Literature Review

Culture
Over the years, numerous efforts have been made in order to define the term culture. It is
generally agreed upon that culture guides our behavior and comprises of a system of beliefs,
knowledge, attitudes and artifacts that is shared amongst a particular group (Grill, 2013). The
culture of an individual is a strong determinant of how the individual behaves in the society and
what expectations does he/she have from his/her peers. Culture does not only impacts an
individual performance, but the contemporary world comprehends it as a factor that inevitably
has an effect on organizational performance as well. (Axelrod, 1997) Defines culture as “the set
of attributes that are subject ot social influence.” Similarly, (Chatman & Cha, 2003) State “a
system of shared values (defining what is important) and norms defining appropriate attitudes
and behaviors).” Despite having various definitions, the overall idea of culture revolves around
the learned behavior of individuals with respect to their society and surroundings.
National Culture
A nation’s culture determines the environment of a particular country and how certain values are
seen and understood amongst the people of a particular nation. Cultural norms are forces that
change perception of individuals, and behaviors (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Due to the
emergence of globalization and the widespread communication of people with other cultures
with respect to business or personal dealings makes it imperative to understand the concept of
national cultures. The importance of national culture is widely acclaimed (Bazerman &
Tenbrunsel, 2011) but there remains less unanimity when it comes to defining it. Cultural
diversity a term that is readily used to describe how people belonging to different countries,
religions or value systems have the tendency to think or behave differently. Cultural diversity is
becoming an important concept, owing to globalization and the influx of modern technology that
has bridged the gaps between people from around the world.
Elements of Culture
Values
Values are considered to be one of the most important elements that define a culture. It reflects
the importance of things in an individual’s life and the value he/she associates with the particular
concept/thing. (Kluckhohn, 1951) Defines values as “A value is a conception, explicit or
implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which
influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of actions”. However, it is
important to state here that values, despite being defined, are largely subject to an individual’s
thinking. In the context of a society, some authors attribute values as to the factors that are either
good, bad or deemed desirable by the society or not (Brewer & Roccas, 2001).
Language
Language is a medium of communication that individuals belonging from a particular use to
communicate amongst themselves. The most convenient way of understanding language as a part
of the overall cultural dimension is to observe the differences same words can have in various
cultures. For instance the word chair in English and the word chaise in French have essentially
the same meaning. Through shared and agreed upon languages, a collaborative society comes
into being. One of the reasons why a considerable amount of nations imply on making English as
the medium of communication is because of its acceptance worldwide (Ray, 2007).
Language can either be written or oral but mankind is attributed to a huge development that is
known as written language. The importance of language was insisted upon by Edward Sapir and
Benjamin Lee Whorf as they stated that it becomes difficult for people to comprehend objects
and concepts which do not have specific words in their own language (Whorf, 1956).
Beliefs
Beliefs serve as a source of motivation for a society, how they look up to doing things for a
greater reward in this or the hereafter. They reflect on how an individual perceives his/her reality
(Fu, et al., 2004). Whereas values can be sought as to be more transcendental, beliefs are seen to
be more particular regarding an institution and can be directly linked to behaviors. Therefore, it
becomes imperative in the context of studying national cultures that beliefs do play a more
significant role than values (Leung, et al., 1995).
Social Organization
The social organization theory was developed by (Shaw and Mckay, 1942, 1969) to study the
increasing crime rates and how they were having an underlying impact on the whole society. It
was revealed due to the society not being organized enough, it left a greater margin for criminals
to intervene and disrupt the whole process. However, the extent of social organization can be
linked with a particular culture and can also be explained by Hofstede’s individualistic and
collectivist approach that would be discussed in greater detail in the latter part of this research.
According to (Sampson, et al., 1999), it is a complicated task to study the mechanisms of social
organization with relevance to culture.
Characteristics of Culture
Culture has been constantly explained by heredity due to the patterns of behaviors that were seen
in human beings. It can be interpreted that culture is not inherited, rather it is learned over time
(Spencer-Oatey, 2012). In order to explain learned culture, an example can be used. In certain
cultures, eating meat of particular animals such as pork is considered unlawful and disgusts
individuals to an extent. If the unlawful part is kept aside, it disgusts individuals because they
have seen their ancestors and elderly having the same feeling towards it. This is how it becomes
a part of a learned behavior.
