expatriation and repatriation in mncs: a taxonomy

Expatriation and Repatriation in MNCs: A Taxonomy • 239

EXPATRIATION AND REPATRIATION IN MNCs:A TAXONOMY

Human Resource Management, Summer 2002, Vol. 41, No. 2, Pp. 239–259© 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).DOI: 10.1002/hrm.10034

Yehuda Baruch and Yochanan Altman

The challenge of the management of expatriates and repatriates has never been more timely norurgent: globalization has forced expatriation into the corporate agenda, confronting us with anarray of questions on HRM strategy and practice. We propose that a wide range of current think-ing and practice may be conveniently grouped into a taxonomy of five organizational options,each advancing a different set of expatriation relationships: Global, Emissary, Peripheral, Profes-sional, and Expedient. A framework outlining the main configurations of these options generatesa generic model for expatriation at the organizational level. This forms the principal part of thearticle, followed by a comprehensive discussion and implications for practice. © 2002 WileyPeriodicals, Inc.

Introduction

With the advent of globalization, the num-ber and extent of business representativescrossing international borders has turnedfrom a trickle into a torrent that dominatesthe agenda of human resource departments.Economic and social factors are working toincrease global competition and global op-erations, and subsequently an accelerationof traffic in expatriation and repatriation (cf.Laurent, 1986; Porter, 1989; Porter & Tansky,1999). The concept and practice of global-ization have been studied extensively, andincreasingly so, including the human re-source aspects of it. Expatriation—theclearest manifestation of globalization froman HR perspective (Brewster & Scullion,1997; Porter & Tansky, 1999; Selmer,1996)—calls for theoretical framing.

In the United States alone, some 100,000employees are sent overseas each year

(Mandell, 1994) at an estimated cost of$250,000 for an executive and family (Hiltorp& Janssens, 1990; Ioannou, 1995). Similarly,the figure for Europe was put at three to fourtimes one’s annual salary, discounting reloca-tion costs (Zetlin, 1994).

Much of the research on expatriation andrepatriation is concerned with individuals (cf.Arthur & Bennett, 1995; Baruch, 1995) or themeta-organizational: strategic, environmental,and political (Bartlett & Ghoshal, 1989; Hu,1992; Perlmutter & Heenan, 1974; Porter,1989). There is an evident lack of conceptualwork at the organizational operational level.Few authors have focused on the organizationas the unit of study in international HRM (forexceptions, see Adler & Boyacigiller, 1996;Buckley & Casson 1998; Hendry, 1996; Por-ter & Tansky, 1999). We have now reached astage of theory development that calls for somepreliminary theoretical assertions. We will notsucceed in sorting out the discrepancies and

240 • HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, Summer 2002

“sense making” of divergent data on issuespertinent to expatriation, unless we attempt,at the minimum, a classifying exercise.

The purpose of this article is to provide aconceptual framework for the student andpractitioner of international HRM on the is-sues of expatriation and repatriation, by high-lighting some relevant organizationalcharacteristics and related operational needs.Considering the organization as the unit ofanalysis, we propose a conceptual model, clari-fying the available options and the derivedconsequences for action (or inaction), andlinking them to actual HR policies and prac-tices. The contribution of these to the man-agement of expatriation, for example in dealingwith success and failure, has been missing inthe literature. This is a glaring omission, andone of our aims in proposing our taxonomy isto address this gap. Finally, we broaden thetreatment of expatriation by also encompass-ing repatriation as integral to the process.

In Search of a Framework

The management of expatriation forms an in-creasingly important aspect of career manage-ment within the context of HRM. Theuerkauf(1991) proposed that for the global enterprise,career planning right from the recruitmentstage, throughout a person’s career, shouldbe interspersed with international assign-ments. For the global organization’s HR de-partment, expatriation poses the intricate taskof recruiting, preparing, relocating, place-ment, integration, rewarding, appraising, pro-moting, and repeating the process forrepatriation thereafter. For a vast number ofpersonnel, the overseas assignment has be-come a standard requirement in career pro-gression in our smallest to our largestmultinational organizations. Not surprisingly,expatriation is seen as a career-managementissue by, among others, Feldman and Thomas(1992), Stroh (1995), and Stroh, Dennis, andCramer (1994).

Guzzo, Nooman, and Elron (1994) placedexpatriation within the current debate con-cerning the psychological contract. The ideaof the psychological contract initially proposedby Levinson, Price, Munden, Mandl, andSolley (1962) was further developed by, among

others, Kotter (1973), Schein (1980), andNicholson and Johns (1985), and is currentlyholding center stage in career theory and or-ganizational studies (e.g., Herriot &Pemberton, 1995; Robinson, Kraatz, &Rousseau, 1994; Rousseau, 1995, 1996).Viewed from these perspectives, expatriationrepresents a specific case of the employmentrelationship. Guzzo et al. (1994) argued thatthese relationships would be relational ratherthan transactional. This is also implied in thework of Arthur and Bennett (1995) and Harvey(1997). We propose that the nature of the re-lationship should be viewed as contingent,aligned to an organization’s philosophy, val-ues, and policy on expatriation.

Within the above-mentioned debate, ex-patriation is treated as a bounded concept,though its properties, in particular the orga-nizational properties, are not delineated. Thesame applies to the practitioner-oriented lit-erature dealing with such aspects as selectionand training. Little attention is paid to thevariety of options taken by organizations un-der changing circumstances and over time.The literature tends to focus on large, mostlyNorth American MNCs; and if we were to takeas example an influential text such as Bartlettand Ghoshal’s (1989), one cannot escape anunderlying prescriptive tone. Implicitly,Bartlett and Ghoshal advocated stages of de-velopment, of which the transnational is theepitome of a “globalized” enterprise. This haslittle resemblance to reality.

A recurrent theme in the literature on ex-patriation is the failure rate. For a significantproportion of expatriates, an overseas assign-ment not only fails to achieve its goals, withcostly personal and corporate consequences,but is in fact detrimental to one’s career. Fail-ure is commonly depicted as one or all of thefollowing: an early return of the expatriate,poor performance while on assignment, andon return, reaching a career plateau or leav-ing the company altogether.

Evidence suggests that more than 30% ofU.S. corporate overseas assignments fail(Marquardt & Engel, 1993; Solomon, 1995).Foster (1997) puts the UK figure similarly atabout 28%. This is not due to a lack of fundsor market experience: in a study of fifty For-tune 500 companies, employees for overseas

The relationshipshould be viewedas contingent,aligned to anorganization’sphilosophy,values, andpolicy onexpatriation.


assignments were nearly always selected fortheir technical expertise, but not, however, forany cross-cultural competence (Solomon,1995). Thus Marx (1996) found that less than20% of companies in the UK and Germanyassess managers’ potentials for internationalassignments. Other related findings are thatbetween 30% and 40% of expatriates leavetheir companies within two years of repatria-tion (cf. Dowling, Schuler, & Welch, 1994;Stroh, 1995), compared to 5–10% of non-ex-patriate employees (in the United States andEurope) (Baruch, 1998; Hendry, 1995; Hom& Griffeth, 1995). A wider definition of fail-ure would include leaving the company afterrepatriation, as Black and Gregersen (1999)have argued.

Harzing (1995) and Forster (1997), on theother hand, suggested that the high failurerates of expatriates are in fact an exaggera-tion. Harzing claims that there is no strongempirical evidence for current estimations.Moreover, both challenge the prevailing defi-nition of failure in expatriation, arguing for abroader definition beyond the conventionalcriterion of early return as a measure of fail-ure. Daniel and Insch (1998) support the ob-servation that current failure rates (prematurereturns) are lower than in the past (WindhamInternational, 1994, for example, reporting 8%of premature returns). They suggest this mightbe due to either inaccurate reporting in thepast or to improved management of the expa-triation process. The failure need not be re-stricted to physical action, however, andpsychological withdrawal can be counted as aharmful consequence of expatriation (Shaffer& Harrison, 1998).

The debate about failure rate does nottake into account the contribution of HR poli-cies and practices to expatriation success andfailure, and this gap needs to be addressed.What is missing is a framework that will ac-knowledge how different organizational im-peratives—strategies, policies, andpractices—lead to expatriation consequencesand under what circumstances.

Trends in the Study of Expatriation

A successful expatriation assignment relieson four elements: choice of candidate, pre-

posting preparation for executive and family(both taken care of prior to the expatriation),support and maintenance of relations withthe home organization while on assignment,and the facilitation of a smooth return to thehome base upon completion (Mendenhall,Dunbar, & Oddou, 1987; Zetlin, 1994). Tung(1981) identified four groups of variables thatcontribute to the success or failure on thejob for expatriates: technical competence,personal traits (or relational abilities), abil-ity to cope with environmental variables, andfamily situation.

The first few months of expatriation areoften depicted as a “honeymoon” (Borg &Harzing 1995; Furnham & Bochner, 1986), aperiod followed typically by emerging difficul-ties over a wide range of issues and disillu-sionment, which is often rectified over time,creating the familiar U-shaped curve of ad-justment (see Oberg, 1960; Sappinen, 1993).Furnham and Bochner called it “culturalshock”: a reaction to an unfamiliar environ-ment and unforeseen circumstances; wherebya person typically starts with a “high,” dips intoa “low,” and gradually emerges into a betterlevel of functioning and well-being. Black,Gregersen, and Mendenhall (1992) proposedthat the prime contributions to a culturalshock are, first, disruptions of routines (cf. alsoBellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler, & Tipton,1985), and, second, the number and frequencyof disrupted routines, requiring a dispropor-tional investment of time and mental energy.Black, Mendenhall, and Oddou’s (1991)model of dimensions, determinants, and dif-ferences in the expatriate adjustment processwas recently supported by Shaffer, Harrison,and Gilley (1999). The model, although tak-ing into account organizational factors, fo-cuses on the individual level, offering a limitedorganizational perspective.

