Technical Report 1216 

Conceptualizing Multicultural Perspective 

Taking Skills 

Joan R. Rentsch 

Organizational Research Group

Allison Gunderson 

Case Western Reserve University 

Gerald F. Goodwin and Allison Abbe 

U.S. Army Research Institute 

November 2007 

 

United States Army Research Institute 

 for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
U.S. Army Research Institute 

for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

A Directorate of the Department of the Army 

Deputy Chief of Staff, G1 

Authorized and approved for distribution: 

 BARBARA A. BLACK, Ph.D. MICHELLE SAMS, PhD. 

Research Program Manager Director 

Training and Leader Development 

Technical review by 

Michelle Zbylut, U. S. Army Research Institute 

Stephanie T. Muraca, U. S. Army Research Institute 

NOTICES 

DISTRIBUTION: Primary distribution of this Technical Report has been made by ARI. 

Please address correspondence concerning distribution of reports to: U.S. Army 

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Attn: DAPE-ARI-MS, 2511 

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926. 

FINAL DISPOSITION: This Technical Report may be destroyed when it is no longer 

needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral 

and Social Sciences. 

NOTE: The findings in this Technical Report are not to be construed as an official 

Department of the Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents.
i 

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 

1. REPORT DATE (dd-mm-yy)

November 2007 

2. REPORT TYPE

Final 

3. DATES COVERED (from. . . to) 

May 2006 to November 2007 

5a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 

W74V8H-06-P-0216 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Conceptualizing Multicultural Perspective Taking Skills 

5b. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 

622785 

5c. PROJECT NUMBER 

A790 

5d. TASK NUMBER 

217 

6. AUTHOR(S): 

Joan R. Rentsch (Organizational Research Group), Allison 

Gundersen (Case Western Reserve University), Gerald F. 

Goodwin (U.S. Army Research Institute), Allison Abbe (U.S. 

Army Research Institute) 

5e. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

Organizational Research Group, LLC 

5329 Buckhead Trail 

Knoxville, TN 37919

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 

10. MONITOR ACRONYM 

ARI 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social 

Sciences 

ATTN: DAPE-ARI-RK 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway 

Arlington, VA 22202-3926

11. MONITOR REPORT NUMBER 

Technical Report 1216 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

Subject Matter POC: Allison Abbe 

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words): 

U. S. Army leaders are increasingly required to engage in full-spectrum operations that include a multinational or 

multicultural component. Army leaders must develop cultural understanding and skills in order to work effectively 

in multinational alliances, to anticipate and respond to adversary intent, and to interact successfully with local 

populations. The ability to take the perspective of individuals within the context of their culture enables Army 

leaders to understand other cultures at a level finer than that afforded by simply using global cultural dimensions 

alone. Perspective taking is a skill that may play a role in working effectively with diverse individuals across 

cultural boundaries. Individual level perspective taking is a cognitive process by which an individual is able to 

identify the thoughts and/or feelings of another. The competencies identified as contributing to multicultural 

perspective taking include fundamental competencies of self-awareness, personal and interpersonal skills, and 

regional expertise, and advanced competencies of extraction, interpretation, and a schema for culture. This 

paper describes a conceptual framework for multicultural perspective taking skills and makes recommendations 

for training those skills.

15. SUBJECT TERMS 

 Cultural Awareness, Cultural Understanding, Cultural Intelligence, Perspective Taking, Interpersonal Skills, 

Competencies

 SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF 

16. REPORT 

Unclassified 

17. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified

18. THIS PAGE 

Unclassified

19. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

Unlimited

20. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

21. RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Ellen Kinzer 

Technical Publication 

Specialist 

703-602-8047 
 ii 
Technical Report 1216 

Conceptualizing 

Multicultural Perspective Taking Skills 

Joan R. Rentsch 

Organizational Research Group

Allison Gunderson 

Case Western Reserve University 

Gerald F. Goodwin and Allison Abbe 

U.S. Army Research Institute 

Leader Development Research Unit 

Stanley M. Halpin, Chief 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926 

November 2007 

Army Project Number Personnel Performance 

622785A790 and Training Technology 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

iii 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The authors would like to thank Lisa M. V. Gulick and Jeffrey L. Herman of George Mason 

University, Consortium Research Fellows Program, for their assistance in preparing this report.

iv 
CONCEPTUALIZING MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING SKILLS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Research Requirement: 

Increasingly, the United States Army operates in multinational, and therefore, 

multicultural, environments. Teamwork within such settings requires the ability to see events as 

members of other cultures see them. The goal of the research was to define a set of multicultural 

perspective taking skills that will enable Army leaders to function effectively in multinational 

alliances. 