Shared culture can be explained by the phenomena that each culture has both sets of elements;
universal and distinctive. The former can be used to describe shared culture. Despite the fact that
every culture is unique, it is essential to establish that universals elements do exist because
human beings, as biological species have overlapping tendencies. Moreover, the laws that govern
nature are the same and they constantly remain the same, however, they can be interpreted
differently in various cultures (Spencer-Oatey, 2012).
Culture transmission takes place when the elements of a particular culture are passed from one
generation to the next (Whittaker, 2015). The cultural transmission phenomena does occur with
respect to the biological evolution of human beings. Research has found a relationship between
culture and genes (Bolwes & Gintis, 2004). The importance of cultural transmission can be
recognized where it plays a part in determining personality traits.
Symbols
Symbols communicate certain meanings in different cultures that cause various emotions or
reactions among individuals. Symbols can be a part of the non-verbal communication or they can
be material things such as animals, colors etc. According to the theory of symbolic
interactionism, it is shared symbols that enable social interaction. One of the basic examples of
symbols are national flags. These flags just do not represent these countries, rather they stand for
something. The flag of USA represents freedom, democracy and the people of USA draw
inspiration from it.
Culture and the individual
Recent research and discussions have emerged considering the relationship between national
culture and the behavior of individuals. According to various researchers, a link has been found
between the influence of culture and the individual behavior (Boyacigiller & Adler, 1991). In
order for successful development of the human capital, the role of national culture is significant
(Papademtriou & Masouras, 2013). (Adler, 1991) States that national culture is generally shared
a greater majority of the individuals and the elder generations are usually pass on the behavior in
an attempt to make their upcoming generation follow the same customs and values.
Cultural Dimensions Review
Hofstede’s dimensions
Geert Hofstede established six cultural dimensions to understand and study the differences
between various countries and for the ease of cross comparison among them.
The first hofstede dimension is the power distance index. Hofstede stated how different cultures
treated their subordinated or superiors differently. In cultures that had a lower power distance,
the subordinates or level employees found it easier to convey their ideas to their superiors and
the power within an organization or institution was fairly distributed (Agodzo, 2014). In contrast,
in cultures where the power distance index is higher, the authority lies centrally and the
employees or subordinates are expected to treat their superiors with a greater level of respect
(Hofstede, 2010).
The second dimension is individualism and collectivism. Certain societies focus on the success
of an individual and they emphasize on personal building. Collectivist societies emphasize the
success of the social framework and are more closely linked, with granting greater importance to
family systems and social institutions (Hofstede, 2011).
The third dimension is masculinity and femininity. Masculine cultures give priority to
assertiveness, material success and a society that is more competitive. Feminine cultures focus
on social harmony, long-term happiness and a society that is more collective in nature (Erdener,
2013).
The fourth dimension is short-term and long-term orientation. Cultures that score high on short-
term orientation are looking for immediate gratification and the achievement of short term goals
whereas long-term oriented cultures look for stability, resounding success that comes over time
and remain content if they do not get immediate positive results (Hofstede, 2011).
The fifth dimension talks about the uncertainty avoidance index. This can be understood in terms
of how certain cultures are more risk taking than others. Cultures that score high on this index
are known for taking lesser risks and being the precautious ones. In comparison, cultures that
score low are risk takers who encourage individuals to explore new opportunities by not
worrying about uncertainty (Hofstede, 2015).
The last dimension is restraint and indulgence. Restraint cultures keep their personal lives away
from their work and do not indulge actively in family matters or enjoyment. Indulgence cultures
are encouraged to enjoy their lives to the maximum and have fun in all aspects (Hofstede, 2010).
GLOBE
The Globe research program has been initiated in order to expand the understanding towards
cross-cultural communications and to determine how it has an inevitable impact on the
organizational culture. Scientists and management scholars from various cultures come together
to share their research and experience in order to add value to the initial research (House, et al.,
2002). It can also be termed as an overall extension of the Hofstede model as the framework
comprises of certain hofstede dimensions and further evaluation of other elements that make up
the organizational culture. For instance, considering the collectivism dimension, it expands it
into group and societal collectivism. Societal is where an individual feels pride in the society he
resides in whereas the group is more particular regarding his/her organizational group. Similarly,
it builds on to dimensions such as humane orientation, performance orientation, assertiveness,
egalitarianism and future orientation.
Hall
(Hall, 1987) Came up with the high-context and low-context model, drawing the comparisons
between cultures that fall into either one of these categories. He concluded that high context
cultures communicate implicitly, as the image of the person reflects on most of the information
that is being transmitted. He further states how gestures, body movement hand and non-verbal
cues are given greater emphasis in such cultures. He categorized the Japanese, Arab Countries,
Italy, Spain, England and Greece as high context.
