expatriate success by conducting a systematic literature review (SLR) guided by the following objectives: (1) identify the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success, (2) determine the interplay among them and (3) identify previous definitions of expatriate success in the literature and provide an integrative definition of it. By achieving these objectives, the contribution of this SLR to the expatriate literature is twofold. First, it provides greater insight into the different dimensions of expatriate success and their interplay, highlighting the construct's multidimensional and socially constructed nature. Second, it provides an integrative definition, combining individual and organisational perspectives with subjective and objective measures of success.
In what follows, we describe in detail how we proceeded with the SLR following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) steps (selection process, article risk of bias assessment, methods of analysis) and, then discuss the findings. Finally, we conclude and reflect on the possibilities for future research that this new integrative understanding of the construct provides.
Methods and methodology
Study selection process
We conducted a SLR (Tranfield et al., 2003) to elucidate the concept of expatriate success further and critically analyse what has been missed from this concept. Compared to narrative literature reviews, SLR minimises the bias involved in identifying, selecting and analysing studies, as it is based on replicable methods (Needleman, 2002). Our SLR documents were selected, and the findings reported according to the PRISMA approach (Moher et al., 2009). This approach is most suitable for SLR because it eliminates bias in the above tri-phasic (article selection, analysis and reporting) workflow (Petticrew and Roberts, 2006; Priyashantha et al., 2021a, b).
Following the 3-step PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1: Page et al., 2021) for study selection, the first step involved determining search terms, selection criteria and electronic databases. Preliminary results show that “expatriate success' was commonly associated with keywords like adjustment, performance, productivity, satisfaction, turnover and withdrawal. Our inclusion criteria (Table 1) were document types (book chapters, conference proceedings, journal articles), English language, and published between 1990 and 2021. Next, we searched Scopus and Web of Science separately using the combined terms (“expatriate success”) AND each keyword in the topic, title and abstract.
Inclusion criteria
| Inclusion criterion | Focus on |
|---|---|
| 1 | Published studies starting 1990 to December 20213 |
| 2 | Various document types (journal articles, books, book chapters, conference proceedings) |
| 3 | Publications address expatriate success and related factors |
| 4 | Publications must be in English |
Note(s): 3 Studies investigating expatriates and their success started to emerge after the seminal work by Black and Stephens (1989), who addressed expatriate adjustment. Our cut-off date was December 2021, as we started the search in January 2022
Source(s): Authors ‘own (2023)
Searches on Scopus and WOS yielded 895 studies. After eliminating duplicates, we reviewed the titles and abstracts of 650 studies for relevance. We excluded 388 unrelated documents (e.g. seasonal marine life expatriation, novels). After which, we conducted a second round of inspection, resulting in 262 studies. Out of these, 13 studies were excluded because of inaccessibility. Then, we screened the remaining 249 eligible studies, recording the journal name, year, author, information on the nature of the study, theory(ies) adopted, variables used as either antecedents and/or dimensions, methods, themes and whether an explicit definition of expatriate success is provided (Table A1 in appendix).
List of manuscripts used in the SLR
| Serial | Source | Authors (year) | Method | Tools | Study foci | Antecedents | Dimensions | Explicit definition of expat. success | Theory/ies employed | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual | Interpersonal | Organizational | Individual | Interpersonal | Organizational | ||||||||
| 1 | EMJ | Hiltrop and Janssens (1990) | LR | – | Antecedents: Personal characteristics of the expatriate manager, Spouse's adaptability, Selection, Training, Support - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 2 | TDJ | Hogan and Goodson (1990) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCA - Dimensions: Performance, Efficiency | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 3 | SLMR | Black and Gregersen (1991) | Qual | Case studies | Antecedents: Commitment to parent and local firm | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 4 | JIBS | Feldman and Thomas (1992) | Mix | Personal narratives - Surveys/ANOVA | Antecedents: Job Satisfaction, Internal Work Motivation, Feelings of influence, Mastery over the new environment | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 5 | IJVBM | Mccabe (1993) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection, Pre-departure trainings for expatriates and their families | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 6 | PP | Arthur and Bennett (1995) | Quan | Survey/MANOVA | Antecedents: Job knowledge, Motivation, Relational Skills, Flexibility, Adaptability | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 7 | HRMR | Bell and Harrison (1996) | LR | – | Antecedents: Training and Pre-departure visits to host country to enhance the interaction of expatriates with HCNs - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 8 | APJHR | Davidson and Kinzel (1996) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Organizational Support | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 9 | LQ | Thomas (1996) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCT - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 10 | CDI | Webb and Wright (1996) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (traits and technical skills), Preparing the employee for the expatriate assignment, CCT - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 11 | IJLE | Armitage and Powell (1997) | Qual | Case studies | Antecedents: Cultural, Social and Health causes - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 12 | IJCM | Ashamalla and Crocitto (1997) | LR | – | Antecedents: Pre-departure preparation of expatriate | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 13 | NAEM | Aycan (1997) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1958), Vernon's Life Cycle Theory (Vernon, 1966), Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), and Adaptation-Level Theory (Helson, 1964) | ||||
| 14 | IJHRM | Aycan (1997) | LR | – | Antecedents: Expatriate's competencies and skills, Support and assistance prior and during IA | ✓ | ✓ | Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1958), Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), Attribution Theory (Heider | |||||
| 15 | NAEM | Caligiuri (1997) | Quan | Survey/CFA | Dimensions: Completion of the IA, CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Theory of Expatriate Performance, including contextual | ||||
| 16 | NAEM | Ones and Viswesvaran (1997) | LR | – | Antecedents: Big Five (Emotional stability, Extraversion, Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness) - Dimensions: Performance, CCA, Satisfaction, Adaptation, Completion Rate, Premature Returns, Culture Shock, Effectiveness, Professional Effectiveness, Interpersonal Effectiveness, Acculturation, Overseas Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 17 | JWB | Punnett (1997) | Mix | In-depth interviews/FG - Survey | Antecedents: Selection, Training (pre, during and after the assignment) of the expatriate and the accompanying spouse - Dimensions: Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 18 | Book 5 | Sinangil and Ones (1997) | Quan | Survey/CFA | Antecedents: CCA (affected by Job Knowledge and Motivation, Relational skills, Flexibility/Adaptability, Extra-cultural openness, Family situation) - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 19 | JTI | Woodard et al. (1997) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Selection, Training, Support | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 20 | IJHRM | Harvey (1998) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Spouse's career difficulties - Dimensions: Performance, Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 21 | LODJ | Jordan and Cartwright (1998) | LR | – | Antecedents: Openness to experience, Extroversion, Low anxiety/neuroticism, Relational ability, Cultural sensitivity, Linguistic skills, and the ability to handle stress, Selection -Dimensions: CCA, Personal Growth, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||
| 22 | IJHRM | Caliguiri and Tung (1999) | Quan | Survey/CA/Moderated RA/ANOVA | Antecedents: Characteristics (e.g., Language skills, technical skills, Open-minded Personality), Interpersonal (Family: supportive and well-adjusted spouse and children), HCNs' Support, Support from headquarters, Maintaining the psychological contract -Dimensions: Adjustment, Desire to terminate the IA and Supervisor rated performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||
| 23 | IJHM | Feng and Pearson (1999) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Adjustment and Adaptation skills, Interpersonal relations skills, Cultural stress management skills | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 24 | HRM | Porter and Tansky (1999) | LR | – | Antecedents: Assimilation, Endurance, Psychological Factors, Career Expectations - Dimensions: Achieving the goals (financial, market share etc), CCA, Completion of IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 25 | PP | Caligiuri (2000) | Quan | Survey/RA/DM/BC | Antecedents: Personality type - Dimensions: Willingness to complete IA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | (Buss, 1991; MacDonald, 1998) | ||||
| 26 | JCCP | Dalton and Wilson (2000) | Quan | Survey NEO PI-R | Antecedents: Big five personality characteristics - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 27 | EJP | Van Oudenhoven-Van and Van Oudenhoven (2000) | Quan | Survey (MPQ) | Antecedents: Openness, Flexibility, Social Initiative, Emotional stability | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 28 | IJIR | Grant-Vallone and Ensher (2001) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Antecedents: Balance between personal and work life, Organizational support - Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 29 | IJHRM | Harvey et al. (2001) | LR | – | Antecedents: Candidate motivation level, Selection of fitting candidates, Parent host: Information Asymmetry, Goal Congruence | ✓ | ✓ | Agency Theory (Jensen and Meckling, 1976; Eisenhardt, 1988; Nilakant and Rao, 1994) and Expectancy Theory (Vroom, 1964; Nadler and Lawler, 1977; Porter and Lawler, 1968) | |||||
| 30 | JEIT | Linehan and Scullion (2001) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/Cross-case analysis - | Antecedents: Breaking the glass ceiling, Accompanying spouse's Adjustment status, Mentorship, Interpersonal networks | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 31 | IJIR | Van Oudenhoven et al. (2001) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Traits and Skills (Orientation to action, Adventurousness, Open-mindedness, Flexibility, Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Cultural Empathy, Perseverance, Commitment to the company) - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 32 | CCMIJ | Varma and Stroh (2001) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: High LMX -- Dimensions: Communication, Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Leader-Member Exchange Theory (Liden and Maslyn, 1998) | |||
| 33 | WMR | Cordano et al. (2002) | Quan | Survey (WAMS)/CFA/MANOVA and ANOVA | Antecedents: HCNs' Support – Dimensions: CCA, Social and Work Adjustments | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 34 | ITJ | Edmond (2002) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: Selection Criteria (Task-Cross-cultural) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 35 | JTMD | Goby et al. (2002) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Harmony between the perception of expats (and the spouse) and the HRDs about social and employment support - Dimensions: Job Commitment, Organization Loyalty, Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 36 | JWB | Harvey and Novicevic (2002) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 37 | IJHRM | Napier and Taylor (2002) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/Workshops, seminars and FG | Antecedents: Host nation's culture, Level of economic development of the host country | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 38 | WMR | Paik and Vance (2002) | Quan | Survey/Small group interviews/MANOVA | Antecedents: Status as foreigners, Gender | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 39 | JSP | Stierle et al. (2002) | Quan | Survey/CA/HRA | Dimensions: Performance, CCA, Job Satisfaction, Identification with the work team abroad | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 40 | IJIR | Vance and Ensher (2002) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: Training - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 41 | CTRJ | Woodard et al. (2002) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Selection, Training, Support - Dimensions: Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 42 | IJIR | Ali et al. (2003) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Antecedents: CCA (Enhanced by the adjustment of the spouse) | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 43 | IJHRM | Caligiuri and Phillips (2003) | Quan | Experiment (pre-test and post-test) | Antecedents: Realistic job preview's effect on expat's self-efficacy and his/her ability in making informed decision - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 44 | JMP | Guthrie et al. (2003) | Quan | Survey (NEO-PI-R, HPI) | Antecedents: Social and Psychological adjustments, Family Situation, Job Knowledge and Motivation, Relational Skills, Flexibility, Adaptability, Extra-Cultural Openness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 45 | IJHM | Magnini and Honeycutt (2003) | LR | – | Antecedents: Technical Competencies, Learning Abilities - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 46 | JIM | Martin and Bartol (2003) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: Performance expectation, Clarification, Consideration of the local environment, Frequency of PA, Fairness, Career development - Dimensions: Expatriate's performance system | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 47 | HR | Cerdin and Dubouloy (2004) | Qual | Qualitative interviews | Antecedents: Psychoanalytical approach to look into the past to find determinants that shed light on success on IA | ✓ | ✓ | Work Role Transition Theory (Nicholson, 1984) and Psychoanalytical Theory (Freud, 1890) | |||||
| 48 | JTMD | Harcar and Harcar (2004) | LR | – | Antecedents: Family Issues, HR Policies - Dimensions: Job Withdrawal Intentions, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Spillover Theory (Pleck, 1977) | ||
| 49 | IJIR | Harvey and Kiessling (2004) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 50 | JM | Kraimer and Wayne (2004) | Quan | Survey/CFA/SEM | Dimensions: CCA, Commitment to the organization, Performance, Intentions to complete IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 51 | JIBS | Shay and Baack (2004) | Quan | Surveys/SEA | Dimensions: Premature Returns, CCA, Effectiveness | ✓ | ✓ | Work Role Transition Theory (Nicholson, 1984), Uncertainty Reduction Theory (Berger and Calabrese, 1975), and Contact Theory (Homans, 1950) | |||||