Engen (1995) revealed that, for many re-patriated employees, returning home from anoverseas assignment is a potential career di-saster (see also Harvey, 1981; Shaffer,Harrison, & Gilley, 1999). Poor induction,coupled with lack of proper career planning,breeds disappointment and frustration, lead-ing to disillusionment and anger with the “cul-prit,” that is, the company. Rodrigues (1996)labeled it a “reverse culture shock.” This, in

… returninghome from anoverseasassignment is apotential careerdisaster.


turn, results in large numbers leaving the com-pany (Baruch, Steele, & Quantrill, 2002;Dowling et al., 1994; Zetlin, 1994) and tomany others resisting overseas postings(Baruch, 1995; Evans, Lamk, & Farquhar,1989). Having to deal with refusals for expa-triation is a nightmare scenario for humanresource departments in any MNC (Punnett,1997). One response by some MNCs is to optto using third-country nationals (TCNs) as animportant source for expatriate employment(Chadwick, 1995; Torbiörn, 1997).

Altogether, we have ample evidence on thedifficulties expatriation and repatriation causethe individual and his/her environment, andwe have well-documented cases of organiza-tional consequences (Black, Gregersen,Mendenhall, & Stroh, 1999). These vary fromexpatriation failure (e.g., poor performance,early return, leaving the company) to lowermorale of international assignees and reluc-tance to expatriate (Punnett, 1997; Weeks,1993). What we lack is an overall map of theoperational responses MNCs may adopt at thestrategic and policy levels. In doing so, onewill have to attempt to weave the individualperspective with the organizational facet.

Our approach is guided by Adler’s (1983)contention that international HRM should takenote of the cultural not merely the geographi-cal. Indeed recent evidence indicates that se-lection of expatriates must take into accountboth personality and cross-cultural differencesin the decision-making process (Caligiuri,2000). In developing our own classification wepay tribute to Perlmutter’s (1969) seminal con-tribution differentiating among global organi-zational configurations: ethnocentric (homecountry oriented), polycentric (host countryoriented), and geocentric (world wide oriented);and more recently Bartlett and Ghoshal’s(1989) categorization into international (low onintegration and responsiveness), global (low onresponsiveness, high on integration), multina-tional (high on responsiveness, low on integra-tion), and transnational (high on both).

Applying Organizational Taxonomy andMetaphors

We propose a model of five alternative options,each of which represents a different approach

to the issue of expatriation and repatriation.Each option, anchored in practice, implies adifferent set of a priori organizational assump-tions, concerns, and, indeed, ideologies, whichtranslate into diverse policies and practices.We group these under the following labels:Global, Emissary, Peripheral, Professional, andExpedient. The labels we chose aim to por-tray, in a metaphorical way, some critical fea-tures of each of the five options. This will helpthe reader in grasping the nature and notionof expatriation and repatriation, as well as aid-ing in understanding the derived applicationsfor policy and practice. Ours is a contingencyapproach aiming to address the paucity of ex-planations available at the organizational op-erational level.

Before we proceed to the main part of ourpaper, a brief comment about taxonomies andmetaphors is appropriate. The use of taxono-mies and typologies for classification and clari-fication of organizational phenomena is awell-established scholarly enterprise (Rich,1992). The presentation of information in thisway has a long and distinguished history inorganizational analysis, which hardly needselaborating. Taxonomies and typologies areconsidered a sound basis for theory develop-ment and hypothesis testing (Haas, Hall, &Johnson, 1966). They provide a means for or-dering and comparing organizations and clus-tering them into categorical types withoutlosing sight of their underlying richness anddiversity (Rich, 1992).

Metaphors aid in generating a commonunderstanding and in driving meaning (Pondy,1983). They have been used as the organizingprinciple in influential texts such as those ofMorgan (1986, 1997) and Smircich (1983).

A Taxonomy of Corporate Expatriationand Repatriation Practices

We start with a short descriptive statement foreach of the five options:

Global: This is the “archetype” large glo-bal-player MNC, with an establishedreputation in expatriation manage-ment. The company will have a com-prehensive set of procedures andpractices in place. Moreover, employ-

… internationalHRM should takenote of thecultural notmerely thegeographical.


ees would expect expatriation to be atthe core of their professional andmanagerial career.

Emissary: The emissary company has es-tablished overseas markets with along-term view as to its internationalpositioning; however, it is firmlyrooted in a particular “home” cultureand this serves as its repository ideol-ogy, power base, and expatriate source.

Peripheral: This model characterizescompanies operating in peripheral ge-ographies, where expatriation is asought-after career option. Here theexpatriation experience would be areward in its own right.

Professional: A buy-in knowledge andexpertise strategic option. The com-pany prefers to use external people,in effect outsourcing the expatria-tion process.

Expedient: The emergent approach fornewcomers to the global scene, whichcharacterizes most firms in the pro-cess of developing their overseas poli-cies and practices. At present, theirapproach is more ad hoc and prag-matic.

Principles of Categorization

The principles that form the basis for distin-guishing among the options are the follow-ing: values, time, global vs. local focus,individual vs. company criterion, and natureof the psychological contract.

Values: The Strategic Drivers. FollowingRokeach (1973) and Dewey (1939) we con-tend that values, be they at the individual, or-ganizational, or national level, underpinattitudes and behaviors. Thus values are some-thing measurable. Values are the bedrock of acompany’s philosophy and, consequently, strat-egy, on numerous issues (Schein, 1995). To ourpurpose here, the following distinctive valuesare apparent in opting for a specific option.

For the Global company, the core philoso-phy may be portrayed by the idea of Organi-zation Man, as epitomized by Whyte (1956).The manifested ideology of the Emissary or-ganization is “spreading the gospel” (and used

to be “educating the natives”). Hedonismserves well to encapsulate the Peripheral ideasof expatriation as a perk, while the Professionaloption is based on confined transactional re-lationships. Lastly, the Expedient strategy,driven by pragmatism and immediacy, thriveson entrepreneurial values.

Time Dimension: Assignment Length. For theGlobal employee, though career may be con-strued as a string of relocations, each one isshort term (usually no more than three years’duration); an Emissary expatriate may have asomewhat longer-term posting (about five yearsfor Japanese MNCs in the 1980s: Tung, 1988).The Professional expatriate opts for an extendedperiod of expatriation by volition. The Periph-eral as well as the Expedient expatriates experi-ence more erratic expatriation assignments, butfor different reasons. With the Peripheral, it isa perk to be shared by many; with the Expedi-ent, expatriation is ad hoc and therefore lesspredictable. It is worth noting that except forthe Global expatriate, for whom this is a way oflife, all the other options encompass expatria-tion as optional, which may suit career choicesat different junctions in one’s career cycle.

Global vs. Local Sourcing: Where to Look forExpatriates. Here we deal with sourcing orien-tation. Both the Global and the Professionaloptions are globally oriented. For the Global,eyeing the entire world as its market, geographyis of little consequence; whereas for the Profes-sional, international focus means sourcing fromoutside the home country. For both the Periph-eral and the Emissary the solution is local sourc-ing, although for different reasons. ThePeripheral builds on the eagerness of its employ-ees to experience the big world; the Emissaryexpects its people to give up the security andconvenience of the home organization. With itsad hoc emphasis, the Expedient organization islikely to be inconsistent in its sourcing.

Individual vs. Company Criterion: Who Drivesthe Assignment. At the core of the Peripheraland Professional are the individuals—be it theprofessional expatriates in the Professionaloption or employees’ expectations in the Pe-ripheral company that drive expatriation. Thereverse is true for both the Emissary and the

The principlesthat form thebasis fordistinguishingamong theoptions are thefollowing:values, time,global vs. localfocus, individualvs. companycriterion, andnature of thepsychologicalcontract.


Global, since it is the company’s requirementsthat drive the process. For the Expedient,ambiguity on this issue reflects the difficul-ties faced by expatriates. Resolutions will bead hoc and variable.

What Psychological Contract? In the Globalcase, the psychological contract is open ended,anticipating a long-term career. For the Emis-sary, it is relational, underscoring mutual com-mitment. The Professional option istransactional, a “give and take” relationship,built on a “here and now” need. A transac-tional approach characterizes also the Periph-eral option; however, unlike the Professionalcase, here the present (the lure of a lucrativeposition) is contingent on past performance.As for the Expedient, the psychological con-tract is ambiguous, which may add to the dif-ficulty of the position.

Level of Analysis

As indicated earlier, our main focus here isthe organization. Therefore the basic unit ofanalysis is the firm. However, we will not ig-nore the relevance of other levels of analysisand incorporate, where appropriate, also in-dividual and national inferences.

It is people who “make the place,” asSchneider (1987) posited, and people’s per-sonality, inclinations, and values vary. Thus,against the normative expectation, the Emis-sary organization may have individuals who arenot as responsive to service calls overseas aswould be expected of them; both the Periph-erals and the Globals may find that some staffmay not wish to be moved, contrary to thenorm, while the Professional organization,typified by external sourcing, may be capableof identifying internal candidates who will fitwell the task at hand.

Geography plays a role here as well. ThePeripheral organization may be located insmaller countries, like Belgium or Ireland, tra-ditionally dependent on bigger surroundingeconomies or in small and “far-away” coun-tries, such as the case of New Zealand or Is-rael. The applicability of the Emissary optionmay go hand in hand with an exclusive na-tional culture: the example of Japan andFrance as major economies comes to mind,

or indeed a “‘strong organizational culture”(Deal & Kennedy, 1988).

Strategic Outlines

For each option we outline the following stra-tegic parameters:

• core philosophy and ideology• antecedents• embedded values• policies and organizing principles• HR practices: selection and recruit-

ment, training and development(T&D), retention, and use of TCNs

• HR consequences: advantages andchallenges for the management of ex-patriation and repatriation.

