This textbook is designed to help Marines link concepts of culture to the realities of planning and executing military operations around the world. The book has three primary goals:
This is the after-action report from the Cultural Intelligence Assessment Project commissioned by DLNSEO, which was designed as a first step toward understanding if and how the CQ Assessment can be used to meet the need across DoD for an empirical, academically valid way of measuring cross-cultural competence.
This is the after-action report from the Assessing Culture and Regional Training Programs Across DoD project commissioned by DLNSEO, which called for the expanded and strategic use of the CQ Military Survey across DoD.
The Culture General Guidebook provides concepts and skills that can be used to understand and interact in culturally complex situations in any part of the globe.
The purpose of this summary report is to detail the progress made in identifying potential barriers and gaps within organizations and to serve as a resource for the development of a Cross-Cultural Competence (3C) White Paper.
The purpose of this set of studies was to assess whether the ability to distinguish between real and fake gestures in a foreign setting is positively associated with cultural adjustment to that setting.
The present article addresses human functioning in cultural embeddedness from the agentic perspective of social cognitive theory.
This article describes cross-cultural research on the relation between how people conceptualize nature and how they act in it.
In this research, we examined the impact of cultural intelligence (CQ) on intercultural negotiation processes and outcomes, controlling for other types of intelligence (cognitive ability and emotional intelligence), personality (openness and extraversion), and international experience.
The author examines the following limitations of research on individualism and collectivism: It treats nations as cultures and culture as a continuous quantitative variable; conflates all kinds of social relations and distinct types of autonomy; ignores contextual specificity in norms and values; measures culture as the personal preferences and behavior reports of individuals; rarely establishes the external validity of the measures used; assumes cultural invariance in the meaning of self-reports and anchoring and interpretation of scales; and reduces culture to explicit, abstract verbal knowledge.