| 52 | JCCP | Ward et al. (2004) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Psychological Adaptation, Sociocultural Adaptation (both are affected by neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, less discrepancy between extraversion and host-culture norms less discrepancy between openness and host-culture norms) | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 53 | IJHRM | Anderson (2005) | Mix | Semi-structured interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Selection (Technical and interpersonal skills, Family situation) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 54 | CDI | Gabel et al. (2005) | Mix | Semi-structured interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Mental Ability (Perf), Big five characteristics (Perf), EQ (CCA, Perf, Satisfaction, Withdrawal decisions) Selection - Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Completion of IA, Life Satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||
| 55 | IJHRM | Harrisson and Schaffer (2005) | Quan | Survey/FA | Antecedents: CCA - Dimensions: Task Performance, Relationship Building, Overall Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Work motivation Theory (e.g. Vroom's VIE theory, 1964; Naylor et al., 1980), Withdrawal Theory (e.g. Hulin, 1991), also referred to as Reduction of Inputs Theory (Harrison, 2001) or Propensity to Withhold Effort Theory (Kidwell and Bennett, 1993) | ||||
| 56 | PR | Holopainen and Björkman (2005) | Quan | Survey (longitudinal)/DM/RA | Antecedents: Personal Characteristics - Dimensions: completion of IA, CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 57 | IJHRM | Huang et al. (2005) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Big five personality characteristics - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Theory of Personality (Digman, 1990; Mount and Barrick, 1995) | |||||
| 58 | JIBS | Mezias and Scandura (2005) | LR | – | Antecedents: Mentoring - Dimensions: CCA, Completion of IA, Successful Repatriation, Transfer of Knowledge | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Development of International Mentoring Theory by integrating current perspectives on protean and boundaryless careers with the literature on mentoring and expatriates | ||||
| 59 | JCCP | Mol et al. (2005) | MA | – | Antecedents: Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 60 | JEIT | Neupert et al. (2005) | Qual | Critical incidents interviews/Needs assessment | Antecedents: The development of professional skills (Leadership, management), Personal characteristics (Patience, Flexibility, Confidence, Innovation, Experience, Maturity) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 61 | JCP | Swagler and Jome (2005) | Quan | Survey/HMR | Antecedents: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 62 | CCMIJ | Tan et al. (2005) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 63 | AME | Toh and Deinisi (2005) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCNs' Support - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 64 | SMR | Varner and Palmer (2005) | LR | – | Antecedents: Self-knowledge, Selection, Training Dimensions: Effectiveness, Knowledge Gain, Tenure after repatriation | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 65 | IMDS | Lee and Croker (2006) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Antecedents: CCT - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 66 | HRDR | Littrel et al. (2006) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCT - Dimensions: Expatriate's early return, Delayed productivity and start-up time, Disruption of the relationship between the expatriate and HCN, Damage to the MNC's image, Lost Opportunities, Problematic repatriation resulting in high turnover rates | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 67 | IEJ | Richardson et al. (2006) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) | ||||||
| 68 | IM | Andreason (2007) | LR | – | Antecedents: Spouse's Adjustment | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 69 | IJCHM | Avril and Magnini (2007) | LR | – | Antecedents: Holistic approach in selection and training while taking in consideration the family status, EQ, Learning orientation and lifestyle habits (diet and exercise) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 70 | JIBS | Bolino (2007) | LR | – | Dimensions: [Subjective] satisfaction with one's career/[Objective] promotions | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964; Judge et al., 1995; Wayne et al., 1999), Career-Cone Model (Schein, 1971) | ||||||
| 71 | IJHRM | Kupka and Cathro (2007) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Well-being of the spouse before, during and after the IA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 72 | IJHRM | Paik et al. (2007) | Mix | In depth interviews - Survey/ANOVA | Antecedents: HCN's Support (influenced by perceived compensation's gap) - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Equity Theory (Adams, 1965) | |||||
| 73 | JOB | Toh and Deinisi (2007) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCNs' Support - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) | |||||
| 74 | IJHRM | Bonache and Zárraga-Oberty (2008) | LR | – | Antecedents: Abilities, Motivation, Quality of relationship between the individuals - Dimensions: Success of knowledge transfer | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||
| 75 | Book 2 | Burrus (2008) | LR | – | Antecedents: Personal characteristics, Families, HCNs | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 76 | IJFIP | Flytzani and Nijcamp (2008) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Locus of control - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Locus of Control Theory (Rotter, 1966, 1975, 1990) | ||||
| 77 | IJIR | Herleman et al. (2008) | Mix | Interviews - Survey/CA/HR/MRA | Antecedents: Social Support, Ibasho, Stressor - Dimensions: Satisfaction, CCA, Well-being | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 78 | SBP | Lee and Sukoco (2008) | Quan | Survey/CFA/SEM/ANOVA | Antecedents: Personality Characteristics, Social Support - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Theory of Evolutionary Personality Psychology (Buss, 1991) | |||
| 79 | GBOE | Mcnulty (2008) | Qual | Case study | ROI: a calculation in which the financial and non-financial benefits to the firm are compared with the financial and non-financial costs of the IA, as appropriate to the assignment's purpose | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 80 | IJHRM | Seak and Enderwick (2008) | Qual | Email questionnaire containing open-ended questions | Antecedents: Selection (traits and technical skills), Preparing the employee for the expatriate assignment, CCT - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 81 | Book 6 | Van Vianen et al. (2008) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (self-assessment, family's opinion, organisation's opinion)- Dimensions: Completion of the IA, Meet performance standards, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |
| 82 | JCAF | Yeaton and Hall (2008) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (right skills), Training and Support during the different stages of the IA - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 83 | HRM | Benson and Pattie (2009) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: LMX Interactions - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Leader-Member Exchange Theory (Liden and Maslyn, 1998) | ||||
| 84 | HRM | Bozionelos (2009) | Quan | Survey/ANCOVA/HRA | Antecedents: CCT, Protégé Experience (Affected by gender), Peer Support (affected by gender), Cultural clusters of the home and host countries - Dimensions: Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||
| 85 | HRMR | Caligiuri et al. (2009) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (Personal Characteristics, Language Skills, International experience as predictors) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 86 | HRM | Cerdin and Le Pargneux (2009) | LR | – | Dimensions: Career Success, Job Success, Development Success, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Theory of Fit (e.g. Kristof, 1996), Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964) and Signal Theory (Spence, 1973) | ||||
| 87 | IJMR | Harvey and Moeller (2009) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (motivation), Training, Repatriation | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 88 | IJHRM | Kreng and Huang (2009) | LR | – | Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 89 | HRM | Olsen and Martins (2009) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCN's Support - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) | |||||
| 90 | IJHRM | Thite et al. (2009) | Mix | In-depth interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Cultural Distance - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 91 | HRM | Tungli and Peiperl (2009) | Quan | Mail survey/interviews with HR professionals/Comparative analysis | Dimensions: Premature Termination, CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 92 | Book 3 | Braga and Kubo (2010) | LR | – | Antecedents: Strong Organizational Culture - Dimensions: Willingness to remain till the end of IA, Premium Pay | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 93 | PR | Cogin and Fish (2010) | Quan | Survey/SEM/OLS regression | Antecedents: Selection, Predicting individual's value, Orientations - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 94 | BAR | De Macedo-Soares and Schubsky (2010) | Mix | Interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Commitment, Interdependence, Coordination, Communication | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 95 | CRIBJ | Downes et al. (2010) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: Expatriate's personality - Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Assignment Value | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 96 | IJHRM | Hemmasi et al. (2010) | Quan | Survey/Scale development | Dimensions: CCA, Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Performance Professional development, Career advancement, Macro-organizational Contribution, Effectiveness | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 97 | AJBM | Lee (2010) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: IQ, CQ, EQ - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 98 | ARCOM 2010 | Moore and Elmualim (2010) | Qual | A face-to-face questionnaire interview | Antecedents: Cross-Cultural Difference | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 99 | IJHRM | Templer (2010) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Antecedents: HCN's perceived importance of expatriate's personal attributes, Ethnocentric attitudes of HCNs - Dimensions: Work Adjustment, Subordinate Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Unit Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 100 | IJHRM | Traavik and Richardsen (2010) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: [Objective] Earnings and Promotions/[Subjective] Career and Job Satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 101 | IJCHM | Causin et al. (2011) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: CCT - Dimensions: Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 102 | AOM 2011 | Cerdin and Dickmann (2011) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Dimensions: Career Satisfaction, Job Satisfaction, Intention to leave the organization | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Person-Environment Fit Theory (e.g. Kristof, 1996) and the Boundaryless Career Perspective (e.g. Arthur and Rousseau, 1996) | ||||
| 103 | COBRA 2011 | Cerimagic and Smith (2011) | Qual | Case studies/In depth interviews | Antecedents: Selection (Learning Orientation Skills) - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 104 | IJHRM | Hamori and Koyuncunot (2011) | Quan | Surveys/HRA | Dimensions: Shortest time to get promoted to the top | ✓ | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964; Ng et al., 2005) | |||||
| 105 | AJCEB | Konanahalli et al. (2011) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: HCNs' Support, Job Parameters, Organizational Parameters - Dimensions: CCA, Completion of IA, Job Satisfaction, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 106 | AJBM | Lai (2011) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: Selection, Training, Family Support (Specialty Capacity, Interface Ability, Leadership, Family Status and Cultural Perception) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 107 | AJBM | Lee and Wu (2011) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Person-Organization Fit, Psychological Climate, CCA, Personality Traits, Innovative Climate - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Psychological Climate Theory (James and Sells, 1981) and Personality-Job Fit Theory (Holland, 1997) | ||||
| 108 | JMP | Manson and Carr (2011) | Quan | Survey/ANOVA MANCOVA/RA | Antecedents: Demands-Abilities Fit, Supplies-Values Fit, Perceived Fit - Dimensions: Job Satisfaction, Work Engagement, Satisfaction with life | ✓ | ✓ | Theory of Vocational “Fit” (Bretz and Judge, 1994) | |||||
| 109 | IJHM | Miao et al. (2011) | Qual | In-depth semi-structured interviews | Success of multiple stakeholders is the ultimate expatriate's success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 110 | IJHRM | Pattie and Parks (2011) | Quan | Survey/RA | Dimensions: CCA, Turnover Intention, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 111 | CDI | Shen and Kram (2011) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: Psychosocial Support, Expatriates' developmental networks - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 112 | JWB | Soltani and Wilkinson (2011) | Qual | Open-ended questions interviews | Antecedents: Salient Factors, Person Factors, System Factors - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Institutional Theory (DiMaggio and Powell, 1991; Scott, 1987, 2001; Tolbert and Zucker, 1996) | ||||
| 113 | TIBR | Van Bakel et al. (2011) | Quan | Experiment (longitudinal study)/ANOVA MANCOVA | Antecedents: HCNs' support - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 114 | GBOE | Arp (2012) | Qual | Case studies | Antecedents: Soft Skills (the need for diversity of ideas, perspectives, cross-cultural experience, and people management), Hard Skills (the specific knowledge and technical expertise), Local spouse increases the chance of the expatriate to have better networking in the host country - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 115 | JMD | Cao et al. (2012) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (Career Capital, Protean Career Attitude, CQ), Training - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Career Capital Theory (Arthur et al., 1995; DeFillippi and Arthur, 1994) | |||||
| 116 | TQR | Gupta et al. (2012) | Qual | Open ended questions interview | Antecedents: CCA accompanying spouse – Dimensions: Expatriate's CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 117 | IJHRM | Harrison and Michailova (2012) | Mix | Semi-structured interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Previous IAs - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 118 | IJHRM | Ishii (2012) | Mix | In-depth interviews - Survey/HRA | Antecedents: Local Identification (through language proficiency and adopting of communication styles of the subsidiary) - Dimensions: CCA, Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 119 | IJHRM | Kim and Froese (2012) | Mix | Informal interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Willingness to accept IA - Dimensions: Completion of IA, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Role-Identity Salience Theory (Dupuis et al., 2008) | ||||
