Paradoxical Experiences Of Expatriate Managers In Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although adjusting to a foreign culture is not easy, being immersed in another culture is an experience lived by a growing number of persons in the globalized world. It is intriguing that organizations often blame the individual when expatriate assignments fail (Deresky, 2002; Hodgetts, Luthans, & Doh, 2006) rather than recognizing that others may lack understanding of what it is like to be immersed in another culture. A study of Canadian expatriate managers who have worked for non-government organizations (NGOs) in Indonesia is presented. The research focused on interpreting the lived experience of expatriate managers using their own words and meanings. Written descriptions from participants were obtained and analyzed/synthesized using Giorgi’s descriptive phenomenological method (Giorgi & Giorgi, 2003). The central finding is that individuals experience paradoxical ways of being when immersed, living and working, in another culture. The enhanced understanding obtained may result in alterations to present human resource management practices and strategies utilized in facilitating and supporting expatriate assignments and, thus, benefit expatriate managers and organizations alike.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".