2013 International Conference on Management Science & Engineering (20th)
July 17-19, 2013 Harbin, P.R.China
Individual CQ, Team CQ and Organizational CQ:
A Multilevel Adaptation Model
TANG Ning-yu1，CHEN Chi-yin1，ZHU Xiao-mei1,2，HUANG Meng-qi1
1 Antai College of Economics and Management, Shanghai Jiaotong University, P.R.China, 200052
2 School of Economics and Management, East China Jiaotong University, P.R.China, 330013
Abstract: With the trend of globalization, more and
more Chinese companies have started the journey of
internationalization through direct investment or merger
and acquisition. In this process, how to adapt to different
cultural backgrounds becomes increasingly important,
and the conceptualization of cultural intelligence receives
extensive attention. Cultural Intelligence(CQ), as a new
type of intelligence following social intelligence,
emotional intelligence and practical intelligence has been
used in describing cross-cultural adaptability. This paper
aims to propose a multilevel cultural adaptation model
by integrating individual, team and organizational
cultural intelligence together. The paper firstly does a
review on cultural intelligence, cross-cultural team and
organizational intelligence and then introduces the
theoretical framework of the multilevel adaptation. It
suggests that cultural intelligence at individual, team and
organizational levels plays important roles if companies
want to do effectively in their globalization.
Keywords: cultural intelligence, cross-cultural team,
organizational cultural intelligence
1 Introduction
In recent years, more and more Chinese enterprises
start to expand their business abroad. In 2010, about
3125 Chinese companies invested in 129 countries which
reached $59 billion non-financial direct investment.
However, lacking of multinational management
experiences and deep understanding of PESTs of
different countries and organizations has made some
Chinese enterprises in difficulty when facing complex
and diversified management objects and partners. For
example, in July 2006, nearly 2 years after SAIC’s
(Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation) acquiring
Ssangyong Motor, a strike of South Korean workers
resulted from the conflict between the workforce and
Chinese management team took place. At the end of
August at that year, SAIC had to promise to pay 10
billion Yuan to Ssangyong Motor for calming down the
situation. However, it didn’t turn things into better
situation. The cross-national acquisition finally ended up
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (71072055, 71162006)
- 242 -
978-1-4799-0474-7/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
in failure in 2010. Besides strategy and production
reasons, when analyzing the main reasons for failure, a
most frequently referred one is the culture. SAIC might
have ignored the cultural differences between China and
South Korean when acquiring Ssangyong Motor, and
they did not pay enough attention to the labor union in
the South Korean enterprises and never predicted the a
possible series of actions resulted from the strong ethnic
identity among Koreans. At the end, SAIC and
Ssangyong Motor could not make a task oriented
cross-cultural team with the same goal, not to mention
integrating successfully. It can be learned from the case
that globalization may bring challenges to people
management and organizations. Firstly, with more and
more global operations, Chinese expatriates need to have
the capability to adapt to the host situation. Secondly, as
more Chinese employees will work in cross-cultural
teams, it requires employees to know how to work
effectively with colleagues from different cultural
backgrounds and to manage the cross-cultural teams
effectively. Thirdly, the organizations may have the
challenge to operate in a different situation and what’s
more, they may need to integrate different organizational
cultures if an overseas acquisition takes place. When
employees with different cultural backgrounds work
together, conflicts and collisions from cultural
differences will increase the difficulty and complexity of
cooperation among the employees [1]. Under this
circumstance, the cultural intelligence (CQ) of three
levels, the individual level, the team level, and the
organization level, will affect the effectiveness of
organizational internationalization. This paper will
elaborate the CQ from the aspects of individual, the team
and the organization, and put forward a multilevel
cultural adaptation model.
2 Literature review
2.1 Cultural intelligence
Cultural intelligence is defined as “an individual’s
capability to function and manage effectively in
culturally diverse settings”[2]. Sternberg and Grigorenko
demonstrated that intelligence within a particular context
requires familiarity with that culture [3]. Drawing on
Sternberg and Detterman’s multidimensional perspective
 of intelligence, Ang et al. conceptualized CQ as a
four-factor model with metacognitive, cognitive,
motivational, and behavioral dimensions [4,5].
