ScenarioBased Scales Measuring Cultural Orientations of Business Owners

Scenario-Based Scales Measuring Cultural Orientations of Business Owners Christine Koenig, Holger Steinmetz, Michael Frese, Andreas Rauch University of Giessen, Germany Zhong-Ming Wang University of Zhejiang, China

Introduction § The scales differ from other scales commonly used in cross-cultural research: - Instead of measuring culture at the aggregate level, the scales measure cultural orientations at the individual level. - Instead of being based on Likert items, the scales are based on scenarios. 2

Individual-Level Measurement § Cross-cultural studies on individual business owners should measure cultural orientations rather than culture. § Cultural orientations are manifested in practices and values of individuals. § Among the manifestation of cultural orientations, we consider practices to be more relevant for studying business owners than values. 3

Individual-Level Measurement § We are not aware of any cultural orientation scales measuring practices that are suitable for business owners. § Therefore, we developed cultural orientation scales that measure the practices owners apply in their businesses. 4

Individual-Level Measurement § The scales measure seven cultural orientations: - uncertainty avoidance power distance collectivism assertiveness future orientation humane orientation performance orientation 5

Scenario-Based Measurement § Cultural orientations should be measured using scales based on scenarios rather than using scales based on Likert items. § Likert items and scenarios differ in the measurement of cultural orientations. 6

Scenario-Based Measurement § Scales based on Likert items tend to hold lower crosscultural validity than scales based on scenarios: - Likert items are more likely to be interpreted differently by people from different cultures than scenarios. - Likert items are more affected by the reference group effect than scenarios. 7

Development § We developed the cultural orientation scales in a team of Chinese and German researchers. § We created scenarios that consist of social situations and behavioral options. § The social situations describe problems owners may encounter in their businesses. § Each of the social situations represents one of the cultural orientations. 8

Development § The behavioral options describe behaviors owners may show to solve the problems. § The first option represents of low score on the cultural orientation, whereas the second option represents a high score. § Between the two behavioral options, there are two mirror -inverted three-point scales. 9

Sample Scenario 10

Participants § Among the 461 owners who completed the scales, were 260 Chinese and 201 German owners. § They were not only owners but also managers of their businesses and had at least one employee. § Their businesses belonged to information technology, hotel and catering, automobile, or construction industry. 11

Cross-Cultural Validation § To ascertain whether the cultural orientation scales hold cross-cultural validity, we tested five forms of invariance: - configural invariance metric invariance scalar invariance factor variance invariance error invariance 12

Configural Invariance § The model of configural invariance comprised 23 scenarios that measured the seven cultural orientations. 13

Model 14

Configural Invariance § The model of configural invariance comprised 23 scenarios that measured the seven cultural orientations. § The model of configural invariance provided adequate fit (Chi 2(418) = 603. 45; RMSEA =. 044; CFI =. 94). 15

Metric Invariance § The factor loadings were constrained to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples. § The model of full metric invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2(434) = 628. 26; RMSEA =. 044; CFI =. 93). 16

Scalar Invariance § The item intercepts were restricted to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples. § The model of partial scalar invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2(446) = 641. 92; RMSEA =. 044; CFI =. 93). § Given metric and scalar invariance, the means of the seven cultural orientations can be meaningfully compared across both samples (Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998). 17

Factor Variance Invariance § The factor variances were constrained to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples. § The model of partial factor variance invariance provided adequate fit (Chi 2(451) = 646. 71; RMSEA =. 044; CFI =. 93). § Given metric and partial factor variance invariance, different covariances can be interpreted as different correlations for the remaining five cultural orientations (Marsh & Hocevar, 1985). 18

Error Variance Invariance § The error variances were restricted to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples. § The model of partial error variance invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2(463) = 664. 85; RMSEA =. 044; CFI =. 93). § Given metric and factor variance invariance, this result implies that the Chinese sample showed a lower reliability in half of the scenarios. 19

Conclusion § All five forms of invariance were at least partially supported. § Given metric and scalar invariance, the means of the seven cultural orientations can be meaningfully compared across the Chinese and the German samples. § Given metric and factor variance invariance, different covariances can be interpreted as different correlations – except for uncertainty avoidance and assertiveness. § Given metric invariance, regression coefficients can be compared across the Chinese and the German samples. 20

Thank you very much for your attention.