The Global Option

Philosophy and Ideology. The Global corpo-rate philosophy views expatriation as beingintegral to the life of an organization. Bothindividual and organizational expectations bearupon it, and period(s) of expatriation are aninevitable part of career paths for any execu-tive, resembling civil service career paths inthe “golden age” of imperialism. Some maynot wish to be expatriated, but this will devi-ate from the norm, and thus exclude themfrom the mainstream career path. For the Glo-bal organization, there is nothing special orunique in overseas assignments. In the sameway a local bookshop considers the town asits market and employees’ sourcing, and a na-tional bookseller chain similarly sees the coun-try, the Global book publisher will eye theworld as its oyster.

Antecedents. Some of the leading world MNCswith dominating brands and major marketshares may be readily associated with thismodel. These corporations are likely to have a“strong culture” (Deal & Kennedy, 1988)coupled with a history and tradition of global-ization. Expatriation is part and parcel of thenormal career path of “corporate men/women.” Indeed, it constitutes the essence ofa corporate career. Size matters too: a smallcompany may not be Global by definition. Andtime is relevant. In the typical course of de-

Both individualandorganizationalexpectationsbear upon it,and period(s) ofexpatriation arean inevitablepart of careerpaths for anyexecutive,resembling civilservice careerpaths in the“golden age” ofimperialism.


velopment, the period required to reach a Glo-bal state will be measured in decades ratherthan years. Even the meteoric rise of Microsofthas taken more than a decade to reach itsdominant position.

Embedded Values. Implicit to the managementof these giants is the willingness of employeesto move regularly from location to location.Unwillingness to do so would end one’s ca-reer prospects for all practical purposes. Adapt-ability and cultural openness are thecharacteristics of the Global career-mindedemployees, who, by definition, are also regu-lar expatriates.

Policies and Organizing Principles. The Glo-bal company has an established and devel-oped set of policies (also as consequence ofits size it will be prone to bureaucratization),helped by experience gathered throughoutthe years. For an employee of the Global or-ganization, global “trotting” becomes a wayof life. Expatriation is at the core of the or-ganizational process. The notion of a “homebase” is drastically losing its meaning, asheadquarters may be geographically locatedin practically “nowhere”; that is, a small pro-vincial town, in which nearly none of theemployees has any personal roots or attach-ment (take the case of Caterpillar in Peoria,Illinois or Thomas Cook in Peterborough,England). The home base represents only afraction of the corporation’s business activ-ity, as with Nestlé (Switzerland), Ericsson(Sweden), IKEA (Sweden/Denmark), to namebut a handful of well-known examples.

HR Practices. Recruitment and selection.Two main issues are critically important. First,for key positions, should the company hirelocals or should it employ expatriates; and,second, how should they be selected. For bothquestions, the Global company will have wellestablished procedures. In principle, only theinternal labor market applies; and the selec-tion process will be laid out in detail and fol-lowed rigorously. Of course that does notpreclude “special” hiring for unusual projectsand specific niche markets; but this shouldbe an exception. In the Global model, TCNsas such would not be a separate category, since

the Global regards the world as its market; al-though whether TCN staff enjoy the samecareer opportunities as staff members from theGlobal constituent countries is debatable.

The Global will have well developed prac-tices in place, T&D being no exception. Muchof it will be in-house, which serves also to re-inforce organizational culture (“the way we dothings around here”).

Retention and career management. Forsenior positions, career management will takethe form of a string of gradually more chal-lenging expatriate positions. This could startat the junior level, and expatriation reflectsthe general thrust of career planning for thecompany as a whole (e.g., career pathing).Almost without exception, the Global willconsider expatriation as an inherent part ofthe career progression of its cadre. Those atsenior position are almost certain to have animpressive portfolio of experience spanningthe globe.

HR Consequences. The principal advantagefor the management of expatriation in a Glo-bal organization is, perhaps paradoxically, thatit is a routine operation. Thus it may be ar-gued that the Global case represents theepitome of job stability, continuous learning,and long-term HR planning, in a similar wayto the “transnational” firm in Bartlett andGhoshal’s (1989) taxonomy.

However, the critical challenges that anyGlobal company faces are concerned with thesmooth running of the expatriation opera-tional system: timing, pace, reconciling de-mand with supply, among others. Anothersignificant challenge is dealing with effectiveand productive managers that do not wish tobe relocated. Refusing an overseas assign-ment would shatter their career prospects atfirms such as IBM or Shell International.

The Emissary Option

Philosophy and Ideology. The Emissary com-pany is characterized by an organizational cul-ture indoctrinated with an ingrainedobligation: a sense of duty backed with highcommitment and loyalty. Under the Emissaryoption some people may be asked to acceptan expatriate role, and are not expected to

The Emissarycompany ischaracterized byanorganizationalcultureindoctrinatedwith aningrainedobligation: asense of dutybacked with highcommitment andloyalty.


refuse the offer. Unlike in Global organiza-tions, where expatriation is a way of life, hereone may be excused from an overseas assign-ment in special or certain circumstances, forthe goal of globalization is different from thatof a Global company. The Emissary option isrelevant to companies with clear national iden-tities, operating across geopolitical borders andin need of people to represent and controloperations in subsidiaries. Their goal is to ex-pand by “exporting” the name, products, andservices of the company abroad.

Antecedents. Historically, the establishment ofthe Emissary approach followed a model thatfit the colonial culture of world dominationby European nations in the 19th and early20th centuries. The Emissary approach is nowcommon of Japanese and Korean MNCs,among others, including most electronics andcar manufacturing giants (see, for example,the case of Matsushita analyzed by Holden,2001). Of these, Nissan is a notable excep-tion for allowing its foreign subsidiaries moreautonomy and decision-making powers(Akakura & Schneider, 1991; Wickens, 1989).

Embedded Values. An overseas posting is seenas a mission away from the center of the civi-lized world, away from the power base of thecorporation, which is at home. One would typi-cally undertake this either out of sheer “pa-triotism,” or for lack of choice. The strongbonding with the home base mitigates againstthe risks of “going native.”

Policies and Organizing Principles. In exchangefor accepting the burden of an overseas post-ing, the company provides a comprehensiveback-up package to its assignees, and createsfor them, possibly in collaboration with othercompanies of the same cultural origin, a “homeaway from home.” The expatriate may expectservices such as schooling, church, social clubs,information (journals and radio), cultural ac-tivities, and even specialized shopping centers.Gannon (1994) labeled these “golden ghettos.”

The dialectics home–abroad may come todominate one’s career, whereby frequent episodesof service “abroad” are followed by “sojourns” at“home.” At the extreme, one may become a “pro-fessional stranger,” to borrow a concept from Agar

(1980), spending one’s entire career overseas. Thisis the quintessential British, French, or Japaneseemployee, whose personal and cultural loyaltiesare unequivocally placed with the home countryand home company.

Not surprisingly, the local employee in thisconfiguration is in structural jeopardy in asmuch as the best one may hope for is to be-come (after much testing and probing) a hon-orary Brit, American, or Japanese.

HR Practices. Recruitment and selection. Aswith Globals, the first choice for recruitmentis internal. Local “special” hiring for unusualprojects and specific niche markets will be theexception. Positions of power are kept for rep-resentatives of Home (which from time to timesubject Emissary companies to litigation byfrustrated local employees). Career prospectsfor locals will be dictated by their attitudinaland behavioral resemblance (in values, per-sonal background, mannerisms) to home-country nationals.

For TCNs Emissary companies are theworst environment in which to develop a ca-reer. While there is an operational logic foremploying locals, and an ideological logic forexpatriating home-country nationals, the long-term deployment of TCNs would go againstthe inherent ethos of the Emissary company.

T&D for expatriates will concentrate onpreparation for adjustment to a foreign envi-ronment. These would be country specific andculturally orientated. Locals will be encour-aged to learn the mores of the home environ-ment, and likely perks would include visits tothe home country.

Career management and retention. Forthe Emissary employees, expatriation is seenas a part of a longer-term career path, whichsometimes has to be spent outside the regularhome environment. This forms part of the longpath of career development, typical to FarEastern companies (Bailyn, 1980).

HR Consequences. From the point of view ofthe management of expatriation, the primeadvantage in the Emissary option is an avail-able pool of assignees, benefiting from itsemployees’ long-term commitment and loyalty.

In this context, the pool of expatriationcandidates comprises the whole company, and

Their goal is toexpand by“exporting” thename, products,and services ofthe companyabroad.


we would expect to see expatriates in a widerange of hierarchical levels. The critical chal-lenges for Emissary companies are less to dowith managing the flow of expatriation cycles,rather the maintenance of motivation (due tophysical and psychological detachment fromthe home base). Low turnover adds operationaldifficulties in those cases where failure occurs(Tung, 1988). And with highly litigious trendin the area of equal employment opportuni-ties, Emissary HR managers should expectlawsuits based on discrimination of local man-agers in promotion decisions. A strategic chal-lenge for any Emissary company is how toachieve genuine integration into local busi-ness environments, an essential stage in be-coming a true global player.

The Professional Option

Philosophy and Ideology. The Professional op-tion is radically different from both the Glo-bal and the Emissary. The Professionals’ goalis to concentrate on home-country strengthsand keep their people within specified geo-graphical borders. Hence the ideology drivestoward outsourcing cross-border activities, anddelivery through people external to the com-pany. These may be local people or TCN spe-cialists. The Professional option thusconsciously and deliberately distinguishes be-tween “core” and “periphery,” which is at thecenter of its operational culture.