Metacognitive CQ refers to an individual level of
conscious cultural awareness during cross-cultural
interactions. It reflects mental capabilities to acquire and
understand culturally diverse situations and includes
knowledge of and control over individual thought
processes [6] relating to culture. While metacognitive CQ
focuses on higher order cognitive processes, and
cognitive CQ focuses on knowledge of norms, practices,
and conventions in different cultural settings acquired
from education and personal experiences. The cognitive
factor of CQ therefore refers to an individual’s level of
cultural knowledge or knowledge of the cultural
environment. Motivational CQ reflects the capability to
direct attention and energy toward learning about and
functioning in situations characterized by cultural
differences. Those people with high motivational CQ
direct attention and energy toward cross-cultural
situations based on intrinsic interest [7] and confidence in
cross-cultural effectiveness [8]. Finally, behavioral CQ
reflects the capability to exhibit appropriate verbal and
nonverbal actions, such as words, tones, gestures, and
facial expressions, when interacting with people from
different cultures.
Studies about CQ have showed that CQ has
relationship with personality, such as conscientiousness,
extraversion and openness [9]. CQ and Emotional
intelligence (EI) are related but can be differentiated
theoretically [1]. Some scholars have developed the
measurement of CQ. Ang and others have developed a
four-factor measure of cultural intelligence [10] and Tang
and her colleagues have tested its validity and
applicability in China [11].
2.2 Organizational cultural intelligence
The conceptualization of CQ at the organizational
level has been studied in recent years. Taewon Moon
defined Organizational CQ as “an organization’s capacity
to reconfigure its capability to function and manage
effectively in culturally diverse settings”[16] which is
consistent with Teece et al.’s definition of dynamic
capability as “the firm’s ability to integrate, build, and
reconfigure internal and external competence to address
rapidly changing environments”[17] .
Based on Teece et al.’s framework of dynamic
capability [17], organizational CQ is also a multifactor
construct which consists of processes, positions, and
paths capability [16]. First, process capability in
organizational CQ reflects an organization’s process of
integrating and coordinating a firm’s routine or pattern of
practices, continuously creating bundles of new
resources and knowledge, and reconfiguring the firm’s
asset structures that fit well within a cross-cultural
context. Process capability of organizational CQ has
three roles: cross-cultural coordination/integration,
cross-cultural learning, and cross-cultural reconfiguration.
Second, position capability at the organizational CQ
- 243 -
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
refers to a firm’s specific resources, such as critical
assets, knowledge, or capabilities, which help determine
a firm’s degree of adaptation in the international market.
Based on Teece’s suggestion [17,18], and Ang and Inkpen’s
recent framework of firm-level CQ[19], position
capability of organizational CQ includes cross-cultural
managerial capability, cross-cultural competitive
capability, and cross-cultural structural capability. Finally,
path capability reflects an organization’s capability to
facilitate the process for creating adaptive culture and
minimizing organizational inertia so that it performs
appropriately in cross-cultural situations by
reconfiguration of the existing resources and
competencies, including three factors: cross-cultural
initiation (age at international initiation), cross-cultural
experience (a firm’s prior international experience), and
cross-cultural resource fungibility (the degree to which
the firm can deploy its resources for alternative uses in
the international market).
2.3 Cross-cultural team and team CQ
There are many definitions of team. For example,
Shonk defined that “a team should include at least two
members and keep in consistency to accomplish the
same task”[12]. This definition firstly emphasizes the
coordination as it is necessary for task accomplishing,
and next the team members should work according to the
same task or goal, so the above two points decide
whether a team exist; Robbins regarded team as an
official group whose members trust mutually, share
information, make decision together, and help each other
to accomplish team tasks through communication and
coordination [13]. From these definitions, we can find that
researchers reach to an agreement that a team should
meet at least five conditions: a team should be formed
with at least two people; team members’ skills,
knowledge and experience are complementary; team
members should accomplish the task through
cooperation; members identify with their team and learn
about that they belong to the same group; finally, team
members should share some same or similar values and
ideology to let the team own collective consciousness
and spirit. By contrast, there are fewer specific
definitions of the cross-cultural team. According to
literatures, not only the cross-cultural team but also the
multicultural team and the diversified team are
frequently used right now. Among them, the diversified
team enjoys the most extensive content, while culture is
an important dimension of the diversified team. For
example, Marquardt and Horvath regarded that the
diversified team is the task-oriented working group
whose people come from different countries and cultures
[14]
. While Chen pointed out that “A cross-cultural team
forms as long as people with different cultural
backgrounds work together”[15].