Comparing them with low context cultures, (Hall, 1987) describes them as cultures where
communication is mainly explicit and individuals give greater emphasis to direct, blunt opinions
or expressions as compared to encoded or hidden messages. Confusion or ambiguity is not liked
and clarity is preferred. They include North American countries, Germany and Scandinavian
countries.
Trompenaar
(Tompenaar & Turner, 1998) Spent a considerable amount of time identifying the differences
among different cultures and established that each culture has its own values, perceptions and
preferences. In order to elaborate upon this, they came up with seven different dimensions.
The first dimension is universalism versus particularism. Universalist cultures are more focused
on following rules and relegations, and do not intend to break them over personal relationship or
try to amend them based on the circumstances. In contrast, particular cultures tend to base their
decisions on the situation, and give greater importance to people around them instead of what’s
been written in the book of law.
The second and third dimensions of individualism versus communitarianism states how
individualistic cultures believe in their own freedom and personal success whereas
communitarianism cultures focus on the improvement of the social framework and the society
around them.
The third dimension specific versus diffuse talks about the involvement of people. People from
specific cultures tend to keep their personal and work life separate and do not consider that
relationships have an underlying effect on their work. In opposite, diffuse cultures tend to see an
overlapping mechanism between private and work values and claim that relationships can
inevitably affect an individual’s work performance.
The fourth dimension considers neutral versus emotional cultures. Neutral cultures do not let
their sentiments take over their decisions and rather they make their choices upon logic and
reasoning. Emotional cultures let emotions override them and their decisions are often taken in a
state of emotion or almost spontaneously.
The fifth dimension is achievement versus inscription. Achievement cultures prefer performance
over titles or positioning in the society. They believe that an individual is what he does and
proves his/her worth according to performance. Ascription cultures give more importance to an
individual’s standing in the society such as his/her job status.
The sixth dimension is sequential time versus synchronous time. The sequential cultures lay
greater emphasis on punctuality and believe that time is essential and should not be wasted upon.
Strict schedules are followed. In comparison, synchronous cultures feel that the past and present
are connected, and that scheduled appointments and meetings can be altered if the need arises.
The seventh and the last dimension is internal versus outer direction. People from internal
direction cultures believe that their fate is in their own hands and the power to control their
decisions and outcomes resides with them. The outer direction cultures believe that it is the
environment that controls them and their outcomes and results are greatly affected by it.
Lewis Model
(Lewis, 2006) Created a framework to study the cross-cultural differences and how people
reacted in various cultures. He created three categories; linear-active, multi-active and reactive.
People from linear-active cultures take lesser time and attempt only one thing at a time as it they
believe retaining focus is imperative. They are more direct in terms of dealing with others and
rely on logic and reasoning. They establish a line between their professional and private life and
tend to give a lot of respect to their peers.
In multi-active cultures, people focus on more than one tasks at a time which makes them take
more time than people from linear-active cultures. They rely more on their emotional attachment
with things and individuals and put sentiments before facts.
People belonging from reactive cultures, as the name suggests, are more interested towards
listening to others and adapt a diplomatic policy in their dealings. They usually have a very
subtle body language and are likely to convey in implicit messages while creating a link between
their personal and professional life.
Comparing the dimensions
A comparison can be drawn among the Hofstede, Hall’s and Lewis’ model to identify the similar
patterns and subjects that these researchers have taken upon in order to aid the understanding of
cross-cultural communication and behavior. As hofstede’s dimension talks about the six
dimensions that sets people apart, it can be seen that it is relevant to hall’s high and low context
models. For instance, taking the indulgence vs restraint model, it can be concluded that
Hofstede’s restraint cultures would overlap the category of Hall’s low context countries and
Lewis’ reactive cultures alongside.

Intercultural Competence
According to (Deardoff, 2006), “Intercultural competence is the ability to develop targeted
knowledge, skills and attitudes that lead to visible behaviour and communication that are both
effective and appropriate in intercultural interactions.” In contemporary times, increasing
emphasis has been laid on increasing intercultural competence so individuals and organizations
are able to conduct business with convenience while dealing with people from different cultures
and nations.
Models of Intercultural competence
The compositional models determine competence components without mentioning the
relationship among them. They identify the traits, characteristics and skills that would be
required to improve intercultural interaction. Deardoff’s Pyramid Model of Intercultural
competence can be categorized as a compositional model.