Antecedents. The Professional model providesa solution to a company’s extensive overseasoperations through the hiring of expatriatesto act as its “Foreign Legion” troopers. Theircareer comprises mostly of a string of expa-triation posts. Employer and employee aredriven by a market-oriented culture, fluid, adhoc, or an explicit “give and take” relation-ship. This model fits the company, which isnot Emissary and does not aspire to become aGlobal. It may serve as a default option—ashort-term practical solution for companieswhich predominately operate under other phi-losophies. This option is cost driven, and fitsa “transactional” psychological contract(Herriot & Pemberton, 1995; Rousseau,1995), contrasted with the “relational” stressof the Global and the Emissary.

Embedded Values. The professional optionmarshals the principle of economic pragma-tism. From the company’s point of view, thecase for cost-efficiency would mitigateagainst a questionable loyalty. From the ex-patriate point of view, the task, not the orga-nizational frame, is what matters. Henceopting out for another job or changing com-pany should only be expected. For the vet-eran “professional,” a career path comprisesa string of expatriate assignments, not nec-essarily within one company. His or her ca-reer focus is mainly on the development ofprofessional challenges and financial gains,which contrasts with Emissary and Global“Organization Man” loyalty.

Policies and Organizing Principles. In the Pro-fessional option one does not really need anestablished set of policies, as these follow apragmatic approach of hiring competenciesand “know-how” (which may change as perneed). With larger companies we would ex-pect to find developed policies. This optionis in line with the now famous “shamrock”organization (Handy 1984) whereby thereis a core (internals) and a periphery (exter-nals). The “foreign legionaries” are the per-petual externals, although (like in theEmissary option) one may rise to becomean honorary internal or indeed transferredto an internal core job. Career prospects forthem imply serving at the outposts of thecompany. Buying in from external labormarkets prevails (Sonnenfeld & Peiperl,1988). The organization provides a dual ca-reer ladder: one for “their” core people, thosewho operate and develop within the bound-aries of the organization in the home coun-try; the other designated for “externals,” whoare almost permanently stationed overseas.Unlike the Emissary, where there is a valueattached to membership of core versus pe-riphery (with a clear preference for the core),with the Professional option it is merely anorganizational design choice.

HR Practices. Recruitment and selection isstrategy and cost driven. The Professionaloption focuses on external labor markets andselection is “needs” and “ad-hoc” led. Searchwill be external to the company, restricted to

The Professionals’goal is toconcentrate onhome-countrystrengths andkeep their peoplewithin specifiedgeographicalborders.


“specialized” foreign assignees. Personal at-tributes, including country of origin, will notbe a major consideration in assigning over-seas postings; hence TCNs will be used tofill in positions.

T&D would tend to be need specific, sincethe company buys in expertise. We are likelyto find less developmental emphasis; and, ifjustified, T&D will be outsourced.

Career management and retention willbe based on the going labor market situationand the rules of supply-and-demand apply.We may, however, see an emphasis on reten-tion strategies in direct relationship to thetechnical expertise of the position, or its un-desirability (in case of a particularly inhospi-table environment).

HR Consequences. The primary advantage ofthe Professional option is its ability to drivecost effective and flexible solutions for chang-ing needs, while “shielding” its core peoplefrom the turbulence of expatriation. Careermanagement is seen as the concern of the in-dividual alone, which is a major time-and-costsaving for the HR function.

The critical challenges, however, are todo with the expected issues of commitmentand loyalty. Expatriates do not “belong” tothe company, only as much that they arehired to do a specified task at a given geo-graphical location. It would be astute to ex-pect one to abandon ship anytime.Therefore, a contingency plan for virtuallyall key overseas posts would prove essential(conventional succession planning will notwork here). An additional associated con-cern is likely to be security of information,since this option is exposed to the threat ofindustrial espionage.

The Peripheral Option

Philosophy and Ideology. Globalization for thePeripheral company is an expansion strategy,as local markets are insufficient to offergrowth, or indeed the company may have, bydesign, targeted itself as export oriented. Whatis different in the Peripheral option is thatpeople will be queuing up to get the chanceof expatriation, which will be perceived as aperk by both individuals and the employer.

Antecedents. Organizations that belong to thiscategory operate in special niche markets andare far from the center of activity (either geo-graphically or mentally). MNCs in smallercountries will be a prime case here. They maybe headquartered in countries such as Fin-land, Switzerland, or Belgium in Europe, andSingapore in the Far East. Company size mat-ters as well, since large organizations may over-come the handicap of geography whereassmaller ones may be attracted to the attributesof this option.

Embedded Values. An in-bred propensity forcrossing borders is to be found among com-panies that operate in niche environments orthat provide a highly specialized product orservice. Their positioning may be describedas “peripheral,” in that they are on the mar-gins (sectorally, geographically, mentally).The necessity to operate globally is quite sim-ply existential and hence a “pro-foreign” at-titude will be prevalent here. Thesecircumstances facilitate the temporary migra-tion of people to overseas posting. For thesecompanies the critical success factor lies intheir ability to “export” themselves (and theirpeople), to transfer know-how and expand inforeign markets.

Policies and Organizing Principles. Policies willemphasize equality of access and equal op-portunity. Personal differences apart, expa-triates in the Peripheral option are likely tobe tolerant to new experiences, tolerant tounfamiliar environments, and forbearing tothe hardships of cultural diversity. A specialcase here are immigration/emigration soci-eties. With a multilingual facility, their peoplecross cultural boundaries with relative ease,backed by the geopolitical positioning and/or multiethnic makeup of their countries. Forthese populations expatriation is often per-ceived as a bonus and a desired reward atwork. Firms operating from these “expatriat-ing” countries may enjoy the benefit of hav-ing a large pool of people dispersedthroughout the world who identify them astheir historical and spiritual homelands.These populations would thus consider it aprized opportunity to having a work spell intheir old mother-country.

Globalization forthe Peripheralcompany is anexpansionstrategy, as localmarkets areinsufficient tooffer growth, orindeed thecompany mayhave, by design,targeted itself asexport oriented.


HR Practices. In recruitment and selection,whenever possible, the Peripheral companywill employ its own people in key expatriatepositions, thus internal labor markets domi-nate. The selection procedure will have a dif-ferent edge to it, compared to the formeroptions. Whereas one would normally expectto justify an overseas appointment, here onewould need to justify de-selection of a poten-tial candidate. Appointments will be drivenby employees’ expectations (since an overseasposting is seen as a lucrative perk). Further-more, for the sake of transparency, the selec-tion process should be laid out in detail andwith clarity, to avoid possible charges of nepo-tism. The deployment of TCNs may be seento pose a threat to “home” employees, by com-peting on the desired posting, and thus asource of resentment.

In T&D, combating “culture shock”should be a priority for HR, since, eager to beappointed, employees may be oblivious to theperils of failure. With high personal expecta-tions, potential disappointment following the“honeymoon” period of acculturation mightbe strong.

Career management and retention. Forthe employee in the Peripheral company, anexpatriation period will be seen as almost anegation of the Emissary: a much anticipatedevent, always welcomed. Indeed, the promiseof such opportunities is an attraction and helpsretention of committed employees.

HR Consequences. The main advantages ofthe Peripheral option are the ease in recruit-ing for expatriate positions and the possibilityof using this as a retention strategy. However,matching the appeal of the foreign destina-tion is a critical factor. For some people, serv-ing several years in sophisticated New York orcool London would be tremendous; for oth-ers a spell in rural Africa would be a cherishedadventure. The critical challenges for Periph-eral companies are, first, repatriation; expa-triates might be reluctant to return upon thecompletion of the designated period; and, sec-ond, the management of a reverse culturalshock (for those returning from desired over-seas locations to the mundane of home). Andas mentioned above, procedural justice is animportant factor in managing expectations.

The Expedient Option

Philosophy and Ideology. Whereas each of thefirst four options is characterized by a dis-tinct feature that distinguishes them, whatwe call the “expedient option” is more of a“mixed bag” in which one finds a wide rangeof companies entering globalized markets,and/or wishing to become global players. Inthis respect, that option may be seen as anemerging category and therefore perhaps atemporary developmental stage in the inter-nationalization of a company. Within a morecomprehensive taxonomy it may be construedas the residual, that is, when none of theother four options applies. Although, for somethis may be a deliberate strategy since thecrucial question that companies in this cat-egory are likely to face is whether to opt forone of the other models or for an ad hoc (caseby case) strategy. The Expedient company hasyet to develop a clear philosophy.

Antecedents. A company that cannot or willnot opt for one of the above models will “tryto do its best,” a hallmark of expediency. Forthe majority of organizations, the Global modelcannot be adopted (size does matter after all),neither the Emissary (which is a matter ofphilosophy). The Peripheral model is cultur-ally driven and hence not universally adapt-able; while the Professional option might betoo costly (dependent on the going marketrate) and too risky (low commitment). Thus,companies who are entering the internationalscene are most likely to follow an ad-hoc, prag-matic, and situation specific strategy and theirpractices will follow suit.

Embedded Values. From an employee’s vantagepoint, the overseas assignment poses a risk,yet sometimes one well worth taking, particu-larly when faced with no other option, or ifone’s career is stalling. Unlike with the Glo-bal or Emissary companies, here an overseasassignment is optional. As an uncommon oc-currence, each opportunity will be judged onits merit. Paradoxically perhaps, taking up anexpatriate assignment may be proof of realcommitment, since it is not part of the main-stream career and given its associated hazards.For the company, internationalization is not

The “expedientoption” is moreof a “mixed bag”in which onefinds a widerange ofcompaniesenteringglobalizedmarkets.


necessarily self-evident, and thus also the is-sue of expatriation is debatable and undercontinuous scrutiny. A case-by-case approachwould be politically expedient.