There are different types of cross-cultural teams. It
is clearly found out in the interviews with those
internationalizing Chinese enterprises that recently the
cross-cultural team mainly refers to three situations: first
 one is the working group consisting of members with the
same cultural background working under another cultural
background; second one is the working group consisting
of members both from the home country and host
country working in the home or the host branches; in the
third type, people of different cultures and organizational
culture backgrounds work in a team as a result of
overseas acquisitions. These three teams meet different
problems respectively. The first type of team mostly
meets the problem of individual adaptation to different
cultures and how does the team adjust according to
different cultures it meets when interacting and working
with the outside parts. In this type of team, individual
CQ and entire team CQ as well as the adaptation strategy
will influence the team process and performance. While
the second type cross-cultural team faces to more
challenges and difficulties form the inner process of the
team itself, and cultural diversity, social norms and
cultural distance will affect its efficiency mutually. The
third type is the most complicated one, as it meets not
only the cultural differences the second one meets but
also the organizational cultural differences, which brings
the third one the largest cultural differences in the
cross-cultural team.
Extended from the conceptualization of individual
CQ and Organizational CQ, the CQ at team level could
be defined as a team’s capacity to reconfigure its
capability to function and manage effectively in
culturally diverse settings and at meantime, it also
represents the general level of team members’ CQ.
3 The multi-level model of CQ
3.1 Individual level
Studies found that CQ’s may have effect on
performance. Kim, Kirkman & Chen argued that CQ
might have effect on international assignment[10]; Ang
and others[10,20]showed that CQ could predict cultural
judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and
task performance.
It is not difficult to see that when individual starts to
work in a cross-cultural situation, his/her CQ will affect
his adaptation to the new environment which will further
affect his/her performance in the new situation. CQ will
influence the individual’s performance through his/her
cognition of cultural diversity. One with higher
metacognitive CQ and cognitive CQ will realize the
cultural differences better; one with higher motivational
CQ will be more willing to learn about the difference. In
a whole, clearer cognition and higher willingness of
learning about different culture will make one more
adaptive to the new situation. A better adaptation of the
new situation means one can be more easily to generate
identity and be involved in the situation, and as a result,
he/she can work without cross-cultural problems, and
perform better. Thus we propose that:
Proposition 1: Individual CQ will affect one’s
performance in cross-cultural situation through the
mediation of adaptation.
- 244 -
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Relative cultural distance generates among people
as a result of their different cultural backgrounds. The
mechanism of relative cultural distance originates from
Tsui’s relational character distribution [21], which refers to
the influence of cultural similarity of people on team
process and outcomes. Byrne raised the theory of
similarity and attraction to explain it [22]. According to
this theory, because of similarity, perceivers regard their
world outlook as effective, and the similarity will in
further positively affect interactions among them.
Furthermore, some other researches indicated that
similarity would enhance peoples’ communication
frequency and be useful to establish friendship and social
interaction [23, 24]. It is foreseeable that individual is easy
to identify with other people under the situation of small
relative cultural distance, which results in better
adaptation to the situation. Under the situation of high
cultural distance, CQ affects the individual to make
efforts to adjust initially and generate positive identity
with other members in order to overcome the problem
raised by the difference of cultural distances and perform
better cooperative behavior in the team. Thus we propose
the following:
Proposition 2: Relative cultural distance will
moderate the relationship between individual CQ and
adaptation.
We use Fig. 1 to explain these two propositions at
individual level.