Deardoff’s Model
Deardoff’s pyramid model divides the components into five categories; desired external
outcome, desired internal outcome, knowledge and comprehension, skills and requisite attitudes.

The above figure is a visual representation of Deardoff’s Intercultural competence model. The
components in the lower levels such as skills, knowledge & comprehension and requisite
attitudes have the potential to enhance the upper levels of desired outcomes. In order to acquire
intercultural competence, it is imperative to have an understanding of these components and the
skills that would be required. The skills mentioned here are listening, observing and interpreting.
It allows an individual to not just see how things happen in other cultures but it also provides
them the opportunity of understanding and deeper comprehension. Having the necessary skills of
analysis, evaluation and relation are what makes the process fruitful in the first place.
There is no set beginning point for this framework, but the attitude part is considered as the most
optimal entry point for this model (Deardoff, 2006). The required attitudes allow the individual
to expand his understanding regarding a particular culture.
However, the author implies that as an individual acquires and takes over more components, it
increases the probability of him being able to enhance his overall intercultural competence.
Bennett’s Model
The model of intercultural sensitivity was developed by (Benett, 2017). The goal was to develop
a framework that would enable individuals to have greater competence across various culture
while communicating. The author propounds on the phenomena that when an individual
becomes competent in communicating effectively in his own culture, only then he becomes able
to take that competence across different cultures.
In order to elaborate on the framework, it has been divided into various development of
intercultural sensitivity stages. The continuum moves along from ethnocentrism towards a more
enthrorelative stage. The application of this model is consistent throughout all cultures.
The first stage is denial where the individual does not relate to or recognize that cultural
differences exist. There is very little perception about individuals that belong to different cultures
and since there is no understanding of other societies or cultures, the individual identifies himself
as ‘real’. This is the first stage where there is absolutely no awareness regarding other cultures.
The second stage is defense. This is the first stage where there is recognition of another culture
but individuals are generally more critical of them. They themselves think of them as the
superior ones and the other cultures as inferiors. This stage also has another category, where the
poles are reversed and the individual feels that the other culture is superior and he himself
belongs to an inferior culture. The idea to resolve such a dilemma is to introduce common
elements such as humanity and shared values.
The third stage minimization. As discussed that the defense stage is resolved through conveying
commonly shared values, this is the stage where resolution takes place. This is the stage where
the individual starts to draw similarities between his own and the other culture. Individuals begin
to feel that the things they experience can also be experienced by others and elements such as
beliefs or values transcend boundaries. This begins to instill a feeling of tolerance among them.
However, the minimization stage can also enable individuals to revert back to the denial or
defense stage. They begin to believe that their values and beliefs should be what other cultures
follow as well. The aim to project their self conceived notion onto others.
Once the individual moves out of minimization, he moves towards the acceptance stage. The
level of complexity of an individual’s own culture allows him to understand that similar levels of
complexity may exist in another culture, however in a different form. The acceptance stage
derives the individuals towards curiosity about other cultures and hence they begin to collect
information. However, at this stage it becomes difficult for them to accept another culture
because there maybe hindrance in the overall process of acquiring knowledge about other
cultures.
The next stage is adaptation where the individual finds himself having the capacity of
functioning bi-culturally. The individual does not find it a complication to learn about a new
culture and operate according to it. The adaptation stage is usually divided into two halves. The
first stage comprises of developing understanding for the other culture whereas the second stage
is embracing it, and making the shift. This is imperative for any individual that professionally
works closely with people from two different cultures. To maintain a level of emotional
intelligence, the adaptation of the culture become imminent.
The last stage is integration. The shifting of context from one culture to another culture becomes
effortless and natural. This results in successful cross cultural mediation and represents the
highest level of intercultural competence.
Kolb’s experiential learning theory
Kolb’s experiential learning theory is one of the most prominent educational theories in the
world that states how different individuals have the tendency to understand and learn differently
(Kolb, 1984). This theory focuses on highlight the issues regarding student development and
indicates the importance of recognizing different learning style for various individuals. In order
to sustain effective teaching, teachers must be aware of the process that a particular student goes
while he learns something new (Healey & Jenkins, 2000). The theory is relevant to students
going to other nations for education purposes because it allows teachers to identify the set of
elements that enable them to cater to more than one kind of students. Kolb categorizes the
framework into four categories; concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract
conceptualization and active experimentation.