Policies and Organizing Principles. The evo-lution of policies will be experimental (trialand error); we may see copying from othercompanies, and selective adaptation of diverseingredients from the other four options on anad hoc basis. Also, reliance on external re-sources for selection, training and preparationwill prevail. Lacking in basic resources andwithout adequate infrastructure overseas, thecompany is likely to be opportunistic in itsapproach, that is, expedient.

HR Practices. We would expect that the expedi-ent company will not have a comprehensive viewregarding the place of expatriation within a widerresource strategy. In recruitment & selectionthe company will take a pragmatic line based onavailability and costs. Although internal candi-dates should be a natural preference, the com-pany might be drawn into external search for ahost of reasons, for example, high prospects ofrefusals, lack of relevant experience, no clearcareer path, few precedents, poor infrastructurein place, and inadequate support.

Within a pragmatic approach, the deploy-ment of TCNs is quite possible, but less likelyat the initial stage of internationalization (un-derdeveloped know-how and lack of networks).As for T&D, all too often, the Expedient expa-triates might be left with little or inadequateT&D, given time, budget and political con-straints (who “owns” the problem?). Neitherlarge nor with sufficient know-how, the expe-dient company would opt at best foroutsourcing. Career management and reten-tion will be based on current and emerging(rather than long-term) prospects. Repatriationis expected to be an Achilles heel for retention.

HR Consequences. The chief advantage of theExpedient approach is having the (somewhatdubious) benefit of maintaining maximum flex-ibility of options. The critical challenge is, how-ever, the unnerving (or exciting?) task of creatingorder (structure, policy, practice...) out of chaos.

Table I outlines a summary frameworkof the key strategic, practice, and HR con-

sequences dealt with across the five differ-ent options.

Pragmatic Considerations

The five options of this taxonomy are positedas “ideal type” and they are driven by a singu-lar logic. We recognize, however, that in prac-tice organizations initiate and respond in morethan one manner to changing circumstances.We expect, therefore, that in reality one wouldencounter mixed variants, or a hybrid of twoor even more options in a given business. Forexample, companies employing in the mainan Emissary or a Global strategy may utilizethe Professional option to hire and maintainpresence in less desirable locations, as is thecase for the giant oil companies operating inthe Middle East and the North Sea (Shell,Exxon-Mobil). Or, take the case of PILAT, anIsraeli HR software company, which mostlyapplies the Peripheral model for expatriation,but could not fulfill the need for localizedmarketing know-how. Their solution was to“professionalize” its marketing department inHong Kong and in the UK. And then again,although we posited that the Expedient ap-proach is a default option rather than a delib-erate choice, some opt systematically forad-hoc expatriate solutions as a matter of strat-egy! (Robinson, 1978).

A decisive factor that influences the deci-sion to opt for a hybrid mode would be differ-ences in the perceived attractiveness of thedestination country, and, in particular, the dis-tinction between the industrial West and de-veloping countries. Although the latter mayattract the more adventurous, countries suf-fering political unrest or harsh climate are notpopular with the majority of expatriates (Tung,1997). Thus organizations that would other-wise apply the Global, Emissary, or Expedientoptions as a preferred strategy may opt for theattraction factor and select the Periphery strat-egy in the case of the most attractive destina-tions—and employ the Professional for thelatter. This is what the Swedish hi-tech gi-ant Ericsson is doing. With more than100,000 employees worldwide, some 40,000of them in Sweden, they utilize, in the main,the Periphery option for their 2,000 Swed-ish expatriates, whereas for their TCNs

In reality onewould encountermixed variants,or a hybrid of twoor even moreoptions in a givenbusiness.


OP

TIO

N

Glo

bal

Em

issa

ry

Peri

pher

al

Pro

fess

iona

l

Exp

edie

nt

Str

ateg

y

Phi

loso

phy/

ideo

logy

Lif

e-st

yle:

the

expe

cted

car

eer

patt

ern

Cul

tura

l age

nt:

orga

niza

tion

allo

ng a

rmE

xpat

riat

ion

as a

perk

Fore

ign

legi

on:

anne

xed

for

expa

t. m

issi

ons

Opp

ortu

nist

ic:

reac

tive

Goa

ls/

aim

sG

loba

lizat

ion

as a

key

org.

Cha

rac-

teri

stic

Exp

ansi

on:

bran

chin

g ou

t

A g

row

th s

trat

egy

Seg

rega

tebe

twee

n “i

nter

-na

l” a

nd “

exte

r-na

l”R

espo

nsiv

e to

emer

gent

oppo

rtun

itie

s

Poli

cies

Est

ablis

hed

Dev

elop

ed

Evo

lvin

g

Out

sour

cing

(Lac

k)

TN

Cs

Non

-iss

ue

Fro

wne

d up

on

Und

esir

able

Com

mon

Poss

ible

Tim

e—or

g.di

men

sion

Lon

g te

rm

Lon

g te

rm

Vari

able

Mid

-lon

g te

rm

Ad

hoc

Tim

e—in

d.di

men

sion

Sho

rt t

erm

Mid

ter

m

Ad

hoc,

usu

ally

sho

rtte

rm

Mid

-lon

g te

rm

Ad

hoc

TABL

E I

Exp

atri

atio

n an

d R

epat

riat

ion

Dim

ensi

ons

of H

R

(con

tinu

ed o

n ne

xt p

age)

.

OP

TIO

N

Glo

bal

Em

issa

ry

Peri

pher

al

Pro

fess

iona

l

Exp

edie

nt

HR

Pra

ctic

e

Rec

ruit

men

t &

sel

ecti

on

inte

rnal

—(e

nfor

ced)

inte

rnal

—(n

orm

ativ

e)

inte

rnal

—(d

esir

ed)

exte

rnal

inte

rnal

or

exte

rnal

T&

D

regu

lar,

ongo

ing

regu

lar,

spec

ific

ad h

oc

buy-

in

none

(ti

me

& b

udge

t co

nstr

aint

s)

Car

eer

Dev

elop

men

t: r

eten

tion

inte

gral

car

eer

path

loya

lty

and

long

ter

m; r

elat

iona

l

dist

ribu

tive

just

ice

as a

n is

sue

cont

ract

-bas

ed r

elat

ions

hips

exce

ptio

nal c

ase;

dea

lt a

s pe

r ne

ed

Lev

el o

f ana

lyse

s *

The

fir

m

The

fir

m &

nati

onal

/ cul

tura

l

The

fir

m &

nati

onal

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

Exa

mpl

es *

*

Nes

tlé

Exx

onL

afar

geS

ony

Viv

endi

Mat

sush

ita

Eri

csso

nC

orus

Jype

xG

illet

teK

PM

GTe

va

NU

Bri

nton

sB

arcl

ays

Lev

el o

f ana

lyse

s *

The

fir

m

The

fir

m &

nati

onal

/ cul

tura

l

The

fir

m &

nati

onal

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

Exa

mpl

es *

*

Nes

tlé

Exx

onL

afar

geS

ony

Viv

endi

Mat

sush

ita

Eri

csso

nC

orus

Jype

xG

illet

teK

PM

GTe

va

NU

Bri

nton

sB

arcl

ays


OP

TIO

N

Glo

bal

Em

issa

ry

Peri

pher

al

Pro

fess

iona

l

Exp

edie

nt

HR

Con

sequ

ence

s

HR

Adv

anta

ges

stea

dy f

low

of

cand

idat

es,

ongo

ing

lear

ning

long

ter

m c

omm

itm

ent

easy

to

recr

uit

cost

eff

ecti

ve, f

lexi

ble

unst

able

, fle

xibl

e

HR

Cha

llen

ges

man

agin

g th

e fl

ow

mai

ntai

ning

att

achm

ent,

low

tur

nove

r

diff

icul

t to

re-

patr

iate

, “po

litic

ized

”

lack

of

com

mit

men

t, h

igh

turn

over

man

agin

g th

e ch

aos

Lev

el o

f ana

lyse

s *

The

fir

m

The

fir

m &

nat

iona

l/ cu

ltur

al

The

fir

m &

nat

iona

l

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

The

fir

m &

the

indi

vidu

al

Exa

mpl

es *

*

Nes

tlé

Exx

onL

afar

ge

Son

yV

iven

diM

atsu

shit

a

Eri

csso

nC

orus

Jype

x

Gill

ette

KP

MG

Teva

NU

Bri

nton

sB

arcl

ays

TABL

E I

(con

tinu

ed).

* L

evel

—w

hile

the

str

ess

in o

ur f

ram

ewor

k is

on

the

orga

niza

tion

al (

firm

) le

vel,

we

ackn

owle

dge

that

oth

er le

vels

of

anal

ysis

app

ly; f

or e

xam

ple,

the

Pro

fess

iona

l is

indi

vidu

al o

rien

ted

in it

spr

acti

ces

whe

reas

nat

iona

l loc

atio

n (g

eogr

aphy

and

men

tally

) w

ould

pla

y a

sign

ific

ant

role

in t

he P

erip

hera

l opt

ion

and

nati

onal

cul

ture

in t

he E

mis

sary

opt

ion.

** A

ltho

ugh

man

y of

the

pro

toty

pes

chos

en n

eed

no e

xpla

nati

on, i

n pa

rtic

ular

the

Glo

bals

, oth

ers

may

be

less

kno

wn

to t

he U

S r

eade

rshi

p. E

ven

wit

hin

the

Glo

bals

, Laf

arge

may

req

uire

intr

oduc

tion

. A F

renc

h co

nstr

ucti

on c

ompa

ny w

ith

mor

e th

an 6

5,00

0 em

ploy

ees,

mos

t of

the

m o

utsi

de F

ranc

e; a

t L

afar

ge b

eing

exp

atri

ate

is a

con

diti

on f

or g

etti

ng in

to t

he u

pper

ech

elon

sof

the

fir

m.