| 120 | IJHRM | Lee and Donohue (2012) | Quan | Survey/PA | Antecedents: CCA - Dimensions: Completion of IA, Achieving expected outcomes, On the job effectiveness | ✓ | ✓ | Job Performance Theory (Mol et al., 2005) | |||||
| 121 | IJHRM | Pichler et al. (2012) | Quan | Survey/RA/SEM | Antecedents: Systematic selection expatriate's preparation, Spouse's ability to adjust, Acceptance and Support of HCN | ✓ | ✓ | Similarity Attraction Paradigm (Byrne, 1971) and Social Identity Theory (Tajfel et al., 1971; Tajfel and Turner, 1979; Tajfel, 1981) | |||||
| 122 | Book 11 | Toh et al. (2012) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCT (Cultural Sensitivity, Communication, Management) - Dimensions: Knowledge Transfer (Expats, HCNs, Organization) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) and Justice Theories (e.g., Blader and Tyler, 2009; Tyler and Lind, 1992; Smith and Tyler, 1996; Leonardelli and Toh, 2011) | ||
| 123 | JMD | Van Den Bergh and Du Plessis (2012) | Qual | In-depth qualtiative interactive FG/NVivo | Antecedents: Status, Identity, Motivation to migrate - Dimensions: Career Success | ✓ | ✓ | The Adult Learning Theory (Kolb, 1984) | |||||
| 124 | EJIM | Varma et al. (2012) | Quan | Survey/ANOVA | Antecedents: HCN and Expatriate interactions - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 125 | CER | Veach (2012) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | The psychic distance theory (Johanson and Valhne, 1992), Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1972), and Cultural Intelligence Theory (Earley and Ang, 2003) | ||||||
| 126 | CDI | Cao et al. (2013) | Quan | Survey/SEM | Antecedents: Protean Career Attitude - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Developmental-Contextual Career Theory (Vondracek and Schulenberg, 1986) | |||||
| 127 | MRR | Huff (2013) | Quan | Survey/HSFA/HMR | Antecedents: CQ, Language Proficiency - Dimensions: CCA, Willingness to complete IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 128 | IJHRM | Kim and Tung (2013) | Mix | In-depth interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Expatriate's Position, Expatriate's Expectations, Work-Life Balance - Dimensions: Satisfaction with IA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 129 | CDI | Lee et al. (2013) | Quan | Survey/SEM | Antecedents: Social Support (Socialization of HCN's, CQ), Transformational Leadership - Dimensions: Performance, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) and Social Exchange Theory (Wayne et al., 1997) | |||
| 130 | GBOE | Mcnulty and Cieri (2013) | Qual | Case study | Dimensions: Expatriate ROI | ✓ | Psychological Contract Theory (Rousseau, 1989) | ||||||
| 131 | IJHRM | Pattie et al. (2013) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: Goal Congruence (between the sending supervisor and the expatriate) - Dimensions: Performance, Turnover Intention | ✓ | ✓ | Goal Congruence Theory (Deutsch, 1973; Johnson and Johnson, 1989; Chen et al., 2005) and Leader-Member Exchange Theory (Liden and Maslyn, 1998) | |||||
| 132 | JGM | Schütter and Boerner (2013) | Qual | In depth interviews | Antecedents: Family, Work Interface - Dimensions: Family Adjustment | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 133 | WASJ | Zainol et al. (2013) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Organisational Support Training (Language and Cultural aspect of the host country), Communication between HCN's and expatriates - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 134 | IJHRM | Bader and Berg (2014) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 135 | IJHRM | Bonache and Noethen (2014) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection, Compensation - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 136 | IJHRM | Cao et al. (2014) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: POS, HCNs and expatriates' interactions - Dimensions: Career satisfaction, Intention to stay | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1985) and Theory of Transnational Network for Migrants (Saxenian, 2005) | |||
| 137 | IJHRM | Cerdin and Le Pargneux (2014) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Protean Career Attitude, Boundaryless Career Attitude, Careerist Orientation - Dimensions: Career Satisfaction, Job Satisfaction, Intention to leave IA | ✓ | ✓ | Person-Environment Fit Theory (e.g. Kristof, 1996) | |||||
| 138 | KSSJ | Danisman (2014) | Qual | In-depth interviews NVIVO | Antecedents: Previous IA's experiences - Dimensions: Expatriate's attitude towards the new culture | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 139 | Book 12 | Haslberger et al. (2014) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCA - Dimensions: Performance, Retention, Career Satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Person-Environment Fit Theory (e.g. Kristof, 1996) and Theory of Work (Dawis and Lofquist, 1976) | ||||
| 140 | IJRDM | Jones et al. (2014) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/Open, axial and selective coding | Antecedents: Training targeting managerial decision-making, Organizational culture, Management vision, International market mind-set | ✓ | Personality Trait Theory (Ewen, 1998) | ||||||
| 141 | JCPS | Kishori and Kumar, (2014) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Completion of IA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 142 | APBR | Lauring and Selmer (2014) | Quan | Survey/ANCOVA ANOVA | Dimensions: CCA, Time to proficiency, Performance, Satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 143 | Book 9 | Lee and Kartika (2014) | Quan | Survey/CFA/RA | Antecedents: Individual factors, Family factors, Social factors - Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Knowledge Transfer, Innovation Work Behaviour | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), Family System Theory (Bowen, 1978) and Spillover Theory (Pleck, 1977) | |||
| 144 | JGM | Supangco and Mayrhofer (2014) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: Self- efficacy, Role conflict, Role discretion, Supervisory support, POS - Dimensions: Satisfaction, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 145 | SAJHRM | Valk et al. (2014) | Qual | In-depth interviews/Kodani 1.2 | Dimensions: Work-family balance, Self-satisfaction, Contribution to the family and home country society | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Career Capital Theory (Arthur et al., 1995; DeFillippi and Arthur, 1994) | ||||
| 146 | SOSE | Windiarti et al. (2014) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 147 | EDP Sciences | Zainol et al. (2014) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 148 | IJOA | Almazrouei and Zacca (2015) | Qual | Structured face-to-face interviews | Antecedents: Leadership (Enhanced by EI) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 149 | SBS | Araci (2015) | MA | – | Antecedents: Selection, Training (Intercultural), Organisational and Social Supports - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 150 | JSOD | Bartolo-Ribeiro and Andrade (2015) | LR | – | Antecedents: Selection (Knowledge, Skills and Abilities) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 151 | JGM | Canhilal et al. (2015) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/content analysis | Dimensions: Job and Personal well-being, Satisfaction, Withdrawal Cognition, Premature Termination, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 152 | IJIR | Chen (2015) | Quan | Survey/HRA | Antecedents: CCA (affected by CQ) - Dimensions: Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, Turnover Rate, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 153 | JGM | Davies et al. (2015) | Quan | Survey/CFA/ANCOVA | Antecedents: Spouse's Adjustment Status - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Relational Demography Theory (Tsui and O'Reilly, 1989) | |||||
| 154 | JCHRM | Gallego-Toledo (2015) | Qual | Case study | Antecedents: Well-being, Job satisfaction, Performance, Trainings - Dimensions: Organizational Commitment, Job Commitment | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 155 | IJIR | Gibson et al. (2015) | LR | – | Antecedents: Targeted expatriate's expectation - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 156 | IJHRDM | Howe-Walsh et al. (2015) | LR | – | Dimensions: Performance, Completion of IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 157 | JWB | Itani et al. (2015) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Language proficiency - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 158 | BJM | Kawai and Mohr (2015) | Quan | Survey/CA/HRA | Antecedents: Role ambiguity, Role novelty, Organizational support, Supervisor support | ✓ | ✓ | Role Theory (Katz and Kahn, 1978) | |||||
| 159 | IJHRM | Kempen et al. (2015) | Quan | Survey/CFA/BCs/HRA | Antecedents: Role overload, Role ambiguity, Work–family, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 160 | Book 4 | Kierner (2015) | LR | – | Antecedents: Spouse's adjustment status - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 161 | PJMES | Krishnaveni and Arthi (2015) | Qual | In depth interviews | Antecedents: Organizational support, CCT - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 162 | Book 4 | Lazarova et al. (2015) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Spouse and family adjustment, Willingness to go on IA- Dimensions: Completion of IA, CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Work/Life Balance (Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985; Greenhaus and Powell, 2003, 2006), Family Systems Theory (Caligiuri et al., 1998a, b; Olson, 1993; Rosenbusch and Cseh, 2012), Crossover Theory (Westman, 2001; Westman et al., 2004), and the Job Demands-Resources Model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007; Demerouti et al., 2001; Karasek, 1979) | |||
| 163 | APJHR | Li and Jackson (2015) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Theory of Anxiety and Uncertainty Management in Intercultural Communication Gudykunst and Ting-Toomey, 1988, Gudykunst 1993, 2005) | ||||||
| 164 | JGM | Linder (2015) | Mix | Personal interviews and expert interviews - Survey/PLS-SEM | Antecedents: Leadership - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Symbolic Leadership Theory (Winkler, 2010) | |||||
| 165 | Book 1 | Morley and Parkinson (2015) | Qual | In-depth interviews/Analytic induction approach followed by coding and generation of meaning | Antecedents: Personal Attributes, Knowledge and skills, Effective management of operations | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 166 | JWB | Ren et al. (2015) | Quan | Survey/Multiple RA/Logistic RA | Antecedents: Engagement - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Self-Determination Theory (Ryan and Deci, 2000) and Relative Deprivation Theory (Crosby, 1976; Martin, 1981) | |||||
| 167 | JGM | Salomaa (2015) | Qual | IPA/Semi-structured interviews | Antecedents: Coaching | ✓ | Integral Theory of Ken Wilber (1995, 2000, 2016) | ||||||
| 168 | IJHRM | Shen and Jiang (2015) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: Expatriate's self-efficacy, Family problems, POS - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 169 | IJOA | Almazrouei et al. (2016) | Qual | Structured face-to-face interviews | Antecedents: Leadership (Enhanced by CQ) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 170 | JGM | Bucker et al. (2016) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: Know-why, Know-how, Know-whom - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 171 | JWB | Caligiuri and Bonache (2016) | LR | – | Antecedents: Change in individuals' competencies as a function of living and working in another country, Personality characteristics, Motivation for success abroad | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 172 | IJTD | Caligiuri and Tarique (2016) | Quan | Survey subscale of (NEO-PI-R) NEO – FFI | Antecedents: Personality traits (e.g., Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness Conscientiousness) | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 173 | JGM | Caliguiri et al. (2016) | Quan | Survey/RA | Antecedents: HCN's Support (depends on his/her ethnocentrism and cultural humility) - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 174 | Book 10 | Causin and Ngwenya (2016) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: Willingness to complete IA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 175 | JGM | Denisi and Sonesh (2016) | LR | – | Antecedents: CCA, Absorptive Capacity - Dimensions: Task performance, Relationship building, Contextual Performance, Retention | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 176 | APJHR | Furusawa and Brewster (2016) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: Selection, Pre-departure trainings. Organizational support - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 177 | ISBCD-16 | Gitonga and Zhang (2016) | LR | – | Antecedents: CQ - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 178 | HRDR | Greer and Stiles (2016) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 179 | ISCLO 015 | Harjo (2016) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: Big 5 personality characteristics, Language proficiency, Leadership and management skills - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 180 | TIBR | Makela et al. (2016) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: Salary development or Promotions | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 181 | ER | Mcnulty and De Cieri (2016) | LR | – | Dimensions: Corporate ROI, Individual ROI | ✓ | Psychological Contract Theory (e.g, Pate and Scullion, 2009; Yan et al., 2002) | ||||||
| 182 | IJCCM | Okpara (2016) | Quan | Survey/HRA/CA | Antecedents: CCA | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 183 | JMD | Pinto and Araujo (2016) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/Thematic content analysis | Antecedents: Interpersonal contacts, Organizational Contacts | ✓ | ✓ | Social Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1985) | |||||
| 184 | HR | Ramaswami et al. (2016) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Renumeration (relation between human capital and compensation building) | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1993) | ||||||
| 185 | JIBE | Selvanathan et al. (2016) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Selection, Training - Dimensions: Expatriate's success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 186 | JGM | Van Der Laken et al. (2016) | SLR | – | Antecedents: Social support by supervisor, Organizational support - Dimensions: Performance, Retention, CCA, Commitment | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Stress Management Theories (Ashford and Taylor, 1990; Kahn et al., 1964; Katz and Kahn, 1978; Minuchin, 1974; Lazarova et al., 2010; Gudykunst and Nishida, 2001), Social Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1985), Social Networks Theory (Dunn, 1983), Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977), Exchange theories (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960), Psychological Contracts Theory (Rousseau, 1995) and Leader-Member Exchange Theory (Liden and Maslyn, 1998) | ||||