Individual Individual Individual
CQ adaptation performance
Relative cultural distance
Fig.1 Individual level CQ and performance
3.2 Team level
Compared to the single cultural working situation,
members in cross-cultural teams have different cultural
backgrounds. Studies have indicated that management of
cultural diversity and cultural difference in the
cross-cultural team is necessary [14]. When all members
in the cross-cultural team show high CQ, the entire team
CQ is relatively high, further the level of cross-cultural
team CQ will influence the effectiveness of
communication and conflict management of the team.
Team communication is the interactive process of
team members’ information sharing, problem solving and
effective decision making. The goal of communication is
to make team members reach to the agreement of the
team goal, task and problem solving in order to keep
target and thought consistent as well as spiritual unity. In
the cross-cultural team, the effect of team
communication is more important. The main character of
cross-cultural communication is to communicate the
cultural difference between two parts. People from
 different cultural backgrounds bring their own
perceptions, values, norms, beliefs and minds in the
communication process. When people interpret the
information from another culture, they learn it according
to their own cultural background. As a result, it is easy to
make wrong perception, perception bias, wrong
interpretation and wrong evaluation in cross-cultural
communication. In the team with high CQ, team
members have better recognition of different cultures and
higher identity with other members during the mutual
communication, so less wrong perceptions or
interpretations are made, thus they will communicate
more fluently. The fluent communication among team
members will help to build trust and identity, and as a
result it will improve the team effectiveness and
members’ satisfaction.
During the team work, conflict is unavoidably In the
cross-cultural team, because of the cultural differences
and relative cultural distance of team members, their
internalized beliefs and values may have huge
differences and generate various conflicts in team
cooperation process. Jehn classified conflicts as task
conflict and relationship conflict [25]. The former one
belongs to work orientation, which means team members
conflict because of different ideas of task goals,
decisions or solutions, just as the substantive conflict or
cognitive conflict; the latter one is emotion orientation,
which means when members perceive their inconsistence
or incoordination, they will generate nervous, anger,
hostile or other negative moods, like the emotional
conflict or interpersonal conflict. Tjosvold thought that
task conflict could enhance performance in the team [26];
because of the task conflict, team members were urged to
collect more information to understand the inner reasons
and considered the problem deeper to get better solution
and then indirectly enhance one’s as well as the team’s
performance. In the cross-cultural team, these two
conflicts exist too. And more important, the cultural
difference itself is easy to bring relationship conflict and
make members hard to build trust which results in a
tense state and decrease of the identity among team
members as well as weak cohesiveness, work
inconsistency and finally the poor performance. Research
showed that the high level CQ of the team could
moderate the distrust resulted from cultural diversity
among team members [27]. In the team of high CQ,
members can more clearly observe and manage their
mutual cultural differences and all kinds of conflicts, so
they can offer better information communication and
interaction to enhance interpersonal friendship, and solve
the problems of cultural conflict more quickly to make
better team decisions and get higher team production.
Thus we propose that:
Proposition 3: Team level CQ will affect
cross-cultural team’s effectiveness through the
mediation of team process, especially communication
and conflict management.
This can be illustrated in Fig.2.
- 245 -
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Team
effectiveness
Team Team process Task
CQ Communication performance
Conflict Member
satisfaction
Fig.2 Team level CQ and cross-cultural team effectiveness
3.3 Organizational CQ and effectiveness of
globalization
To justify the organizational CQ framework,
Taewon mentioned the relationship between individual
and organizational levels of CQ[16]: Metacognitive and
cognitive facets of CQ closely related to process
capability of organizational CQ, as they all reflect
intelligence in learning processes in culturally diverse
situations; Motivational CQ closely related to position
capability of organizational CQ, as motivational CQ is
conceptualized as an individual’s intrinsic trait and
position capability reflects specific inherent assets and
competitive capabilities the organization possesses.
Behavioral CQ closely related to path capability, as
behavioral CQ refers to outward manifestations of
behaviors or overt actions that are desirable in a
cross-cultural interaction. Path capability of
organizational CQ refers to the way a firm organizes and
develops routines based on previous investments and its
repertoire of prior history. As the mechanism of
individual CQ and adaptation described earlier,
organizations with high CQ may also have higher
capability to adapt to different cultural situation which
will eventually increase its effectiveness in global
operation. The logic behind that is, while firms with low
organizational CQ spend more time and resource on
solving cross-cultural conflicts, firms with high
organizational CQ will focus on core business and
therefore perform better. In the global market, the
surviving environment of the organization is extremely
changeable, so organizations with higher CQ will adapt
to host PEST situation more smoothly and changes
strategy more swiftly As to the effectiveness of global
operation, we think that there are four aspects.