Viv

endi

is a

Fre

nch

utili

ty c

ompa

ny, w

hich

has

mor

e th

an 2

20,0

00 e

mpl

oyee

s w

orld

wid

e, s

ome

150,

000

of t

hem

in 1

20 c

ount

ries

out

side

Fra

nce.

The

com

pany

mai

ntai

ns t

he E

mis

sary

opti

on f

or t

heir

ope

rati

on in

the

UK

wat

er in

dust

ry. M

atsu

shit

a, a

Jap

anes

e co

nglo

mer

ate

that

app

lies

the

Em

issa

ry o

ptio

n in

its

polic

y an

d pr

acti

ce. S

ony

empl

oys

the

Em

issa

ry f

or m

ost

ofit

s ex

patr

iate

s—al

thou

gh e

ven

in J

apan

man

y em

ploy

ees

wou

ld b

e ha

ppily

exp

atri

ated

for

the

cha

nce

to b

ecom

e a

part

icip

ant

obse

rver

in o

ther

cul

ture

..E

rics

son

is a

Sw

edis

h M

NC

in t

he m

obile

-pho

ne m

arke

t, f

or w

hich

the

issu

e of

exp

atri

atio

n is

sel

dom

a p

robl

em w

hen

look

ing

for

Sw

edis

h na

tion

als

to s

pend

som

e ti

me

in s

outh

ern

coun

trie

s. C

orus

Gro

up w

as f

orm

ed f

ollo

win

g a

mer

ger

betw

een

the

Dut

ch c

ompa

ny H

oogo

vens

and

Bri

tish

Ste

el. W

ith

60,0

00 e

mpl

oyee

s (h

eadq

uart

ered

in t

he U

K),

the

y ha

ve ju

st o

ver

200

expa

tria

tes,

but

the

num

ber

is g

row

ing.

For

the

for

mer

par

t ba

sed

in T

he N

ethe

rlan

ds t

he c

ompa

ny a

pplie

s th

e Pe

riph

eral

opt

ion

succ

essf

ully

; how

ever

, wit

h w

ide

expe

rien

ce in

the

glob

al m

arke

t an

d a

wel

l-de

velo

ped

polic

y th

ey d

o no

t us

ually

fac

e re

patr

iati

on p

robl

ems.

The

com

pany

is c

erta

inly

aim

ing

to m

ove

to t

he G

loba

l app

roac

h. J

ypex

, a m

ediu

m s

ized

ele

ctri

cin

fras

truc

ture

com

pany

, is

base

d in

the

Fre

nch

Car

ibbe

an is

land

s of

Gua

delo

upe

and

Mar

tini

que.

Whi

le t

he F

renc

h fl

y to

Mar

tini

que

for

regu

lar

mee

ting

s, it

is t

he G

uade

loup

ians

who

are

expa

tria

ted

to P

aris

(A

ltm

an, 2

000)

.W

hile

Gill

ette

and

KP

MG

nee

d no

intr

oduc

tion

(K

PM

G a

lso

appl

ies

the

Glo

bal a

ppro

ach

alon

gsid

e th

e P

rofe

ssio

nal)

, Tev

a is

an

Isra

eli p

harm

aceu

tica

l com

pany

wit

h 3,

500

empl

oyee

s,w

hich

use

d to

uti

lize

the

Peri

pher

al o

ptio

n, b

ut n

ow h

as t

rans

form

ed it

s ex

patr

iati

on a

ppro

ach

to t

he P

rofe

ssio

nal m

ode.

Nor

wic

h U

nion

(N

U)

is a

lead

ing

UK

insu

ranc

e co

mpa

ny w

ith

som

e 18

,000

em

ploy

ees,

but

onl

y se

vera

l doz

ens

expa

tria

tes.

Bri

nton

s is

a lu

xury

inte

rnat

iona

l (U

K-b

ased

) ca

rpet

’ man

ufac

-tu

rer,

wit

h a

wor

kfor

ce o

f 4,

000,

of

whi

ch a

lmos

t 1,

500

are

loca

ted

over

seas

, but

sim

ilarl

y to

NU

, onl

y a

coup

le o

f do

zen

are

expa

tria

tes.

Bar

clay

s is

an

exam

ple

of a

larg

e M

NC

wit

hhu

ndre

ds o

f ex

patr

iate

s, e

mpl

oyin

g ne

vert

hele

ss t

he E

xped

iant

app

roac

h.


(some 1,800), expatriation management in-corporates a blend of the Expedient and theProfessional approaches.

Transitions

As we have shown, expatriation and repatria-tion practice could be grouped into one of fiveoptions. As discussed, that does not exclude ahybrid approach, whereby more than one cat-egory is in use by the same organization and itdoes not imply that a company is “boxed” inthe same option(s) forever. The purpose of thissection is to elaborate on the movement acrossdifferent options.

By transition we mean the move from oneoption of expatriation to another. We preferthe term “transition” over “transformation” be-cause it is likely to be a gradual change overtime, as an expatriation policy develops in linewith a market strategy and business opportu-nities present themselves. However, radicalshifts may occur, such as in the case of merg-ers and acquisitions or a major restructuring.

Although diversity in ideology, location,size, and labor markets abounds, all optionshave distinct advantages to offer and maypose possible drawbacks. Hence there is noone best model. Due to the dynamic natureof business environments, it is most likelythat different strategies will be requiredunder different circumstances. As transitiongoes, nearly all options are feasible, if notalways practical. However, we need to bearin mind that an organization opts for a par-ticular option because it best represents itsbusiness philosophy, market strategy, orga-nizational culture and tradition as elaboratedbefore. An expatriation approach is there-fore a manifestation of a Weltanschaaung(Kuhn, 1970; Iles, Yoles, & Altman, 2001)and it may not change overnight.

Let us look first at the “natural” path ofdevelopment. In the age of globalization andwith economic drivers, growth is a desired de-velopment. Thus it is suggested that the Glo-bal would be a standard bearer, a naturalchoice for benchmarking, a desired option forthe majority, even though becoming Global isnot always feasible. Nevertheless, an Expedi-ent company would strive to internalize a cul-ture of being a true global player. The

Emissary may evolve into a Global, with thechange of geopolitical circumstances. This iswhat happened to HSBC, the global bankingempire. Some twenty years ago it used to signits expatriates on contracts forbidding themfrom marrying while on assignment (a mea-sure expected from an Emissary company)whereas today, operating in most countries, itadvocates a free flow of labor across the globe.Similarly, a Peripheral company may find itsethos changing, and with many TCN employ-ees and consistent growth, becoming Global.

The reverse also happens, of course.Globals may shrink, making them adopt anEmissary or Professional option. The trans-formation IBM went through in the 1990sinvolved a move toward a Professional expa-triate sourcing; whereas both American mo-tor giants, General Motors and Ford, seem tohave been pulling back in recent years from aGlobal-sourcing position to an Emissary one.

Certain transitions would be less likely. Itwould be difficult for a Global to move to aPeripheral model: that may be a step too far.Nor would it be likely for a Professional or-ganization to move to a Peripheral or Emis-sary, because their respective Weltanschaaungsare, figuratively, worlds apart.

It would be difficult for a Peripheral tochange itself into a Global, for it is not just amatter of size. Peripherals are niche-marketplayers, while Globals tend to be diversifiedglobal players. However, when a niche mar-ket develops into a global one, as is the caseof mobile telecommunications companies, weevidence the transformation of a small Finn-ish company into a global giant (Nokia). Forthe less ambitious Peripherals the Profes-sional model may be a more viable option assize (and hence costs) prevents them fromsending too many core employees overseas.This may also be, by default, the preferredoverseas growth strategy for Expedients,which with limited resources would find it theleast costly; and a preferred option for theEmissary, which can divorce its main busi-ness at home (keeping the core identity in-tact) from expanding overseas markets.

In Figure 1, we show the directions tran-sitions may take. For ease of reference, wepresented the five options on a two-dimen-sional grid (local vs. global orientation and

There is no onebest model.Differentstrategies will berequired underdifferentcircumstances.


individual vs. company orientation). The Glo-bal and Professional options are driven bya strong global orientation; whereas the Pe-ripheral and Emissary will be sustained bya strong local culture. Global and Emissaryexpatriation policy and practice are drivenmainly by company needs, whereas the Pro-fessional and the Peripheral policy andpractice are shaped also by individual de-sires.

The arrows in the figure represent whatwe believe to be “natural” transitions (thicklines), that is, most likely to develop; and theless likely moves (dotted lines).

Discussion and Conclusions

In this article we attempted to provide a con-ceptual framework for the management of ex-patriation and repatriation in internationalHRM. Having outlined the main configurationsof the five options proposed: Global, Emissary,Professional, Peripheral, and Expedient, we builta set of propositions for their derivatives which

are grouped under the headings: HR strategies,HR practice and HR consequences. We hopethat this outlined set of propositions would helpfirst, in characterizing and differentiatingamong the five options; and, second, in point-ing the way to further explicating the philoso-phy, policies, and practice for each.

This collection of proposed options makesup complementary recipes for the manage-ment of expatriation as an organizational prac-tice; and provides an analytical framework atthe level of the firm (a middle-range theory).Hence our taxonomy purports to “sort out” thefield of expatriation by classifying diverse prac-tice and delineating its consequences.

In addition, we believe that this taxonomymay help explain the sore point of expatria-tion—its apparent high failure rate (Dowlinget al., 1994; Foster, 1997; Marquardt & Engel,1993; Solomon, 1995; Stroh, 1995). We pre-dict that failure will be lowest in the Emis-sary, Global, and Peripheral scenarios andhighest in the Expedient model. Indeed, webelieve that the large number of failures

Figure 1. Likelihood of transitions.

Global orientation

Local orientation

Professional Global

Expedient

Peripheral Emissary

Self-centeredcareer orientation

More likely

Less likely

Corporate-centeredcareer orientation


among Expedient expatriates overshadows therelative success of others. Our argument goesas follows.