| 187 | JGM | Egilsson and Dolles (2017) | Qual | Biographical narrative interviews | Antecedents: Strong mental composure (provided by social support and problem-focused coping strategies) - Dimensions: Performance, CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 188 | HRMJ | Forster (2017) | Mix | Interviews - Survey | Antecedents: CCT - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 189 | EMJ | Furnham (2017) | Quan | Survey/ANCOVA MANCOVA/RA | Antecedents: Personality Characteristics (Less Neurotic, More Extraverted, Agreeable, Openness, Conscientiousness) - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 190 | HRM | Kumarika et al. (2017) | LR | – | Antecedents: Psychological contract (parent and host companies) - Dimensions: Performance, Intention Turnover | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960) | |||
| 191 | REEP | Rocke (2017) | LR | – | Antecedents: Expatriate selection criteria, Training, Teaching techniques, Family and social Support, Organisation's Support, Compensation | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 192 | IJSA | Salgado and Bastida (2017) | Quan | Survey/SEA/BC | Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Intention of early returns | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 193 | IBR | Schmid and Wurster (2017) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Dimensions: Shortest time to get promoted to the top after IAs | ✓ | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1993) and Elite Theory (e.g., Mills, 1956; Davis, 1994) | |||||
| 194 | BJM | Silbiger et al. (2017) | Quan | Survey/CFA/SEM | Dimensions: Satisfaction, Intention to withdraw | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Regulatory Focus Theory (Higgins, 1997) | ||||
| 195 | Book 7 | Tenzer and Schuster (2016) | LR | – | Antecedents: Relational skills and abilities - Dimensions: Communication | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 196 | JGM | Baluku et al. (2018) | MA | – | Antecedents: Flexibility, Adaptability Dimensions: Mobility intentions | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 197 | PJMS | Bednarova et al. (2018) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Intercultural Knowledge - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 198 | JIEB | Cray et al. (2018) | Qual | Structured interviews/Content analysis | Antecedents: Social intelligence, EQ, CQ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 199 | ODJ | Davis et al. (2018) | LR | – | Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Withdrawal cognition | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) | ||||
| 200 | IJHRM | Dickmann and Cerdin (2018) | Qual | In-depth interviews/Focus group | Antecedents: Know-why, Know-how, Know-whom | ✓ | Intelligent Career Theory (Arthur, Claman and DeFillippi, 1995) | ||||||
| 201 | SJM | Guttormsen et al. (2018) | Qual | In-depth interviews/Iterative hermeneutical approach | Dimensions: Performance, Career development, Life satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 202 | HRMR | Kang and Shen (2018) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCN's Support – Dimensions: Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 203 | MD | Lee (2018) | Quan | Survey/SEM | Antecedents: Previous IAs - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 204 | AJBER | Sokro and Moeti-Lysson (2018) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: HCN's Support - Dimensions: CCA, Expatriate's Success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 205 | MEJM | Tahir and Ertek (2018) | Qual | Semi-structured in-depth interviews | Antecedents: CCA (enhanced by CCT) – Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 206 | JPA | Tsegaye et al. (2018) | Quan | Survey/SEM | Antecedents: Personal value, Environmental factors - Dimensions: Work engagement | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 207 | CCSM | Wang and Varma (2018) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCNs' Support - Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Knowledge Transfer | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Intergroup Contact Theory (Allport's, 1954) | |||
| 208 | JGM | Weisheit (2018) | SLR | – | Antecedents: International Relocation Mobility Readiness (IRMR) - Dimensions: CCA, Satisfaction, Willingness to complete IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 209 | MRR | Akhal and Liu (2019) | Quan | Cross sectional surveys/MLR | Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 210 | IJCCM | Bayraktar (2019) | Qual | Digital diary method/Rochester Interaction Record method/Inductive content analysis | Antecedents: Social Support - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 211 | CCSM | France et al. (2019) | Mix | Semi-structured interviews/FG - Survey/RA | Antecedents: Self-reflection, Cross-cultural awareness | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 212 | JGM | Guttormsen and Francesco (2019) | Quan | Survey/MANCOVA/ANOVA | Dimensions: CCA, Satisfaction, Willingness to complete IA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 213 | ITJ | Hanke (2019) | LR | – | Antecedents: Use of motivating language enhances expatriate's cross-cultural efficacy and intrinsic motivation - Dimensions: Expatriate's effectiveness | ✓ | ✓ | Motivating Language Theory (Madlock and Sexton, 2015), Self Determination Theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985), and Self-Concordance Theory (Sheldon and Elliot, 1999) | |||||
| 214 | SABR | Harry et al. (2019) | Qual | Unstructured Interviews/NVivo 9 | Dimensions: [Objective] Number of promotions, Salary increases etc,/[Subjective] Personal judgement like career satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964) and Boundryless Career Theory (Arthur and Rousseau, 1996) | |||||
| 215 | CDI | Janessari and Sullivan (2019) | Quan | Survey/CFA | Antecedents: Career adaptability construct - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Career Construction Theory (Savickas, 1997, 2005) | |||||
| 216 | RCIS | Lin et al. (2019) | Quan | Survey/LISREL model | Antecedents: CCA, Work Stress - Dimensions: Job involvement | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||
| 217 | TIBR | Van Bakel and Salzbrenner (2019) | Mix | Podcast/In-depth interviews - Survey | Antecedents: Motivation, POS, CCT - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 218 | IJHRM | Van Bakel (2019) | LR | – | Antecedents: HCNs' and expatriates'’ interactions - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 219 | HRMR | Van Der Laken et al. (2019) | MA | – | Antecedents: Social support - Dimensions: CCA (proximal), Commitment (proximal), Performance (long term), Retention (long term) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Exchange Theory (e.g., Gouldner, 1960; Kurtessis et al., 2017; Raabe and Beehr, 2003; Rousseau, 1989; Seers, 1989) and Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory (Gudykunst and Nishida, 2001) | |||
| 220 | JGM | Wan (2019) | Qual | In-depth interviews/Asynchronous emailed interviews | Antecedents: Selection (Big Five personality traits of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability), training (cultural diversity), Willingness for expatriation - Dimensions: Motivation | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Social Capital Theory (Bourdieu, 1985) and Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) | ||||
| 221 | SAJEMS | Webber and Vögel (2019) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Preparation, Support and training of the spouse - Dimensions: CCA of the spouse, Satisfaction of the spouse | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 222 | HRH | Alluhidan et al. (2020) | Qual | Case Study | Antecedents: Selection, Training | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 223 | JGM THEMR | Arokiasamy and Kim (2020) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: EQ, CQ - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 224 | IJEM | Blanco and Sastre Castillo (2020) | Quan | HMR | Antecedents: Education, Training, Experience - Dimensions: Performance, Rewards | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1975) | ||||
| 225 | TIBR | Dang and Rammal (2020) | LR | – | Antecedents: Interpersonal relationships between expatriates and HCNs, families of expats relationships in the host country - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Family Systems Theory (Bowen, 1978) | |||||
| 226 | JIM | Dimitrova et al. (2020) | Quan | Survey/MRA | Antecedents: CCA (influenced by Cultural novelty, Supervisor's support, Job decision latitude) - Dimensions: Career satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Job Demands-Resources Theory (Demerouti et al., 2001) | |||||
| 227 | JGM | Faeth and Kittler (2020) | SLR | – | Antecedents: Certain skills, Right motivation to work in a hostile environment - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 228 | Book 8 | Froese and Peltokorpi (2020) | Quan | Survey/ANOVA | Dimensions: CCA, Work Attitudes | ✓ | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) | ||||||
| 229 | JITC | Kim (2020) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: CCT (enhances CQ) - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Transformative Learning Theory (Cranton, 1994–1996; Mezirow, 1991–1992-1996–1997), Connectionism Theory (Thorndike, 1910) | |||||
| 230 | Book 8 | Mello et al. (2020) | LR | – | Dimensions: [Objective] Number of promotions, Salary Increases etc/[Subjective] Personal Judgement-like career satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 231 | MRR | Pinto et al. (2020) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Confidence - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Achievement Goal Theory (Kanfer et al., 2017) and Expectancy-Value Theory (Atkinson, 1964) | ||||
| 232 | MOR | Ren et al. (2020) | Quan | Survey | Dimensions: CCA, Performance, Commitment, Retention | ✓ | ✓ | Social Capital Theory of Career Success (Lin, 1999; Seibert et al., 2001) and Intelligence Theory (Sternberg, 1999; Sternberg and Detterman, 1986) | |||||
| 233 | CP | Setti et al. (2020) | Quan | Survey/CFA | Antecedents: CCA (affected by CQ) - Dimensions: Performance | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 234 | CCSM | Vora and Kainzbauer (2020) | Qual | In depth interviews/FG/NVIVO 10 | Antecedents: Humanistic leadership style - Dimensions: Better Communication within the leader and the team | ✓ | ✓ | Humanistic Leadership Theory (e.g. Avolio et al., 2009; Dinh et al., 2014; House and Aditya, 1997; Zhu et al., 2019) | |||||
| 235 | Book 8 | Waxin and Brewster (2020) | LR | – | Dimensions: [Objective] Number of promotions, Salary Increases etc/[Subjective] Personal Judgement-like career satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 236 | IJOA | Wu et al. (2020) | Quan | Survey | Antecedents: Trust, Social capital, Knowledge sharing behaviour - Dimensions: Financial performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||
| 237 | EBPJ | Zainol et al. (2020) | LR | – | Antecedents: Psychological comfort - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 238 | IJEM | Bashir et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/PLS-SEM | Antecedents: Psychological contract - Dimensions: CCA, Commitment, Intrinsic career success | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Signaling Theory Spence (1973) and Motivation Theory (Maslow, 1943) | |||
| 239 | IJBSAM | Chan et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/ANOVA/PLS-SEM | Antecedents: POS, HCN's Support (Role Information/Social Support) - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) | ||||
| 240 | IJHRM | David et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/Bias-corrected bootstrapping | Antecedents: POS, FSOP, Organizational CQ, Gender - Dimensions: CCA, Commitment, Career Satisfaction, Community Embeddedness | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Strategic Human Resource Management Theory (Wright and McMahan, 1992) | |
| 241 | JGM THEMR | Dolce et al. (2021) | Qual | In-depth interviews | Antecedents: Organisational support (Financial support, Housing relocation assistance, Schooling support for children, Career counselling for partners), Pre-departure trainings - Dimensions: CCA | ✓ | ✓ | Gender Role Theory (Eagly, 1987) and Job Demands Resources (JD-R) model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007) | |||||
| 242 | ECKM | Gradim et al. (2021) | Qual | Case Study/Semi-structures interviews | Antecedents: Selection, Knowledge Management | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 243 | JWB | Lazarova et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/CFA/MLR | Dimensions: [Objective] Number of promotions, Salary Increases/[Subjective] Personal Judgement-like career satisfaction | ✓ | ✓ | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) | |||||
| 244 | IJHRM | Marques et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/PLS-SEM | Antecedents: Responsible leadership - Dimensions: CCA, Performance | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Responsible Leadership (Pless and Maak, 2012) and Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) | ||||
| 245 | JGM THEMR | Ray and Maheshwari (2021) | Qual | Semi-structured interviews/NVivo 8 | Antecedents: Social Support from various domains (Community, Family and Work) – Dimensions: CCA- Success | ✓ | ✓ | Atheoretical | |||||
| 246 | EJTD | Tahir (2021) | Qual | In-depth unstructured interviews/NVivo | Antecedents: Knowing the novel culture and business's norms in the subsidiary | ✓ | Atheoretical | ||||||
| 247 | JGM THEMR | Valk (2021) | Qual | Interviews and self-reports/Kodani 1.2 | Antecedents: Competencies, Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, Other characteristics - Dimensions: CCA, Completion of IA | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964, 2002) | |||
| 248 | IJPE | Zhang et al. (2021) | Quan | Survey/DEA/SEM/DT | Antecedents: Selection (DT) | ✓ | Cutural Dimensions Theory (Hofstede, 1980, 2001) | ||||||
| 249 | IJM | Zhou (2021) | Mix | Cases/Interviews/Observation - Surveys/Harman's single-factor test/CFA/MRA | Antecedents: Psychological Contract of expats and MNCS | Psychological Contract Theory (Rousseau, 1989) | |||||||
Note(s): The acronyms are tabulated in Table 2 below
Study risk of bias assessment
Study selection and subsequent analysis may be significantly influenced by the researcher's subjectivity, negatively affecting the review's quality (Kitchenham and Charters, 2007). However, the empirical evidence in support of quality assessment is so little that no consensus exists on the basis of such assessments (Thomas and Harden, 2008). As such, the selected studies were subjected to an assessment that is based on the relation with our focus on the research, and the inclusion and exclusion criteria only, and coupled with the fact that only WOS- and Scopus-retrieved publications were considered on the basis that such documents have already been peer-reviewed (Xiao and Watson's, 2019). That was done independently and in parallel by the two authors of this article (Brereton et al., 2007) who formed a consensus regarding the 249 included studies.
Methods of analysis
We performed a ‘descriptive analysis (see Findings) by identifying the frequency that expatriate success-related variables were treated as dimensions and/or antecedents of success, authors, dates, journals, research methodologies, data collection techniques, unit of analysis (individual, interpersonal and organisational levels) and theories. This allowed us to satisfy objectives to (1) identify the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success (Table A1 in the appendix) and (3) clarify the definition of expatriate success in the previous literature (Table A2 in the appendix). Hence, antecedents, dimensions and definitions were the overarching themes or analytical codes extracted deductively from the research objectives.