The first aspect of effectiveness of globalization is
financial performance. Financial performance is one of
the most valued performance indicators and closely
related to the enterprises’ fortune.
The second aspect of effectiveness is efficiency of
operations. High efficiency usually reflects a sound
status of organizational communication and concordance
within a cross-cultural context and is what enterprises
pursue.
The third aspect of effectiveness of globalization is
the internal turnover rate in organizations. A moderate
turnover rate is necessary and good for the development
of an enterprise. But the enterprise should pay attention
if the turnover rate is too high, especially when changes
 take place in the organization.
Finally, external satisfaction, such as satisfaction of
customers, suppliers and society, et al., is an important
factor to measure the effectiveness of globalization.
External reaction and satisfaction influence the
sustainable development of organizations. Thus we
propose the following:
Proposition 4: Organizational CQ will affect the
effectiveness of globalization through the mediation of
organizational adaptation.
Fig.3 reflects the assumptions we made.
Organizati. Organizationa Organizational
onal CQ l adaptation effectiveness
Fig.3 Organizational level CQ and effectiveness
4 Conclusions
In this paper, we established a cultural adaptation
model to help local enterprises realize the differences in
international expansion and the ways to overcome the
cultural obstacles. Though there have been studies at the
different levels, the paper tried to set up a multilevel
adaptation model by integrating individual CQ, team CQ
and organizational CQ together. It may expand the
exiting research scope on cultural intelligence.
Further empirical studies can be done to test the
relationship among these variables and the interaction
among the different levels. The framework put forwarded
by this paper can be applied to the practice. Before
international mergers and acquisitions, the company
needs to think about its capability to adapt to other
cultural situations at the individual level managers as
well as team and organizational level and try to get ready
in advance. Local companies need to build up a team of
global managers by recruiting from outside or cultivating
from inside. As Earley and Peterson suggested, cultural
intelligence could be a new approach to intercultural
training for global managers and be tailored to make
trainings on metacognition, cognition, motivational and
behavioral cultural intelligence rather than
culture-specific interventions need to be designed for
managers who will be sent to work in the cross-cultural
teams[28]. Besides, it will be helpful if the company can
do bi-culture audit before the acquisition. According to
Malekazedeh and Nahavandi, there might be four
different ways for merging different organizational
cultures such as assimilation, deculturation, integration
and separation, local companies need to think about
which will be the right way to merge the different
cultures[29]. What’s more, local companies need to take
the national culture differences into consideration if the
acquisition is a cross-border one. With this cultural
adaptation model in mind, we suggest that companies
should prepare for the globalization not just on the
- 246 -
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
financial side, but also on the people and the cultural side
which are equally or even more important.
References
[1]N Y Tang, Y Y Hong. Cultural intelligence: New
indicator for cross-cultural adaption [J]. Human
Resource Development of China, 2005, 12. (in Chinese)
[2]P C Earley, S Ang. Cultural intelligence: Individual
interactions across cultures [J]. Palo Alto, Calif: Stanford
University Press, 2003.
[3]R J Sternberg, E L Grigorenko. Intelligence and
culture: How culture shapes what intelligence means,
and the implications for a science of well-being [J].
Philosophical Transactions-royal Society of London
Series B Biological Sciences, 2004: 1427-1434.
[4]R J Sternberg, D K Detterman. What is intelligence?
Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition
[M]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1986.
[5]S Ang, L V Dyne, C K S Koh, K Y Ng, K J Templer,
C Tay, N A Chandrasekar. Cultural intelligence: Its
measurement and effects on cultural judgment and
decision making, cultural adaptation, and task
performance [J]. Management and Organization Review,
2007, 3: 335-371.