For different reasons, the three options—Global, Emissary, and Peripheral—supportsuccess in expatriation. For Global employ-ees, expatriation is a way of life. Indeed, theentirety of one’s corporate career may becharacterized as a string of expatriation as-signments. Emissary expatriates get muchsupport to sustain them during their “mis-sion” abroad: material as well as moral. Thechains of Korean and Japanese schools, su-permarkets and community centers/churchesattest to that. The Peripheral expatriates starttheir expedition with a positive mind-set,which should help them through the roughpatches of expatriation (cognitive dissonancecan work wonders, as Festinger, 1957, hasshown us).

The Expedient expatriates stand out inthis relative lack of preparedness, lack of sup-port on location, and absent career sense,hence the high failure rate. As to the Profes-sional option, this special type of expatria-tion is, in its entirety, an intentionalexpatriation career path.

Ours are ideal-type options. In actualpractice, and in particular in decentralizedorganizations, one may expect the concomi-tant use of more than one option at any giventime. Indeed one would not be surprised tofind a functional area in an MNC adoptinga Professional model, while headquartersfollow the Emissary option; a subsidiary orjoint venture following a Peripheral optionwhile the mother company is a Global. Onthe face of it, these are mutually exclusivemodels; reality, however, dictates that theylive side by side.

The taxonomy offers an alternative andcomplementary approach to that often fea-tured in the literature. For example, Bartlettand Ghoshal (1989) offered a stages-basedmodel, where firms can develop up to the fi-nal transnational stage. In contrast, our modelargues for five distinct options, each with theirrelative advantages and disadvantages. More-over, all are grounded in practice, and wouldsuit globalization strategies for both the busi-ness and the HR function. Our model thussupports strategic alignment of HRM with

business strategy (Gratton, Hope Hailey,Stiles, &Truss, 1999; Holbeche, 1999), andprovides benchmarking for strategic choicescompanies have to make in directing theirpolicies and practices.

Moving on from the strategic to the cul-tural arena, our model builds on the well-known contribution by Perlmutter (1969).His taxonomy (ethnocentric, polycentric, andgeocentric) fits well with the American in-ternational outlook in the second half of thelast century. Our set of options reflects thevariety of cultural perspectives of a globaleconomy at the onset of the 21st century.

The taxonomy dealt exclusively with or-ganizational parameters. Other parameterswould also merit a further theoretical devel-opment, most notably country of origin andits impact on the prevalence, the nature of,and the success/failure of expatriation. It isbeyond the scope of this paper to elaborateon such a wide range of parameters, but apossible interpretation for the discrepancy inthe literature on failure rates may be due todifferences among cultures. There is empiri-cal evidence that failure rates in Europe andJapan are lower than in the United States(Harzing & Ruysseveldt, 1996; Scullion,1991; Tung, 1988).

To conclude, this taxonomy will proveuseful if it helps practitioners and studentsof expatriation in “sense making”—if it alertsthem that there are choices to be made andthat “best practice” comes in more than oneshape or form. As is the case with other clas-sifications of this kind, the options presentedhere are intended to provide a yardstickagainst which actual practice can be com-pared and measured.

Future Directions

Although our taxonomy is rooted in actualexperience, an urgent task is to validate ourassertions with systematic empirical studies.In addition it would be worthwhile to exam-ine possible differences among the five op-tions at the geographical and sector levels,paying attention to MNCs that originate inregions other than North America or Japan(Brewster & Scullion, 1997; Forster &Johnsen, 1996).

In actualpractice, and inparticular indecentralizedorganizations,one may expectthe concomitantuse of more thanone option at anygiven time.


A much wider issue is if and why corpo-rations transform from one model of opera-tion to another and how this may beassociated with cultural changes, environ-mental concerns, as well as shifting careerand organizational patterns. For example,Allred, Miles, and Snow (1997) predictprevalence of the network and cellular or-ganizational forms in years to come. Howwill these affect expatriation models andwhat will become of the Expedient optionas a result? We depicted it as a “mixed bag.”However, this may also be a case of a modelin transition. The phenomenon of expatria-tion, while not new, has only fairly recentlygathered sufficient momentum to become akey institutional “phenomena.” We wouldexpect to see before long the emergence of“best practice,” which will drive Expedientapproaches, and may well replace the “mixedbag” of the Expedient. Furthermore, with ex-

patriation becoming a corner stone of cor-porate experience, how will it in turn im-pact the direction, shape and worldview oforganizations? How will it affect strategy,structure, and citizenship?

Lastly, our taxonomy is derived, like thevast majority of studies in internationalHRM, from the industrialized world. How-ever, since we are dealing here with a globaland universal trend, it would merit payingattention to what the so-called third worldmay have to offer.

In the final analysis, as Rich (1992) ar-gued, “classification systems are judged notby the ease or neatness through which or-ganizations are grouped but by their utilityand their ability to replicate reality” (p. 760).We hope to have gone some way here in pro-viding a useful tool for the benefit of thoseengaged in the expanding practices of expa-triation and repatriation and their study.

Yehuda Baruch is a Reader in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Man-agement at UEA Norwich UK and a Visiting Associate Professor at the University ofTexas at Arlington, and formerly a Research Fellow at London Business School. Heholds a B.Sc. in Electronic Engineering (Ben Gurion, Israel), and an M.Sc. and D.Sc.in Management and Behavioral Sciences (The Technion, Israel). His research interestsare careers, strategic and global HRM, and technology impact on management. He haspublished more than fifty papers in these fields in a number of journals, includingHuman Relations, Human Resource Management, Organizational Dynamics, and Orga-nization Studies.

Yochanan Altman is an academic and organizational consultant, trained as an occu-pational psychologist and holding a doctorate in organizational anthropology. He is aProfessor of International HRM at the University of North London, and a VisitingProfessor, Paris University II. He is the Editor of the Journal of Managerial Psychologyand author of several books and numerous articles on the processes of organizationaltransformation, organizational careers, leadership, diversity, and internationalization.

REFERENCES

Adler, N.J. (1983). Cross cultural management: is-sues to be faced. International Studies of Man-agement and Organizations, 13(1–2), 7–45.

Adler, N.J., & Boyacigiller, N. (1996). Global man-agement and the 21st century. In B.J. Punnett &O. Shenkar (Eds.), Handbook for internationalmanagement research (pp. 537–558). Cam-bridge, MA: Blackwell.

Agar, M.H. (1980). The professional stranger. New

York: Academic Press.Akakura, A., & Schneider, S.C. (1991). Missan Italia,

SPA. In M. Mendenhall & G. Oddou (Eds.),Readings and cases in international human re-source management. Boston: PWS-Kent.

Allred, B., Miles, R.E., & Snow, C.C. (1997). Char-acteristics of managerial careers in the 21st cen-tury. In Y. Altman (Ed.), Careers in the newmillennium, causes, challenges and conse-quences. (Chapter 6). Leuven, Amersfoort:ACCO.


Arthur, W., Jr., & Bennett, W., Jr. (1995). The inter-national assignee: The relative importance of fac-tors perceived to contribute to success. PersonnelPsychology, 48 (1), 99–114.

Bailyn, L. (1980). The slow burn way to the top: Somethoughts on early years of organization careers.In C.B. Derr (Ed.), Work, family and careers: Newfrontiers in theory and research (pp. 94–106).New York: Praeger.

Bartlett, C.A., & Ghoshal, S. (1989). Managing acrossborders. The rransnational solution. Boston:Harvard Business Press.

Baruch, Y. (1995). Business globalization—The hu-man resource management aspect. Human Sys-tems Management, 14 (4), 313–326.

Baruch, Y. (1998). Walking the tightrope: Strategicissues for human resources. Long Range Plan-ning, 31 (3), 467–475.

Baruch, Y., Steele, D., & Quantrill, J. (2002). Break-ing out: From the province to the globe. Interna-tional Journal of Manpower, 23(6).

Bellah, R.N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W.M., Swidler,A., & Tipton S.M. (1985). Habits of the heart.New York: Perennial Library.

Black, J.S., & Gregersen, H.B. (1992). Serving twomasters: Managing the dual allegiance of expa-triate employees. Sloan Management Review, 33(4), 61–71.

Black, J.S., & Gregersen, H.B. (1999). The right wayto manage expats. Harvard Business Review, 77(2), 52–62.

Black, J.S., Gregersen, H.B., & Mendenhall, M.E.(1992). Global assignments. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Black, J.S., Gregersen, H.B., Mendenhall, M.E., &Stroh, L.K. (1999). Globalizing people throughinternational assignments. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.

Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M.E., & Oddou, G. (1991).Towards a comprehensive model of internationaladjustment: An investigation of multiple theoreti-cal perspectives. Academy of Management Re-view, 16 (2), 291–317.

Borg, M., & Harzing, A.W. (1995). Composing aninternational staff. In A.W. Harzing & J.V.Ruysseveldt (Eds.), International human resourcemanagement (pp. 179–204). Sage.

Brewster, C., & Scullion, H. (1997). A review andagenda for expatriate HRM. Human ResourceManagement Journal, 7(3), 32–41.

Buckley, P.J., & Casson, M.C. (1998). Models of themultinational enterprise. Journal of International

Business Studies, 29 (1), 21–44.Caligiuri, P.M. (2000). Selecting expatriates for per-

sonality characteristics: A moderating effect ofpersonality on relationship between host nationalcontact and cross-cultural adjustment Manage-ment International Review, 40, 61–80.

Chadwick, W.F. (1995). TNC expatriate manager poli-cies. In J. Selmer (Ed.), Expatriate manager (pp.233–253). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Daniel, J.I., & Insch, G.S. (1998). Why are early de-parture rates from foreign assignments lower thanhistorically reported? Multinational BusinessReview, Spring, 13–23.