List of manuscripts explicitly defining expatriate success
| Serial | Source | Authors (year) | Method | Definition of Expatriate's success (ES) | Levels | Key terms | Specific terms referring to success | Type of expats | Theory/ies employed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NAEM | Aycan (1997) | LR | ….“Therefore, the two most critical criteria of ”expatriate success” are adjustment and performance.” The author links the acculturation process to the adjustment of the expatriate and highlights the importance of studying the process from the Individual and organisational levels | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Performance | Expatriate success | OE | Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1958), Vernon's Life Cycle Theory (Vernon, 1966), Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977) and Adaptation-Level Theory (Helson, 1964) |
| 2 | NAEM | Caligiuri (1997) | Quan | The author suggests the following: the three most common criteria for evaluating expatriate success have been: (1) completion of the foreign assignment, (2) cross-cultural adjustment and (3) performance on the foreign assignment | Individual and organisational | Completion of the IA Adjustment Performance | Success in the IA | OE | Theory of Expatriate Performance, including contextual, managerial, technical and expatriate-specific dimensions is proposed based on (Campbell et al., 1993) |
| 3 | LODJ | Jordan and Cartwright (1998) | LR | ..“In expatriation, success can be defined as a successful cultural adjustment that leads to personal growth as much as it can be defined as high performance at work.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Performance | Expatriate success | OE | Atheoretical |
| 4 | HRM | Porter and Tansky (1999) | LR | “Success can be defined in many ways. Here we consider success to the organisation in terms of the expatriate achieving specific objectives. These objectives would often include some financial goals but might also be in the form of market share gain, introducing a new product or service, cycle time improvements, or quality objectives. Accomplishing the stated business objectives will require interaction with people in the host country, so it is unlikely to happen unless the manager assimilates. To avoid unnecessary expense, it is also crucial that the Individual complete the entire term of the assignment, which is more likely if both the employee and his/her family view the experience positively and have expectations for career benefit following the assignment. Although the assimilation, the endurance, the psychological factors and the career expectations can be considered success outcomes in their own right (Gregersen, 1992), we regard all of these as contributing factors to whether the expatriate achieves assigned business objectives.” | Organisational | Completion of the IA Achieving organisational goals | Success in the IA | OE | Atheoretical |
| 5 | JM | Kraimer and Wayne (2004) | Quan | “Consistent with this converging view of expatriate success, we define success in terms of expatriate adjustment, commitment to the organisation, job performance and intentions to complete the assignment.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Commitment to the organisation Performance Intention to complete IA | Expatriate success | OE | Atheoretical |
| 6 | JTMD | Harcar and Harcar (2004) | LR | In this study, expatriate women's success is defined with two variables, job withdrawal and work performance, which are affected by family issues and HR policies | Organisational | Job withdrawal intentions Performance | Expatriate success | OE | Spillover Theory (Pleck, 1977) |
| 7 | CDI | Gabel et al. (2005) | Mix | … “Consequently, at the Individual level, the research reported here considers four success indicators: (1) cross-cultural adjustment, (2) performance evaluation, (3) complete a full term of the assignment and (4) life satisfaction.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Performance Completion of the IA Life satisfaction | Success in the IA | OE | Atheoretical |
| 8 | SMR | Varner and Palmer (2005) | LR | … “How effective is the expatriate during his/her stay? How long does the expatriate stay with the company after repatriation? What knowledge has the expatriate gained and how is the company institutionalising and using that knowledge?” | Individual and organisational | Expatriate's effectiveness during the IA Expatriate's tenure after repatriation Expatriate's Knowledge gain Organisation's use of expatriate's gained knowledge | Expatriate success | Not Specified | Atheoretical |
| 9 | Book 6 | Van Vianen et al. (2008) | LR | “Expatriates who remain in their assignments until the end of the term (attendance), meet the performance standards and adjust to the new culture (satisfaction, well-being) are considered as the most successful ones” | Individual and organisational | Completion of IA Meeting performance standards Adjustment | Expatriate success | Not Specified | Atheoretical |
| 10 | GBOE | Mcnulty (2008) | Qual | The author proposes a definition and a method of ROI calculation using expatriates. In fact, in this article, “expatriate ROI” is defined as “a calculation in which the financial and non-financial benefits to the firm are compared with the financial and non-financial costs of the international assignment, as appropriate to the assignment's purpose.” | Organisational | Expatriate's ROI: financial and non-financial benefits to the firm vs the financial and non-financial costs incurred by the organisation | Expatriate success | OE | Atheoretical |
| 11 | HRM | Cerdin and Le Pargneux (2009) | LR | “Individual success during expatriation and repatriation encompasses what we call career success, job success and development success. We also propose to measure IA success at the organisational level during expatriation and repatriation by performance.” | Individual and organisational | Career success Job success Development success Performance Retention of employees | Expatriate success in the IA | OE | Theory of Fit (e.g.Kristof, 1996), Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964) and Signal Theory (Spence, 1973 |
| 12 | IJHRM | Traavik and Richardsen (2010) | Quan | Objective career success was defined by extrinsic, visible outcomes such as earnings or promotions, whereas subjective career success was defined by intrinsic outcomes such as career and job satisfaction | Individual | Objective outcomes (earnings and promotions) Subjective outcomes (career and job satisfaction) | Career success | OE/SIE | Atheoretical |
| 13 | IJHRM | Pattie and Parks (2011) | Quan | “…. three outcomes that are critical measures of expatriate success: adjustment, turnover intentions and expatriate performance.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Turnover intentions Performance | Expatriate success | OE | Atheoretical |
| 14 | IJHRM | Hamori and Koyuncu (2011) | Quan | This paper focuses on the career success of expatriates and defines it as the shortest time to get promoted to the top | Individual | Shortest time to get promoted to the top | Career success | OE | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964; Ng et al., 2005) |
| 15 | AOM 2011 | Cerdin and Dickmann (2011) | Quan | The authors explored two success criteria from an Individual perspective: career satisfaction and job satisfaction. Moreover, from the organisational perspective, they evaluated the expatriate's intention to leave the organisation as a measure of IA success (failure) | Individual and organisational | Career satisfaction Job satisfaction Intention to leave the organisation | Success in the IA | OE | Person-Environment Fit Theory (e.g.Kristof, 1996) and the Boundaryless Career Perspective (e.g. Arthur and Rousseau, 1996) |
| 16 | TIBR | Van Bakel et al. (2011) | Quan | “It is therefore important to include both cross-cultural adjustment and performance in studies concentrating on the determinants of the success of international assignments.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Performance | Success in the IA | Not Specified | Atheoretical |
| 17 | Book 11 | Toh et al. (2012) | LR | ..“ If an expatriate assignment is truly successful, the expatriate should gain knowledge and experience, the HCN should gain knowledge and career capital and the organisation should benefit both because of the successful transfer of information that motivated the assignment in the first place, but also from the career capital gained by all of its employees” | Individual, interpersonal and organisational | Expatriate's knowledge and experience gain HCN's knowledge and career capital gain Organisation's successful transfer of information | Expatriate success Expatriate failure | Not Specified | Social Identity Theory (Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) and Justice Theories (e.g. Blader and Tyler, 2009; Tyler and Lind, 1992; Smith and Tyler, 1996; Leonardelli and Toh, 2011) |
| 18 | APBR | Lauring and Selmer (2014) | Quan | ..”The evaluation of an IA (whether successful or failure) can be approached from two perspectives or two different levels. At the Individual level, the main concern is the expatriate. Expatriate retention, Individual performance or cross-cultural adjustment are some factors related on an Individual level (e.g. Caligiuri, 1997, 2000; Takeuchi et al., 2002). On the other hand, organisational perspectives are concerned with the effectiveness of the international human resources strategies practised in the organisation. Recruitment, selection and compensation are some examples of these strategies and return investments.” | Individual and organisational | Job Performance Desire to leave the assignment early Satisfaction | Success in the IA | OE | Atheoretical |
| 19 | SAJHRM | Valk et al. (2014) | Qual | “…. this study will primarily deal with four basic variants: work adjustment, time to proficiency, job performance and job satisfaction.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Time to proficiency Performance Job satisfaction | Expatriate success | SIE | Career Capital Theory (Arthur et al., 1995; DeFillippi and Arthur, 1994) |
| 20 | JGM | Canhilal et al. (2015) | Qual | This article defines an expatriate's success from the Individual perspective. Based on the female (India) expatriates interviewed for their career success, they consider having work-family balance, self-satisfaction and contribution to the family and home country society as the outcome of a successful career | Individual and interpersonal | Work - family balance Self-satisfaction Contribution to the family and home country | Career success | SIE | Atheoretical |
| 21 | IJHRDM | Howe-Walsh et al. (2015) | LR | A successful expatriation is one where the individual performs effectively in a foreign country and remains for the planned duration and part of successful expatriation includes retaining the repatriate when they return to the home organisation | Organisational | Performance Completion of the IA Repatriation | Success in the IA | Not Specified | Atheoretical |
| 22 | HRM | Kumarika Perera et al. (2017) | LR | … “We base our choice of constructs on Harzing and Christensen (2004), who urge the use of the well-established HRM concepts of performance and turnover in evaluating expatriate success or failure.” | Organisational | Performance Turnover intention | Expatriate success Expatriate failure | OE | Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964; Gouldner, 1960) |
| 23 | BJM | Silbiger et al. (2017) | Quan | ..“Hence, the current study used withdrawal cognition and job satisfaction as expatriation success.” | Individual and organisational | Job satisfaction Intention to withdraw | Success in the IA | Not Specified | Regulatory Focus Theory (Higgins, 1997) |
| 24 | IBR | Schmid and Wurster (2017) | Quan | … "By using time to the top, we apply a recommended measure of career success as previously used in upper echelons research (Cappelli and Hamori, 2005; Sheridan et al., 1990)." | Individual | The shortest time to get promoted to the top after being on IAs | Career success | OE | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1993) and Elite Theory (e.g. Mills, 1956; Davis, 1994) |
| 25 | ODJ | Davis et al. (2018) | LR | ..“Expatriate success is often evaluated in terms of expatriate adjustment, job performance and withdrawal cognitions.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Performance Withdrawal cognitions | Expatriate success | Not Specified | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) |
| 26 | HRMR | Van Der Laken et al. (2019) | MA | ..“We included four success criteria in order to balance between psychological processes and organisational outcomes: expatriates' adjustment, commitment, performance and retention. We consider adjustment and commitment to be proximal outcomes as they constitute direct psychological responses to received social support. Performance and retention can be regarded as longer-term behavioral responses to social support and can thus be considered more distal criteria of success.” | Individual and organisational | Adjustment Commitment to the organisation Performance Retention | Expatriate success | OE/SIE | Social Exchange Theory (e.g. Gouldner, 1960; Kurtessis et al., 2017; Raabe and Beehr, 2003; Rousseau, 1989; Seers, 1989) and Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory (Gudykunst and Nishida, 2001) |
| 27 | SABR | Harry et al. (2019) | Qual | ..”The grouping of career success has been on two continuums. Firstly, career success is a subjective experience associated with psychological success and emphasises career satisfaction (Shaffer et al., 2012; Shortland, 2018) and job satisfaction (Hussain and Deery, 2018). Secondly, career success can also be framed as an objective reality, emphasising more on measurable outcomes such as job security, promotions and salary (Egner, 2013; Lee, 2005; Zikic, 2014).” | Individual | Objective measures: Job security, Promotion and Salary Subjective measures: Career and job satisfaction | Career success | SIE | Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964) and Boundaryless Career Theory (Arthur and Rousseau, 1996) |
| 28 | Book 8 | Waxin and Brewster (2020) | LR | ..”Career success is defined as the accomplishment of desirable work-related outcomes at any point in a person's career (Arthur et al., 2005). Career success consists of two dimensions (Ng et al., 2005): Objective career success includes externally comparable or more tangible indicators of a person's career development, such as salary and promotions (Arthur et al., 2005); subjective career success refers to a person's internal reflection and evaluation and is often operationalised as career satisfaction (Ng et al., 2005)” | Individual | Objective measures: Salary Promotions Subjective measures: Career satisfaction | Career success | SIE | Atheoretical |
| 29 | Book 8 | Mello et al. (2020) | LR | .."Empirical studies of expatriates define career success as the accomplishment of desirable, positive psychological or work-related outcomes as a result of international experiences accumulated over time (Holtbrügge and Ambrosius, 2015; Ng et al., 2005; Suutari et al., 2018). In the careers' literature, objective career success is defined as factors directly observable by others and measurable in a standardised way, such as salary or promotions (Arthur et al., 2005; Gunz and Heslin, 2005). Subjective career success is defined as the focal actor's evaluation and experience of achieving career outcomes meaningful to them personally (Ng et al., 2005; Seibert et al., 2001; Shockley et al., 2016), typically measured as career satisfaction (Greenhaus et al., 1990; Seibert et al., 2013) or perceived career success (Heslin, 2003; Turban and Dougherty, 1994) and, more recently, as a multidimensional evaluation of career facets, such as growth and development, personal life and authenticity (Shockley et al., 2016).” | Individual | Objective measures: Promotions Salaries Subjective measures: Career satisfaction Growth Development Personal Life Authenticity | Career success | SIE | Atheoretical |
| 30 | JWB | Lazarova et al. (2021) | Quan | ..“ Career satisfaction as a measure of career success.” | Individual | Subjective measures: Career satisfaction | Career success | OE | Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) |
| 31 | JGM THEMR | Valk (2021) | Qual | ..'”Hence, we offer a definition of expatriate effectiveness and success that is more broad than these four criteria and the definitions of Bird et al. (2010), Ross (2011), drawing upon the contributions of aforementioned authors, namely the ability to work effectively and live contentedly abroad.” | Individual and organisational | Ability to work effectively and live contentedly | Expatriate success | Not Specified | Human Capital Theory (Becker,1964, 2002) |
Through inductive thematic analysis of the articles (Thomas and Hardens, 2008), we were able to identify different dimensions (e.g, CCA, Performance, Satisfaction) and antecedents (e.g. CCA, Motivation to migrate, Interaction with HCNs) of success as first-order codes and classify them into three levels (individual, interpersonal and organisational). Subsequently, we used these first-order and second-order codes to analyse expatriate success definitions and trends based on the frequencies of these codes (see findings). Next, we conducted this analysis manually by tabulating the information in chronological order for a better understanding (Table A1 in the appendix) and to highlight the contrast and trend of expatriate success definition across the years (Table A2 in the appendix). Drawing on Rousseau et al.'s classification (2008), we used integration and interpretation methods to analyse and synthesise our data. Integration is a process of triangulation across different studies and methods to answer specific questions and examine the approaches taken to the topic. This enabled us to answer the following questions: What variables did the studies consider and how? How did the studies define expatriate success? And what theoretical framework did they adopt? Interpretation involves collecting descriptive data, pinpointing its common concepts and transferring them to new classifications to develop new constructs. Although, we didn't explicitly develop a new construct, however in systematically classifying its dimensions and critically indicating what is missed from the extant definitions we extended and developed the construct further.