[6]J H Flavell. Meta-cognition and cognitive monitoring:
A new area of cognitive inquiry [J]. American
Psychologist, 1979, 34: 906-11.
[7]E L Deci, R M Ryan. Intrinsic motivation and
self-determination in human behavior [J]. New York:
Plenum, 1985.
[8]A Bandura. Social cognitive theory in cultural context
[J]. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 2002,
51: 269-290.
[9]S Ang, L V Dyne, C Koh. Personality correlates of the
four-factor model of cultural intelligence [J]. Group &
Organization Management, 2006, 31(1): 100-123.
[10]S Ang, L V Dyne, C Koh, K Y Ng. The measurement
of cultural intelligence. Paper presented at the
Symposium on Cultural Intelligence, Academy of
Management Meetings, New Orleans, 2004: 8-11.
[11]N Y Tang, X S Zheng, J S Zhang, J Fu. Cultural
intelligence: Construct and criterion-related validity [J].
Psychological Science, 2010, 33(2).
[12]J H Shonk. Working in teams: A practical manual for
improving work groups [M]. New York: AMACOM,
1982.
[13]S P Robbins. Organization behavior [M]. Beijing:
China Renmin University Pres, 1997. (in Chinese)
[14]M J Marquardt, L Horvath. Global teams: How top
multinationals span boundaries and cultures with
high-speed teamwork. Palo Alto: Consulting
Psychologist Press, 2001.
[15]X P Chen. Management across cultures [M]. Beijing:
Tsinghua University Press, 2005. (in Chinese)
[16]M Taewon. Organizational cultural intelligence:
Dynamic capability perspective [J]. Group &
Organization Management, 2010, 35: 456.
[17]D J Teece, G Pisano, A Shuen. Dynamic capabilities
 and strategic management [J]. Strategic Management
Journal, 1997, 18: 509-533.
[18]D Teece. Toward an economic theory of the
multiproduct firm [J]. Journal of Economic Behavior and
Organization, 1982, 3: 39-63.
[19]S Ang, A C Inkpen. Cultural intelligence and
offshore outsourcing success: A framework of firm-level
intercultural capability [J]. Decision Sciences, 2008, 39:
337-358.
[20]S Ang, L V Dyne, C K S Koh, K Y Ng, K J Templer,
C Tay, N A Chandrasekar. Cultural intelligence: Its
measurement and effects on cultural judgment and
decision making, cultural adaptation, and task
performance [J]. Management and Organization Review,
2007, 3: 335-371.
[21]A S Tsui, C A III. O’Reilly. Beyond simple
demographic effects: The importance of relational
demography in superior-subordinate dyads [J]. Academy
of Management Journal, 1989, 32: 402-423.
[22]D Byrne. The attraction paradigm. New York:
Academic Press, 1971.
[23]J R Lincoln, J Miller. Work and friendship ties in
organizations: A comparative analysis of relational
networks [J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1979, 24:
- 247 -
Authorized licensed use limited to: Natl Inst of Development Administration. Downloaded on March 30,2024 at 09:29:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
181-199.
[24]T R Zenger, B S Lawrence. Organizational
demography: The differential effects of age and tenure
distributions on technical communication [J]. Academy
of Management Journal, 1989, 32: 353-376.
[25]Jehn. A multimethod examination of the benefits and
detriments of intragroup conflict [J]. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 1995, 40(2): 256-282.
[26]D Tjosvold. Dynamics and outcomes of goal
interdependencies in organizations [J]. Journal of
Psychology, 1986, 120: 101-112.
[27]T Rockstuhl, K Y Ng. The effects of cultural
intelligence on interpersonal trust in multicultural teams
[M]. In: S Ang, L V Dyne. Handbook on cultural
intelligence: Theory, measurement and applications. New
York: M E Sharpe, 2008: 206-220.
[28]P C Earley, R S Peterson. The elusive cultural
chameleon: Cultural intelligence as a new approach to
intercultural training for the global manager [J].
Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2004,
3: 100-115.
[29]A Malekzadeh, A Nahavandi. Making mergers work
by managing cultures [J]. Journal of Business Strategy,
1990, 11: 55-57.