Dawn, A. (1994). Corporate coaches support globalnetwork. Personnel Journal, 73 (1), 58.

Deal, T.E., & Kennedy, A.A. (1988). Corporate cul-tures. London: Penguin Books.

Dewey, J. (1939). Theory of valuation. Chicago: Uni-versity of Chicago Press.

Dowling, P.J., Schuler, R.S., & Welch, D.E. (1994).International dimensions of human resourcemanagement. Belmont, CA: Wadworth.

Engen, J.R. (1995). Coming home. Training, 32 (3),37–40.

Evans, P., Lamk, E., & Farquhar, A. (1989). Manag-ing human resource management in internationalfirm: Lessons from practice. In P. Evans, Y. Doz,& A. Laurent (Eds.), Human resource manage-ment in international firm. Hampshire:Macmillan.

Feldman, D.C., & Thomas, D.C. (1992). Career man-agement issues facing expatriates. Journal of In-ternational Business Studies, 23 (2), 271–294.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Forster, N. (1997). The persistent myth of high expa-triate failure rates: A reappraisal. InternationalJournal of Human Resource Management, 8 (4),414–433.

Forster, N., & Johnsen, M. (1996). Expatriate man-agement policies in UK companies new to theinternational scene. International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 7 (1), 177–205.

Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shock.London: Methuen.

Gannon, M.J. (1994). Understanding global cultures.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C.A. (1990). The multina-tional corporation as an interorganizational net-work. Academy of Management Review, 15 (4),603–625.

Gratton, L. Hope Hailey, V., Stiles, P., & Truss, C.


(1999). Strategic human resource management.New York: Oxford University Press.

Guzzo, R.A., Nooman, K.A., & Elron, E. (1994). Ex-patriate managers and the psychological contract.Journal of Applied Psychology, 79 (4), 617–626.

Haas, J.E., Hall, R.H., & Johnson, N.J. (1966). To-ward an empirically derived taxonomy of organi-zations. In R.V. Bowers (Ed.), Studies on behaviorin organizations (pp. 157–180). Athens, GA:University of Georgia Press.

Handy, C. (1984). The future of work. London: Pen-guin.

Harvey, M. (1993). Empirical evidence of recurringinternational compensation problems. Journal ofInternational Business Studies, 24 (4), 785–799.

Harvey, M. (1997). Dual-career expatriates: expecta-tions, adjustment and satisfaction with interna-tional relocation. Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, 28 (3), 627–658.

Harzing, A.W.K. (1995). The persistent myth of highexpatriate failure rates. International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 6 (2), 457–474.

Harzing, A.W.K., & Ruysseveldt, J. v. (1996). Interna-tional human resource management. London:Sage.

Hendry, C. (1995). Human resource management, Astrategic approach to employment. Oxford:Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hendry, C. (1996). Continuities in human resourceprocesses in internationalization and domesticbusiness management. Journal of ManagementStudies, 33 (4), 475–494.

Herriot, P., & Pemberton, C. (1995). New deals.Chichester: John Wiley.

Hiltorp, J.M., & Janssens, M. (1990). Expatriation:Challenges and recommendations. EuropeanManagement Journal, 8 (1), 19–27.

Holbeche L. (1999). Aligning human resource andbusiness strategy. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Holden, N. (2001). Why globalization with a conser-vative corporate culture inhibits localization ofmanagement—The telling case of MatsushitaElectric. International Journal of Cross CulturalManagement 1 (1), 53–72.

Hom, P.W., & Griffeth, R.W. (1995). Employee turn-over. Cincinnati, OH: South Western.

Hu, Y.S. (1992). Global or stateless corporations arenational firms with international operations.California Management Review, 34 (2), 107–126.

Iles, P., Yoles, M., & Altman, Y. (2001). HRM andknowledge management: Responding to the chal-

lenge. Research and Practice in HRM, 9 (1), 3–33.

Ioannou, L. (1995). Unnatural selection. InternationalBusiness, July, 54–57.

Kotter, J. (1973). The psychological contract: Man-aging the joining-up process. California Manage-ment Review, 15 (3), 91–99.

Kuhn, S.T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolu-tion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Laurent, A. (1986). The cross cultural puzzle ofIHRM. Human Resource Management, 25 (1),91–102.

Levinson, H., Price, C., Munden, K., Mandl, H., &Solley, C. (1962). Men, management, and men-tal health. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

Mandell, M. (1994). Robust repatriation. World Trade,7 (1), 40–44.

Marquardt, M.J., & Engel, D.W. (1993). HRD com-petencies for a shrinking world. Training & De-velopment, 47 (5), 59–65.

Marx, E. (1996). International human resource prac-tices in Britain and Germany. Dorset, UK: Anglo-German Foundation.

Mendenhall, M., Dunbar, E., & Oddou, G.R. (1987).Expatriate selection, training, and career pathing.Human Resource Management, 26 (3), 331–345.

Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. BeverlyHills, CA: Sage.

Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organizations. Thou-sand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nicholson, N., & Johns, G. (1985). The absence cul-ture and the psychological contract—Who’s incontrol of absence. Academy of ManagementReview, 10, 397–407.

Oberg, K. (1960). Cultural shock: Adjustment to newcultural environment. Practical Anthropologist,177–182.

Perlmutter, H.V. (1969). The tortuous evolution ofthe multinational corporation. Columbia Jour-nal of World Business, January–February, 9–18.

Perlmutter, H.V., & Heenan, D.A. (1974). How mul-tinational should your top managers be? HarvardBusiness Review, 52 (6), 121–132.

Pondy, L.R. (1983). The role of metaphors and mythsin organization and in the facilitation of change.In L.R. Pondy, J. Frost, G. Morgan, & T.C.Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism (pp.157–166). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Porter, M.E. (1989). The competitive advantage ofnations. London: Macmillan.

Porter, G., & Tansky, J.W. (1999). Expatriate success


may depend on a “Learning Orientation”: Con-siderations for selection and training. HumanResource Management, 38 (1), 47–60.

Punnett, B.J. (1997). Towards effective managementof expatriate spouses. Journal of World Business,32 (3), 243–257.

Rich, P. (1992). The organizational taxonomy: defini-tion and design. Academy of Management Re-view, 17 (4), 758–781.

Robinson, R.D. (1978). International business man-agement: A guide to decision making (2nd ed.).IL: Dryden Hinsdale.

Robinson, S.L., Kraatz, M.S., & Rousseau, D.M.(1994). Changing obligations and the psychologi-cal contract: A longitudinal study. Academy ofManagement Journal, 37 (1), 137–152.

Rodrigues, C. (1996). International management.Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN: West Publication.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values.New York: Free Press.

Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts inorganizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rousseau, D.M. (1996). Changing the deal whilekeeping the people. Academy of ManagementExecutive, 10 (1), 50–59.

Sappinen, J. (1993). Expatriate adjustment on for-eign assignment. European Business Review, 93(5), 3–11.

Schein, E.H. (1980). Organizational psychology (3rded.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Schein, E.H. (1995). Leadership and organizationalculture, 2nd ed.

Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place.Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453.

Scullion, H. (1991). Why companies prefer to useexpatriates. Personnel Management, November,20–21.

Selmer, J. (1996). Expatriate or local boss? HCN sub-ordinates’ preferences in leadership behaviour.International Journal of Human Resource Man-agement, 7 (1), 165–178.

Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A., & Gilley, K.M. (1999).Dimensions, determinants, and differences in theexpatriate adjustment process. Journal of Inter-national Business Studies, 30 (3), 557–581.

Smircich, L. (1983). Concepts of culture and organi-zational analysis. Administrative Science Quar-terly, 28, 339–358.

Solomon, C.M. (1995). Success abroad depends on

more than just job skills. Personnel Journal, 73(4), 51–54.

Sonnenfeld, J.A., & Peiperl, M.A. (1988). Staffingpolicy as a strategic response: A typology of ca-reer systems. Academy of Management Review,13 (4), 588–600.

Stroh, L.K. (1995). Predicting turnover among repa-triates: Can organizations affect retention rates?International Journal of Human Resource Man-agement, 6 (2), 443–456.

Stroh, L.K., Dennis, L.E., & Cramer, T. (1994). Pre-dictors of expatriate adjustment. InternationalJournal of Organizational Analysis, 2 (2), 176–192.

Theuerkauf, I. (1991). Reshaping the global organi-zation. McKinsey Quarterly, 3, 1023-119.

Torbiörn, I. (1997). Staffing for international opera-tions. Human Resource Management Journal, 7(3), 42–51.

Tung, R.L. (1982). Selection and training proceduresof US, European and Japanese multinationals.California Management Review, 25 (1), 57–71.

Tung, R.L. (1988). The new expatriates: Managinghuman resources abroad. New York: Harper andRow.

Tung, R.L. (1997). Exploring international assignees’viewpoints. SC: Arthur Andersen Worldwide.

Weeks, D. (1993). Reluctant expatriates. Across theBoard, 30 (March), 47.

Whyte, W.H. (1956). The organization man. New York:Simon & Schuster.

Wickens, P. (1989). The road to Nissan, flexibilityquality teamwork. London: MacMillan.

Windham International and National Foreign TradeCouncil. (1994). Global relocation trends 1994survey report. Windham International.

Zetlin, M. (1994). Making tracks. Journal of Euro-pean Business, 5 (5), 40–47.

ENDNOTES

The authors wish to thank Gayle Baugh, StevenFrenkel, Mark Mendenhall, two anonymous re-viewers and Associate Editor Bruce Avolio fortheir helpful comments on earlier drafts of thepaper. An earlier version of this paper was pre-sented at the 1999 Academy of Managementmeeting in Chicago.

expatriation and repatriation in mncs: a taxonomy

Documents