Intercultural Training
Intercultural training is undertaken in order to enable individuals to develop intercultural
competence and allow them to converse with people from other cultures. The goal of
intercultural training is to collect knowledge about other cultures and minimize the amount of
conflicts that arise between various cultures (Rygg, 2014).
The classical approach towards intercultural training has always laid a greater emphasis on
course objectives and avoiding culture clashes. The focus on not being disrespectful of the other
culture and a lack of knowledge building regarding the other hampers the learning process. The
question prevails as to if these traditional training practices are enough to have someone prepared
for intercultural competence or multi-culture acceptance.
(Spitzberg, 2009)’s classical definition of intercultural training includes the following aspects:
 Cognitive aspect of knowledge
 Behavioral element of skill
 Affective component of attitude
These aspects focus on avoiding miscommunication and clashes that rose among cultures and
how to avoid such issues with the ‘other’ individual. However, (Ting-Toomey, 2004) presents
the notion that apart from just focusing on reducing conflicts, there should be effective
development to have a sense of tolerance as well.
The attitude dimension deals with the amount of respect an individual is ready to give to people
from another culture and the value that he assigns to the importance of diversity. Furthermore, it
also deals with how an individual finds differences respectful enough and does not deem other
cultures as an unbelievable approach to living life. (Hiller, 2010) Stated that the understanding of
these elements leads towards flexibility and adaptability. It opens the mind of an individual and
such training leads him to not only respect other cultures, but makes him curious to learn further
about them.
Mentalizing is a key process that needs to be understood in order to determine how trainers
nowadays are focusing more on attitude as compared to providing mere knowledge regarding
another culture. The process of mentalizing allows an individual to see himself from the other
side, and put himself in the perspective of people from different cultures. This is done in order to
reduce the instances of stereotyping (Rygg, 2014).
The training should not only take place in terms of providing mere knowledge and disassociated
all emotions from the overall training process. It is imperative for trainers to push the context of
emotion too, which allow an individual to see the diversification in a better manner. This can
also be done by providing individuals unexpected situations and see how they would react in
such circumstances. This prepares the individual for any kind of backlash he might face while
interacting with another culture (Rygg, 2014).
Training Methods
There are certain approaches that are undertaken in order to improve intercultural competence
and communication. The approaches from (Noe, 2005), (Mankin, 2009) and (Sakalas &
Kumpikaite, 2007).
The methods employed could either be individual, one-to-one or group based.
Individual methods
Individual methods include when a trainee learns independently, without being in the presence of
another individual. These methods include assignments, internet browsing, interactive video and
reading special literature. This allows the trainee to reflect upon himself and learn independently
regarding various cultures. These methods have been assisted recently due to a vast influx of
technology and since the resources are available readily through the internet, it allows the trainee
to pick and choose specific training programs himself.
One-to-One learning methods
These methods are employed when an individual learns in the company of another trainee or a
teacher, mentor or a coach. One of the most common forms is coaching where an experienced
individual coaches the trainee and gives him information. The information is not just theoretical
but practical activities also take place. Another form of one-to-one training is counselling which
is more theoretical than coaching and the idea is to provide the trainee with the necessary
information and motivation. Demonstrations are practical examples where the trainee is given a
demo of how they should be behaving in an entirely different cultural context.
Group learning
One of the most common forms of intercultural training takes place in group learning. They
include sessions such as brainstorming, case studies, discussion sessions, group projects, trips,
networking exercises etc. The main aim of this method is to make the individual feel comfortable
working in a group. The group learning is enhanced when people from different cultures come
together to learn about other cultures.
However, these training methods could differ according to cultures as well. Some cultures prefer
learning independently on their own whereas some prefer group learning. For example, it is
revealed that Spanish individuals have group learning as the most preferred method of training
(Kumpikaite, 2013).
Bibliography
Adler, N., 1991. International Dimensions of Organizational Behaviour. Boston: PWS-Kent.
Agodzo, D., 2014. Six Approaches to Understanding National Cultures: Hofstede's Cultural
Dimensions, ': Spring Arbob University.
Axelrod, R., 1997. The dissemination of culture. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41(2), pp. 203-
226.
Bazerman, M. & Tenbrunsel, A., 2011. Der ethische Manager. Harvard Business Manager, pp.
49-58.
Benett, M. J., 2017. Development model of intercultural sensitivity. s.l.:Wiley.
Bolwes, S. & Gintis, H., 2004. The origins of human cooperation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Boyacigiller, N. & Adler, N., 1991. The Parochial Dinosaur: Organizational Science in a Global
Context. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), pp. 262-290.