We used VOSviewer version 1.6.11 (Van Eck and Waltman, 2010) to generate a perceptual map of the final sample to satisfy objective (2), that is to determine the interplay between antecedents and dimensions of expatriate success. VOSviewer is a software tool that helps create and visualise maps based on network data using objects of interest (e.g. keywords). The relationship between these items is shown by the way they link together. All of the links and items constitute the network. After running our sample, the final list contained 29 terms (Figure 2). These terms are connected by lines and are labelled with coloured nodes. The node's size is positively correlated with the occurrence of terms in the titles and abstracts. The more co-occurrences between two terms is evident in their closer proximity on the map, colour similarity and the stronger the link between them (Van Eck and Waltman, 2010). Finally, we obtained a complex visualisation of clusters and networks (Figures 3 and 4). The five clusters demonstrate how the antecedents and dimensions of expatriate success are interrelated, thus helping us to attain objective 2. For example, in the blue cluster-the biggest node- (CCA) is linked to HCNs, attitude, satisfaction and turnover intentions. This linkage helps answer our objective to determine the interplay between antecedents and dimensions of expatriate success.
Findings
Profile of included studies
This section explains the characteristics of the final 249 studies we included (Table 2). The 249 studies were published between 1990 and 2021 across 104 journals, 14 books and 15 of which were conference proceedings. These studies involve 482 authors from 41 countries, indicating broad coverage. The average citation rate for each article during this period was 34. In total, 531 author keywords were determined. 111studies adopted quantitative methods (44.6%), 64 were conceptual (25.7%), 50 qualitative (20%), 17 mixed-methods (6.8%), four meta-analyses (1.7%) and three conducted SLRs (1.2%).
Identifying the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success
This section addresses our first objective: identifying the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success. Across 249 studies, relationships between factors considered antecedents or dimensions of expatriate success were investigated (Table A1). Noticeably, 167 studies (67.1%) were atheoretical in contrast to, 82 (32.9%) which were theory-informed (the 10th column in Table A1). Although in this analysis, we do not distinguish between Oes (organisational expatriates) and SIEs (self-initiated expatriates), and our findings confirm Pinto et al.'s (2020) criticism of SIE's studies as atheoretical or theoretically fragmented without further understanding underlying motives and drivers of success. However, in the last 4 years, theory-based explanations of expatriate success increased (Figure A1 in the appendix).
Two dimensions received the most attention in expatriate studies, namely the individual (62.6%) and the organisational (45%). Recently, the interpersonal dimension gained further attention (6.8%). Various studies investigated the individual dimensions: subjective and self-reported such as CCA (Webb and Wright, 1996; Cao et al., 2013), satisfaction, whether life, self, career, or job (Gabel et al., 2005; Canhilal et al., 2015), success, whether in the career, job or in self-development (Cerdin and Le Pargneux, 2009; Bashir et al., 2021), the expatriate's perspective on work-family balance (Valk et al., 2014), job security, personal growth, authenticity and ability to live contentedly (Valk, 2021). Other dimensions investigated were knowledge gain (Bonache and Zárraga-Oberty, 2008), financial gains (earnings, salaries) and promotions and the duration to obtain the latter after the assignment (Bolino, 2007).
The organisational dimensions considered are expatriate performance (e.g. Hiltrop and Janssens, 1990; Caliguiri and Phillips, 2003), intention to complete the international assignment (IA) (Kraimer and Wayne, 2004), completing the IA (Caliguiri, 1997), effectiveness during the IA (Lee and Donohue, 2012), achieving organisational goals (Porter and Tansky, 1999), job withdrawal intentions (Harcar and Harcar, 2004), turnover intentions (Bozionelos, 2009), commitment to the organisation (Hemmasi et al., 2010), tenure after repatriation (Varner and Palmer, 2005), expatriate return on investment (McNulty and Cieri, 2013), ability to work effectively (Lee and Donohue, 2012) and the organisation's use of knowledge gain (Toh et al., 2012).
Lastly, the interpersonal dimensions are concerned with relationship building and identification with the team abroad (Harrison and Shaffer, 2005), knowledge transfer among host-country nationals and their career capital gain (Toh et al., 2012), contribution to society and family (Valk et al., 2014) and work-family balance (from the family's perspective) (Kempen et al., 2015).
Despite the many studies covering the different dimensions, we rarely found studies that addressed those antecedents and dimensions across all three levels jointly except for Porter and Tansky (1999) and Toh et al. (2012) further clouding the meaning of expatriate success. This was evident in the 3 SLRs, which each address expatriate success's dimensions and antecedents differently. Van der Laken et al. (2016) focused on perceived organisational support's impact on expatriate success. Weisheit (2018) studied expatriate success from an individual standpoint, emphasizing the importance of an employee's readiness to relocate. Lastly, Faeth and Kittler (2020) explored expatriate management in hostile environments from a multi-stakeholder perspective. Despite the fragmented studies, our findings confirm that expatriate success is multidimensional, as indicated by previous literature (Toh et al., 2012) (Table A1).
The interplay between individual, interpersonal and organisational antecedents and dimensions of expatriate success
This section addresses our second objective showing the intertwined relationships between the antecedents and dimensions. In what follows, we discuss the most frequently studied dimensions and show how some antecedents are related.
Depending on the study, adjustment was designated as an individual dimension or antecedent of success. The most widely studied dimension was CCA in its different forms (psychological, socio-cultural and work). Then, 111 studies (44.6%) considered CCA a dimension of expatriate success. In contrast, 33 articles (13.3%) considered it an antecedent of expatriate success, good performance, intention to complete the IA and expatriate well-being. Thus, adjustment has been mostly equated to success rather than an antecedent of it despite several individual antecedents shaping expatriates' CCA. For example, the Big Five personality characteristics explicitly related to expatriates' CCA (Ones and Viswesvaran, 1997). Also, other antecedents of expatriate adjustment were also investigated: cultural intelligence (CQ, e.g. Huff, 2013) 12 studies (4.8%), (emotional intelligence (EQ; e.g. Cray et al., 2018) six studies (2.4%); motivation to migrate (Van den Bergh and Du Plessis, 2012) and willingness to go on IAs (e.g. Wan, 2019) six studies (2.4%)). Other explored factors were language proficiency (e.g. Caliguiri et al., 2009; Huff, 2013), management and leadership skills (Harjo, 2016).
Also, interpersonal antecedents played a significant role in expatriates' CCA: the family's (and spouse's) adjustment and their willingness to go on IAs (e.g. Van Vianen et al., 2008) and interaction with HCNs (e.g. Varma et al., 2012; Van Bakel, 2019). Several organisational antecedents also affected expatriates' CCA such as selection criteria. Organisations whose primary selection criteria were the expatriate's mental ability, Big Five personality characteristics and EQ facilitated the expatriate's CCA (Gabel et al., 2005). Selecting the right candidate, providing them and their accompanying families with adequate cross-cultural training (CCT) and preparation (e.g. Hiltrop and Janssens, 1990; McCabe, 1993) were crucial to adjustment. Organisational support also contributed to CCA (Hiltrop and Janssens, 1990; Webber and Vögel, 2019). Kraimer and Wayne (2004) believe that this perceived organisational support and efforts is crucial for expatriates' CCA and well-being. David et al. (2021) showed that POS and family-supportive work perceptions could enhance the odds of an expatriate's success as it alleviates the burdens they potentially face when accompanied by their family. If expatriates perceive the company's support positively, they will adjust more readily.
Performance is the second most frequent dimension involved in expatriate success. Although only one study (0.4%) considers it an antecedent of success, 80 (32.1%) consider it one of the critical dimensions of success from the organisational perspective. Similarly, various individual antecedents shaped CCA and satisfaction and impacted expatriates' performance. For instance, in addition to Big Five personality characteristics, CQ (Huff, 2013), EQ (Cray et al., 2018), motivation to migrate (van den Bergh and Du Plessis, 2012), willingness to go on IAs (e.g. Wan, 2019), language proficiency (e.g. Caliguiri et al., 2009; Huff, 2013), management and personal leadership skills (Harjo, 2016) have also been correlated with expatriate performance as a dimension of success.
Furthermore, to ensure optimal performance, organisations must also consider the expatriate candidate's technical abilities, stress tolerance, flexibility, communication skills, cultural empathy, spouse adaptability and subsidiary-parent company relations (Hiltrop and Janssens, 1990). Harvey et al. (2001) showed the impact of a candidate's level of motivation on their performance. Lee and Kartika (2014) suggest that both CCA and expatriate performance and knowledge transfer are influenced by interpersonal factors, for example. Similarly, performance is primarily shaped by the same interpersonal and organisational antecedents.
The third most frequent dimension of expatriate success was expatriate satisfaction. Satisfaction appeared as a dimension of success in 35 studies (14.1%) but as an antecedent in only three (1.2%), which indicates that satisfaction was mainly considered an essential dimension of success but not a contributing factor, and various antecedents shaped it. Although satisfaction is one of the critical dimensions of expatriate success, unlike CCA, it is not considered a dimension of success on its own. Instead, satisfaction complements other dimensions of success, such as CCA (Supangco and Mayrhofer, 2014), intention to complete the IA (Mezias and Scandura, 2005), turnover intention (Bozionelos, 2009) and withdrawal cognition (Canhilal et al., 2015). Further, several factors contribute to expatriate satisfaction. Interaction with HCNs relates to expatriate job satisfaction and intention to complete the IA (Konanahalli et al., 2011; Templer, 2010). Organisational support and the extent to which expatriates and HCN support perceive it contributes to their satisfaction with their career and intention to complete the assignment (Cao et al., 2014). Similarly, this perceived organisational support affects their life and family satisfaction (David et al., 2021).
Other dimensions of expatriate success from the organisational perspective were the completion of the IA (e.g. Lazarova et al., 2015) and willingness to remain (e.g. Braga and Kubo, 2010), both with 20 studies (8%); intention to stay with 13 studies (5.2%) (e.g. Cao et al., 2014); premature returns with four studies (1.6%) (e.g. Canhilal et al., 2015); and withdrawal cognition with four studies (1.6%) (e.g. Davis et al., 2018). Ten studies (4%) address commitment to the organisation as another dimension of success (Chen, 2015; Gallego-Toledo, 2015; Van Der Laken et al., 2016). To a lesser extent, other organisational dimensions of expatriate success that were considered sporadically were knowledge transfer (2%), tenure after repatriation (0.4%) and effectiveness (2%). As for achieving organisational goals like financial targets and market shares (0.2%), Porter and Tansky (1999) showed that specific individual antecedents (e.g. assimilation, endurance, psychological factors and career expectations) play a significant role in increasing expatriate chances of achieving such goals, adjusting better and completing the IA.
Finally, knowledge transfer was considered one of the interpersonal dimensions in only three articles (1.2%). While Toh et al. (2012) investigated the role played by organisations in providing adequate CCT to expatriates to ensure this transfer, Wang and Varma (2018) highlighted the critical role of HCNs. Bonache and Zárraga-Oberty (2008) echoed this and added the need for the right abilities and motivation. Contribution to home country society and family, work-family balance and satisfaction were other dimensions of expatriate success at this level (Valk et al., 2014). Moreover, as one key interpersonal dimension of expatriate success, CCA affects relationship building and identification with the team abroad (Harrison and Shaffer, 2005; Denisi and Sonesh, 2016). Hence, the interplay of individual, interpersonal and organisational antecedents shapes these interpersonal dimensions.
To complement these findings, we used VOS viewer to generate several maps highlighting our sample's networks of the keywords co-occurrence. These maps represented five clusters, namely the following: International career success (Cluster 1 in red); Success determined by selection based on personal characteristics (Cluster 2 in green); Success as adjustment and satisfaction influenced by interpersonal factors (Cluster 3 in blue); Success as the lack of expatriate failure facilitated by spouse's organisational support and training (Cluster 4 in yellow); and finally, success linked to commitment and performance enabled by social support (Cluster 5 in purple).
Figure 3 represents the network of co-occurrences of all 29 terms in the five clusters. Figures 2 and 3 show that the “Expatriate success' node is the largest in our sample. It occurred 233 times and is linked to the other terms. This is expected as the studies in our sample specifically relate to expatriate success, the main keyword. The “Expatriate adjustment” node has the highest total strength link (1,364). This node has 27 links (out of 28), reflecting that expatriate adjustment was highly researched and considered the most frequent dimension or antecedent of success. “Performance” has 26 links, the third strongest links (920) and occurred 139 times.
The five clusters show that expatriate success is not a uni- or bi-dimensional concept. Instead, it is multidimensional and affected by diverse factors at differing levels. The main dimensions considered were adjustment, performance, satisfaction, commitment, effectiveness, turnover intentions, career success and repatriation success, therefore, taking the individuals' and the organisation's perspectives into account.
This map (Figure 4) echoes our previous finding about expatriate success, shifting to focus on global career success and involving the whole career, not only the IA. For instance, none of the terms is shaded in blue (oldest), and most are in light orange (more recent). Although authors explored adjustment, performance and expatriate success since the 1990s, these terms appear to be emphasised more recently (light orange) as the research intensity increased as of 2009. Our findings show that research on these dimensions tripled from 67 articles between 1990 and 2006 to 182 articles from 2007 to 2021. The dimensions considered from 2009 onward are career success, repatriation, satisfaction and turnover intention.
Definitions of expatriate success
In this section we satisfy the third objective, by reviewing the existing definitions of expatriate success and suggesting an integrative one. Although researchers studied expatriate success in many ways and from various lenses, no consensus on one definition exists. As mentioned, different dimensions have been considered for the same concept making comparing them difficult. Our findings reveal that very few studies explicitly define expatriate success: only 31 (12.4%) studies, from which only half, 16 (51.6%), were grounded in some theory (Table A2 in the appendix). In 5 out of 16 studies, authors adopted Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1964) thus reflecting the predominance of the organisational perspective when defining expatriate success. Conversely, the importance of the interaction and exchange between the organisation and the individual to define expatriate success also seems relevant, with 5articles out of 16 using either Person-Environment Fit Theory (Kristof, 1996), Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964) or relational models of procedural justice (Tyler and Lind, 1992), thus highlighting the organisational perspective in the definition of expatriate success. The use of psychological theories focussing on the subjective dimension of expatriate success at the individual level, such as Anxiety and Uncertainty Management Theory (Gudykunst and Nishida, 2001), Conservation of Resources Theory (Hobfoll, 1989) and Regulatory Focus Theory (Higgins, 1997) are less used to define success, with only three articles out of 16.
Of these 31 articles that define success, 12 (38.8%) considered either individual (e.g. CCA) or organisational (e.g. performance) dimensions, 17 (54.8%) took both dimensions into account, 1 (3.2%) considered the individual and interpersonal dimensions (e.g. knowledge transfer) and 1 (3.2%) highlights all three.
Also, these studies differed in how they refer to success: 12 (38.8%) used the term “expatriate success”, eight (25.8%) used “career success”, eight (25.8%) used “success in the IA”, 2 (6.4%) contrasted “expatriate success” and “failure” and one (3.2%) combined “expatriate success” with “success in the IA”. More than half, 16 (51.6%), focused on the success of OEs. The rest either investigated SIEs (five studies, 16.2%), did not specify the type of expatriate of interest (eight studies; 25.8%), or investigated both OEs and SIEs (two studies, 6.4%). So, comparably, fewer studies defining expatriate success were referred to as SIEs. It is also worth noting that when referring to success in the IA, which is bound to the assignment's corporate goals, authors studied OEs solely, whereas both OEs and SIEs were the subjects of the studies on career success with a broader focus going beyond the attainment of the corporate goals.
The first to suggest a definition of expatriate success was Zeynep Aycan in 1997. She considered both individual and organisational perspectives and proposed that success can be defined by expatriates' levels of adjustment and performance. Also, Caligiuri (1997) explored these two dimensions and suggested that the three most common criteria for evaluating expatriate success were the following: completion of the foreign assignment, CCA and performance on the foreign assignment in this order. Also, Porter and Tansky (1999) considered success "in terms of the expatriate achieving specific objectives but considered from the organisational perspective. These objectives often include some financial goals but might also be in the form of market share gain, introducing a new product or service, cycle time improvements, or quality objectives” (p. 47). Other researchers (Caligiuri, 1997; Kraimer and Wayne, 2004) reported similar definitions of expatriate success and related it to adjustment, performance, completion of the IA, or even the organisation's return on investment on its expatriates (McNulty, 2008). Hence, authors have been more interested in equating expatriate success to tangible and organisational dimensions rather than subjective and individual dimensions, showing a predominance of the organisational perspective in their definitions of expatriate success.
Another trend observed when analysing these definitions is that while previous studies mainly emphasised objective and factual measures of success, such as completing the IA or promotions, more recent definitions started incorporating more subjective measures. For instance, Gabel et al. (2005) introduced life satisfaction as an additional measure of success. Other subjective measures, such as expatriates' gain in knowledge from IAs, fulfilled psychological contracts reflecting the individuals' perspective (Kumarika Perara et al., 2017), and career and job satisfaction (Traavik and Richardsen, 2010) have been considered. Hence, research attempted to provide greater insight into expatriate success by simultaneously focussing on subjective and objective measures that capture the individual's and the organisation's perspectives.
Finally, another consideration that can be drawn from the findings is that of a broader time scope that goes beyond success in the IA and encompasses long-term career success. Cerdin and Le Pargneux (2009) proposed this idea and incorporated both the IA and the long-term career. They added expertise, career, job and development success concepts. They also shed light on the importance of measuring all these during expatriation and after repatriation to define success. Traavik and Richardsen (2010) also explored career success and proposed subjective (e.g. career, job satisfaction) and objective outcomes (e.g. rewards, promotions) to measure it. Valk et al. (2014) considered new dimensions of expatriate success while relating it to career success. They found that the outcome of a successful international career is the work-family balance, self-satisfaction and contribution to the family and home-country society. Three other studies (Blanco and Castillo, 2020; Hamori and Koyuncu, 2011; Schmid and Wurster, 2017) also related expatriate success to career success but considered the time required to get to the top as the measure of this success. Blanco and Castillo pointed out that the longer expatriates are away from the HQ, the longer they will take to get to the top and, therefore, the less successful they will be. Conversely, Ramaswami et al. (2016) considered that the more international experience expatriates exhibit, i.e. the more time spent on IAs, the more human capital they possess, the more rewards they obtain and, therefore, the more successful they are.
This perspective was recently updated. Harry et al. (2019), Waxin and Brewster (2020), Mello et al. (2020) and Lazarova et al. (2021) all provided more recent definitions of expatriate success and linked it to career success and its objective and subjective outcomes. Mello et al. (2020) defined expatriate success as including different subjective and objective measures at the individual level. They mainly focused on the accomplishment of desirable, positive psychological or work-related outcomes, on tangible, objective and measurable features such as promotions or salaries as objective outcomes, and career satisfaction, career success and finally, the multidimensional evaluation criteria of career facets, such as growth and development, personal life and authenticity as subjective outcomes. Then, we found that the definitions by Valk et al. (2014) and Mello et al. (2020) are the most integrative, comprehensive and inclusive. They tackle the individual, interpersonal and organisational aspects and use the subjective and objective measures of an expatriate's success to describe this complex and multi-faceted concept, even though their definitions apply to SIE.
In sum, over time, the definition of expatriate success evolved. First, it was associated with merely completing an assignment measured factually and objectively. Then, it incorporated the expatriates' ability to adjust, measured in a self-reported way, perform well and achieve organisational goals, measured by the organisation. Finally, it considered the efficient transfer of knowledge and expertise and several subjective dimensions of career success.
Discussion
Research on expatriate success often overlooked the construct's multidimensionality and subjective and socially constructed nature failing to achieve a consensus on defining it. Our findings support this notion and show the various antecedents and dimensions to understand expatriate success. These antecedents and dimensions were not independent, as a visible interplay was found among them across individual, interpersonal and organisational levels. Considering the dimensions identified and discriminating them from antecedents, we suggested a comprehensive definition, complementing the extant ones (e.g. Aycan, 1997; Mello et al., 2020). Next, we discuss each of our findings to their respective objectives next.
The first objective of identifying the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success has been thoroughly fulfilled through our findings, which comprehensively address individual, interpersonal and organisational ones. Specifically, our SLR clarifies the concept by systematically categorising and integrating the antecedents and dimensions that were previously primarily investigated separately and only rarely in combination. It also identifies which dimensions (CCA, performance and satisfaction in this order) have been most frequently studied as proxies of expatriate success, which level of analysis (individual and organisational mostly) and which perspective (primarily organisational). From these findings, we conclude that expatriate success is a multidimensional construct that needs to be analysed individually, interpersonally and organisationally from two perspectives, namely individual and organisational (e.g. Harry et al., 2019; Lazarova et al., 2021) jointly to be adequately measured. While each level is essential to understanding expatriate success, no single level can be considered the sole determiner. Thus, categorising these antecedents and dimensions (Table A1) provides a much-needed boundary-clarification of the concept of expatriate success. This clarification calls for attention for future studies in expatriate management research to specify what they mean by success when analysing it as a variable. This specification is necessary to compare studies and create an integrated corpus of knowledge.
Our second objective of the SLR, the interplay among the factors across the different levels is evident in the five clusters that emerged from VOSviewer. Interestingly, four out of the five clusters evidenced the importance of interpersonal and organisational factors on the dimensions of success. The interplay between the antecedents and outcomes at the individual and interpersonal levels contributes to understanding expatriate success. Personality traits play a significant role in facilitating the expatriates' adjustment and, subsequently, success in their IA. Also, the HCNs' attitudes toward expatriates are equally important as emphasized by some studies that a good level of communication between the two parties often leads to a better CCA, performance, intention to complete the IA and overall satisfaction (Templer, 2010; Konanahalli et al., 2011; Cao et al., 2014). All these factors increase expatriates' satisfaction with their job and career, which will likely be reflected in their decreased turnover and withdrawal intentions. Furthermore, the interplay is also evident across the three levels together. For instance, expatriates' commitment to the mission and organisation and their performance seems to be highly influenced by the level of social support provided at the interpersonal level. The social support from the expatriates' family, community, and new work surroundings can play either a positive or a negative role in an expatriate's commitment levels to the job, performance and CCA, all of which consequently reflect on their success (Goby et al., 2002). Undoubtedly, this success is also ensured by a positive performance which is also impacted by the level of social support (Konanhalli et al., 2011; Araci, 2015).
Finally, in line with our third objective, we propose an integrative, multidimensional and multi-level definition of expatriate success. Expatriate success is a socially and scholarly constructed term that comprehensively and integratively evolved and acquired new dimensions at the individual, interpersonal and organisational levels. The trend in this evolution has been divergent rather than convergent making the concept more broadly defined with new, previously unnoticed dimensions. The definition we put forward reflects this expansive trend and incorporates less-noticed dimensions and perspectives for a more holistic understanding of the construct. Hence, we propose the following definition: “expatriate success encompasses all dimensions: the individual (adjustment, satisfaction, career success and work-life balance), the interpersonal (HCNs and expatriate relationship, HCN career capital gain, knowledge transfer and work-family balance) and the organisational (performance, commitment, completion of IA, achieving organisational goals, repatriation success, turnover intention, knowledge transfer and effectiveness).” The interplay between these three dimensions shows that expatriate success can only happen when all the stakeholders across the three levels can capitalise on the expatriation process. Moreover, expatriate success is the outcome of pre-, during and post-assignment factors that ensure the appropriate candidate selection, transition into the assignment and environment through the various individual, interpersonal and organisational factors, and a post-assignment path forward. Our definition integrates all the dimensions previously addressed fragmentedly, to offer a broader conception of expatriate success. It also incorporates a new processual and more comprehensive focus on the long-term rather than short-term success. This long-term view shows that expatriate success is conceived as the overall career success that extends s beyond the termination of an assignment, as suggested in recent research addressing both subjective and objective measures and outcomes (e.g. Harry et al., 2019; Lazarova et al., 2021).