Brewer, M. & Roccas, S., 2001. Individual values, social identity, and optimal distinctiveness.
Individual self, relational self, collective self, pp. 219-237.
Chatman, J. & Cha, S., 2003. Leading by leveraging culture. California Management Review,
45(4), pp. 20-34.
Deardoff, D. K., 2006. Identification and Assessment of Intercultural Competence as a Student
Outcome of Internationalization. 10(3), pp. 241-266.
Erdener, C. B., 2013. Hofstede's Mas/Fam Dimension. Journal of International Business and
Economics.
Fu, P., Kennedy, J. C., Yuki, G. & Bond, M. H., 2004. The impact of societal cultural values and
individual social beliefs on the perceived effectiveness of managerial influence strategies: A
meso approach. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(4), pp. 284-305.
Grill, T. G., 2013. Culture, Complexity, and Informing: How Shared Beliefs Can Enhance Our
Search for Fitness. Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline,
Volume 16.
Hall, E. T., 1987. Understanding Cultural Differences. New York: Intercultural Press.
Healey, M. & Jenkins, A., 2000. Kolb's Experiential Learning Theory and Its Application in
Geography in Higher Education. Journal of Geography.
Hiller, G. G., 2010. Innovative methods for promoting and assessing intercultural competence in
higher education. Proceedings of Intercultural Competence Conference, Volume 1, pp. 144-168.
Hofstede, G., 2010. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. 2 ed. London: Mc-Graw
Hill.
Hofstede, G., 2011. Dimensionalizing Cultures: The Hofstede Model in Context. Online
Readings in Psychology and Culture, 12(1).
Hofstede, G., 2015. National Culture. [Online]
Available at: Geert-hofstede.com
House, R., Javaidan, M., Hanges, P. & Dorfman, P., 2002. Understanding cultures and implicit
leadership theories across the globe: an introduction project to GLOBE. Journal of World
Business, Volume 37, pp. 3-10.
Kluckhohn, C., 1951. Values and Value-Orientations in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in
Definition and Classification. Toward a General Theory of Action, pp. 388-433.
Kolb, D., 1984. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Kumpikaite, V., 2013. Training Methods in Cross-Cultural Human Resource Development: An
intercultural study, Kaunas: Kaunas University of Technology.
Leung, K., Bond, M. & Schwartz, S., 1995. ‘How to explain cross-cultural differences: values,
valences, and expectancies?. Asian Journal of Psychology, pp. 70-75.
Lewis, R. D., 2006. When Cultures Collide: Leading Across Cultures. Boston: Nicholas Brealey
International.
Mankin, D., 2009. Human Resource Development. s.l.:Oxford University Press.
Markus, H. & Kitayama, S., 1991. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and
motivation. Psychological Review, Volume 2, pp. 224-253.
Noe, R., 2005. Employee Training and Development. s.l.:The Mcgraw Hill.
Papademtriou, C. & Masouras, A., 2013. National Culture Underpins Individual Behaviour and
Work-Related-Values: The importance of Nationality, Pafos: Neapolis University.
Ray, S., 2007. Advanced play therapy: Essential conditions, knowledge, and skills for child
practice. International Journal of Play Therapy .
Rygg, K., 2014. Intercultural Training: Learn to avoid treading on other people’s toes or
experience walking in the other person’s shoes. Scandinavian Journal of Intercultural Theory
and Practice, Volume 1.
Sakalas, A. & Kumpikaite, V., 2007. The Impact of Globalization on Human Resource
Development. Changes in Society, Changes in Organizations, and the Changing Role of HRM:
Managing International Human Resource in a Complex World. s.l., The 9th Human Resource
Management Conference.
Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D. & Earls, F., 1999. Beyond Social Capital: Spatial Dynamics of
Collective Efficacy for Children. American Sociological Review, 64(5), pp. 633-60.
Spencer-Oatey, H., 2012. What is Culture? A Compilation of Quotations. s.l.:GlobalPad Core
Concepts.
Spitzberg, B. H., 2009. A model of intercultural communication competence. 13th ed. Boston:
Wadsworth.
Ting-Toomey, S., 2004. Translating conflict face-negotiation theory into practice. s.l.:Thousand
Oaks.
Tompenaar, F. & Turner, C. H., 1998. Understanding Diversity in Global Business. s.l.: Mcgraw
Hill.
Whittaker, M. B., 2015. Cultural Transmission.
Whorf, B. L., 1956. Language, thought and reality: selected writings. Massachusetts:
Technology Press of Massachusetts.