The attainment of these objectives has allowed for covering an extant gap in previous expatriate research where the concept of success had been differently and incongruently addressed (Hemmasi et al., 2010) leading to a lack of comparability among studies (Black, 1990; Caliguiri and Cascio, 1998; Harzing and Christensen, 2004). Also, satisfying our objectives allowed the crafting of a broader conception of expatriate success that considers its subjective and socially constructed nature in line with the career's literature (Briscoe et al., 2021). As we indicate below, this new conception opens a range of avenues for future research.
Limitations and future research
This research is not without its limitations. The studies included do not investigate different kinds of expatriates, such as flex-patriates, short-term assignees, international commuters, business travellers and non-traditional and minority expatriates (Mäkelä et al., 2017; Hutchings, 2021). Instead, it focuses only on OEs and SIEs, which we distinguish between (Table A2). However, understanding whether the measures and definitions of success differ among different groups of expatriates is critical to enriching the conception of expatriate success and should be further investigated by future studies. Specifically, a SLR can be conducted to explore the dimensions of success considered in the studies using these atypical samples of expatriates. Furthermore, delving into the subjective nature of success, it will be interesting to compare the key dimensions used by organisations and the different groups of expatriates to define success (i.e. the protean career of SIEs in contrast to other kinds of expatriates might emphasize individual dimensions such as work–life balance or satisfaction). In a similar line, comparing the dimensions used by expatriates to define success with those of migrants can be also a fruitful avenue for research to enrich the understanding of the socially constructed nature of this concept.
The suggested conception of expatriate success exhibits three important implications for further research in expatriate management. First, given that 15 out of the 31 articles (48.39%) defining expatriate success are not theoretically grounded, it might be time to abandon the concept of expatriate success altogether and instead focus on the overall career success of our international employees. HRM and occupational psychology theoretical models on career achievement and success (Pinto et al., 2020) such as the Theory of Work Adjustment (Dawis and Lofquist, 1984) can be drawn upon to further enrich, ground and theorise the understanding of career success concerning international workers' work-life experience, and subsequently success. These theoretical models can enrich and complement the existing organisational perspective (Kristof, 1996; Becker, 1964) in the definition of expatriate success by giving more prominence to the individual level and subjective nature of this construct.
Second, the suggested broader and multidimensional understanding of expatriate success highlights a necessary shift in the measurement criteria of it and for considering its subjective and socially constructed nature. Multiple indicators covering the highlighted dimensions should be employed to measure the complex nature of expatriate success, as it is neither limited to “objectivist” measures such as CCA, job, life or career satisfaction and organisational commitment, nor to observable measures such as financial compensation or promotions, assignment completion, knowledge transfer, or performance measures, but also expands to include the expatriates' subjective perceptions of their career success defined in their terms (Spurk et al., 2019). While subjective and objective career success measures were addressed in the career development literature (Briscoe et al., 2021), they have not been so in expatriate research, often ignoring the multidimensional, subjective and socially constructed nature of expatriate success. To further understand expatriate success, objective and subjective measures must be accounted for. Thus, to account for the subjective experience of success, we suggest that future studies include subjective measures of expatriates' success. We recommend incorporating the expatriates' perspective into studies on expatriate success by exploring their expectations before, during and after the assignment and how they define success through qualitative or mixed-methods designs.
A third research avenue on expatriate success is to develop and validate a questionnaire with the previously qualitatively identified meanings and idiosyncratic definitions of subjective expatriate success. Given that the meanings of success, like all personal meanings, are particularly sensitive to cultural differences, we recommend conducting this study cross-culturally to account for possible differences across cultures and to develop a culturally sensitive scale.
Implications for practice
Also, the evolution of the concept of expatriate success entails practical implications for organisations. In line with the new, more integrative conception of expatriate success, organisations should now not merely focus on selection and training but also incorporate career development support and career path planning in harmony with the expatriates' perceptions and expectations of their career success which contributes to expatriates' career success, their willingness to share their acquired knowledge and experience with others and ultimately contribute to the organisation's success.
But before deploying HR actions to facilitate expatriate success, organisations should ask expatriates to define what success means to them in their own words, to clarify expectations, help to satisfy them or understand some paradoxical situations that are assessed as expatriate success. Also, this knowledge should be translated into using multiple rather than single indicators (e.g. the completion of the IA) by HR professionals when evaluating expatriates' success. With these steps, organisations may also overcome the issue of expatriates disengaging after repatriation or abandoning the organisation despite completing the IA and outperforming during it, because their expectations and mental representations of success have not been considered by their organisations.
Further, capitalising on these considerations can foster a sense of loyalty and commitment among their expatriates particularly when they realise that their organisations are concerned with the expatriates' perceptions and expectations of success, not just the organisational goals, which align with the move toward protean and boundaryless career models (McDonald and Hite, 2008).
Conclusion
This study (1) identified the dimensions and antecedents of expatriate success, (2) determined the interplay among them and (3) clarified the definitions of expatriate success in the previous literature to provide an integrative definition of it. Following the PRISMA guidelines, 249 studies were included for the review from WOS and Scopus databases, These studies were thoroughly reviewed, coded and analysed manually and with VOSviewer.
In attaining these objectives, the review has made two important theoretical contributions: first, to highlight the construct's multidimensional, subjective and socially constructed nature, calling for this consideration in future research. Second, to suggest an integrative definition incorporating all the dimensions and combining individual and organisational perspectives with subjective and objective measures of success.
The authors would like to extend gratitude to the editor in chief, associate editor as well as to one of the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, feedback and support. The authors greatly appreciate all their guidance.
References
Appendix
List of acronyms
| Journals | |
|---|---|
| Academy of Management Executive | AME |
| African Journal of Business and Economic Research | AJBER |
| African Journal of Business Management | AJBM |
| Asia Pacific Business Review | APBR |
| Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources | APJHR |
| Australian Journal of Construction Economics and Building | AJCEB |
| Brazilian Administration Review | BAR |
| British Journal of Management | BJM |
| Career Development International | CDI |
| Clothing and Textiles Research Journal | CTRJ |
| Commercial Education Research | CER |
| Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal | CRIBJ |
| Cross Cultural and Strategic Management | CCSM |
| Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal | CCMIJ |
| Current Psychology | CP |
| Employee Relations | ER |
| Environmental Behavior Proceeding Journal | EBPJ |
| European Journal of International Management | EJIM |
| European Journal of Personality | EJP |
| European Journal of Training and Development | EJTD |
| European Management Journal | EMJ |
| Global Business and Organizational Excellence | GBOE |
| Human Relations | HR |
| Human Resource Development Review | HRDR |
| Human Resource for Health | HMH |
| Human Resource Management | HRM |
| Human Resource Management Journal | HRMJ |
| Human Resource Management Review | HRMR |
| Industrial Management | IM |
| Industrial Management & Data Systems | IMDS |
| International Business Review | IBR |
| International Education Journal | IEJ |
| International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management | IJBSAM |
| International Journal of Commerce and Management | IJCM |
| International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management | IJCHM |
| International Journal of Cross-Cultural Management | IJCCM |
| International Journal of Emerging Markets | IJEM |
| International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy | IJFIP |
| International Journal of Hospitality Management | IJHM |
| International Journal of Human Resource Development and Management | IJHRDM |
| International Journal of Human Resource Management | IJHRM |
| International Journal of Intercultural Relations | IJIR |
| International Journal of Lifelong Education | IJLE |
| International Journal of Management Reviews | IJMR |
| International Journal of Manpower | IJM |
| International Journal of Organizational Analysis | IJOA |
| International Journal of Production Economics | IJPE |
| International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management | IJRDM |
| International Journal of Selection and Assessment | IJSA |
| International Journal of Training and Development | IJTD |
| International Journal of Value-Based Management | IJVBM |
| International Trade Journal | ITJ |
| Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences | JCPS |
| Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management | JCHRM |
| Journal of Counseling Psychology | JCP |
| Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology | JCCP |
| Journal of European Industrial Training | JEIT |
| Journal of Global Mobility | JGM |
| Journal of Global Mobility: The Home of Expatriate Management Research | JGM THEMR |
| Journal of International Business and Economics | JIBE |
| Journal of International Business Studies | JIBS |
| Journal of International Education in Business | JIEB |
| Journal of International Management | JIM |
| Journal of International Trade & Commerce | JITC |
| Journal of Management | JM |
| Journal of Management Development | JMD |
| Journal of Managerial Psychology | JMP |
| Journal of Organizational Behavior | JOB |
| Journal of Psychology in Africa | JPA |
| Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics | JSOD |
| Journal of the Textile Institute | JTI |
| Journal of Transnational Management Development | JTMD |
| Journal of World Business | JWB |
| Korean Social Science Journal | KSSJ |
| Leadership & Organization Development Journal | LODJ |
| Leadership Quarterly | LQ |
| Management and Organization Review | MOR |
| Management Decision | MD |
| Management Research Review | MRR |
| Middle East Journal of Management | MEJM |
| New Approaches to Employee Management | NAEM |
| Organization Development Journal | ODJ |
| Personnel Psychology | PP |
| Personnel Review | PR |
| Polish Journal of Management Studies | PJMS |
| Purushartha: A Journal of Management Ethics and Spirituality | PJMES |
| Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala | RCIS |
| RURAL. ENVIRONMENT. EDUCATION. PERSONALITY | REEP |
| Scandinavian Journal of Management | SJM |
| Singapore Management Review | SMR |
| Sloan Management Review | SLMR |
| Social and Behavioral Sciences | SBS |
| Social Behavior and Personality | SBP |
| South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences | SAJEMS |
| South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management | SAJHRM |
| Southern African Business Review | SABR |
| The International Journal of Human Resource Management | IJHRM |
| The Journal of Corporate Accounting and Finance | JCAF |
| The Qualitative Report | TQR |
| Thunderbird International Business Review | TIBR |
| Training & Development Journal | DJ |
| Women in Management Review | WMR |
| World Applied Sciences Journal | WASJ |
| Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie (Journal of Social psychology) | JSP |
| Proceedings | |
| Academy of Management 2011 Annual Meeting - West Meets East: Enlightening. Balancing. Transcending | AOM 2011 |
| European Conference on Knowledge Management (pp. 931-XIX). Academic Conferences International Limited | ECKM |
| Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on System of Systems Engineering Australia, 2014 | SOSE |
| Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference Association of Researchers in Construction Management | ARCOM 2010 |
| Proceedings of RICS Construction and Property Conference | COBRA 2011 |
| The First International Symposium on Business Cooperation and Development in South-East and South Asia under B&R Initiative | ISBCD-16 |
| 3rd International Seminar and Conference on Learning Organization (ISCLO, 2015) | ISCLO 2015 |
| Books | |
| International Human Resources Management Challenges and Changes | Book 1 |
| The Routledge Companion to International Business Coaching | Book 2 |
| Challenges of Human Resource Management in Japan | Book 3 |
| Work and Family Interface in the International Career Context | Book 4 |
| New Approaches to Employee Management, Vol. 4. Expatriate Management: Theory and Research | Book 5 |
| The Blackwell Handbook of Personnel Selection | Book 6 |
| Expatriate Management: Transatlantic Dialogues | Book 7 |
| Self-Initiated Expatriates in Context: Recognising Space, Time and Institutions | Book 8 |
| Expert Systems with Applications | Book 9 |
| Handbook of Research on Global Hospitality and Tourism Management | Book 10 |
| The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Socialization | Book 11 |
| Managing Performance Abroad: A New Model for Understanding Expatriate Adjustment. Routledge Studies in Human Resource Development | Book 12 |
| Terms | |
| Structural Equation Modelling | SEM |
| Bivariate Correlation | BC |
| Confirmatory Factor Analysis | CFA |
| Correlation Matrix | CM |
| Correlational Analysis | CA |
| Cross-Cultural Adjustment | CAA |
| Cultural Intelligence | CQ |
| Data Envelopment Analysis | DEA |
| Decision Tree | DT |
| Emotional Intelligence | EQ |
| Factor Analysis | FA |
| Family Supportive Work Perception | FSOP |
| Focus Groups | FG |
| Harman Single Factor | HSF |
| Hierarchical Multiple Regressions | HMR |
| Hierarchical Regression Analysis | HRA |
| International Assignment | IA |
| Linear Structural Relation Model | LISREL Model |
| Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire | MPQ |
| Multiple Linear Regression | MLR |
| Multiple Regression Analysis | MRA |
| Multivariate Analyses Of Covariance | MANCOVA |
| Organisational expatriate | OE |
| Once-Way Analyses Of Variance | ANOVA |
| Ordinary Least Squares | OLS |
| Parallel Analysis | PA |
| Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling | PLS-SEM |
| Perceived Organisational Support | POS |
| Regression Analysis | RA |
| Self-initiated expatriate | SIE |
| Structural Equation Analysis | SEA |
| The Revised Neo Personality Inventory | NEO-PI-R |
| The Hogan Personality Inventory | HPI |
| Women As Managers Scale | WAMS |
Source(s): Authors ‘own (2023)