Procedure: 

Researchers reviewed literature from the disciplines of cultural anthropology, social 

anthropology, cognitive anthropology, counseling psychology, developmental psychology, social 

psychology, organizational psychology, organizational behavior, international business, and 

adult education and development. Conceptualizations of culture and the knowledge, skills, and 

abilities (KSAs) contributing to multicultural perspective taking were extracted. The literature 

reviewed was drawn primarily from the academic domain and included such topics as crosscultural counseling psychology, person perception, cross-cultural person perception, cultural 

intelligence, police interrogation (tactical questioning), global and international business, 

intercultural conflict management, intercultural competence, intercultural training, intercultural 

communication, diversity and cultural awareness training. 

Findings: 

Two major categories containing six sets of multicultural perspective taking 

competencies were identified. Fundamental competencies are self-awareness, personal and 

interpersonal skills, and regional expertise. Advanced competencies are extraction skills, 

interpretation skills, and the development of cultural schema. Each set of competencies contains 

many specific KSAs. The compentency framework is presented to highlight the relationships 

among the compentencies. Understanding these relationships will aid in determining training 

sequencing. 

Utilization and Dissemination of Findings: 

 These findings can inform training development and guide further research on the skills 

needed to function effectively in multicultural environments. Traditional cultural awareness 

training typically focuses on understanding members of another culture from an American’s 

perspective. However, augmenting this training by addressing multicultural perspective taking 

competencies will afford Army leaders broader cross-cultural capability. In developing such 

training, training principles from industrial/organizational psychology and the organizational 

training literature should be applied. In addition, best practices for adult learning should be 

incorporated. 

v 
vi 
CONCEPTUALIZING MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING SKILLS 

CONTENTS 

 Page 

PROJECT OVERVIEW ..............................................................................................................1

PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW OF THE REPORT.....................................................................3 

CULTURE ...................................................................................................................................4 

DIRECT, ORGANIZATIONAL, AND STRATEGIC LEVELS OF LEADERSHIP ................8 

MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING ........................................................................11 

 Fundamental Competencies to Support Multicultural Perspective taking..............................13 

 Advanced Competencies to Support Multicultural Perspective taking ..................................21 

FRAMEWORK OF MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING COMPETENCIES........32 

 Influences Among Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies.......................................34 

 Summary of Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies ................................................38 

FUTURE RESEARCH TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF TRAINING SYSTEMS ...........38 

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................41 

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 1. SELF-AWARENESS COMPETENCIES ...............................................................14 

TABLE 2. PERSONAL AND INTERPERSONAL COMPETENCIES...................................17 

TABLE 3. REGIONAL EXPERTISE .......................................................................................19 

TABLE 4. MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING COMPETENCIES: 

FUNDAMENTAL COMPETENCIES AND DEFINITIONS ........................................20 

TABLE 5. SCHEMA FOR UNDERSTANDING CULTURE..................................................24 

TABLE 6. DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES ..................................................................25 

TABLE 7. EXTRACTION COMPETENCIES.........................................................................28 

TABLE 8. INTERPRETATION COMPETENCIES ................................................................29 

TABLE 9. MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING COMPETENCIES: 

ADVANCED COMPETENCIES AND DEFINITIONS ................................................31 

TABLE 10. INFLUENCES AMONG MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING 

 COMPETENCIES ..........................................................................................................36 

 

LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 1. PRIMARY ELEMENTS OF A FRAMEWORK OF MULTICULTURAL 

 PERSPECTIVE TAKING COMPETENCIES..................................................................33 

vii 
viii 
CONCEPTUALIZING MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE TAKING SKILLS 

Project Overview 

Multicultural Perspective taking is Important to the United States Army 

Increasingly, the United States Army operates in multinational, and therefore, 

multicultural, environments. U. S. Army leaders must meet the challenges of these environments, 

which are frequently complicated by distributed communications and time-compressed, 

complex, dynamic, and data-rich conditions. However, little is known about how to rapidly form 

and support groups in these types of environments (Driskell, Radtke, & Salas, 2003). U. S. Army 

leaders who lack the interpersonal knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) required to operate in 

these environments will likely experience confusion, conflict, inefficiency, and ultimately 

failure. Strongly developed interpersonal competencies are essential to successfully, and quickly, 

build teams within multicultural environments. 

The term multicultural is used here to emphasize that culture exists not only at the 

national level, but also with respect to ethnic group, religion, region, organization, profession, 

and so on. Therefore, within any nation it is likely that multiple cultures will exist. 

 Multicultural perspective taking skills are a set of competencies that enable effective 

joint, interagency, and multinational (JIM) operations. The “Initial Impressions Report on Leader 

Challenges: Operation Enduring Freedom & Operation Iraqi Freedom” (IIR, 2005) emphasized 

the need to improve Soldiers’ ability to operate in a multicultural environment and highlighted 

the inadequacies of the current cultural awareness training, which addresses rudimentary cultural 

knowledge. However, as leaders’ contact with local populations, including contact with 

individuals at high political levels, increases, they require knowledge related to socio-political 

relationships, governing structures, interpersonally sensitive issues (e.g., face, power structures, 

privacy, formality, loyalty), valued items (e.g., money), business practices, religion, social 

customs, and so on. For example, understanding that private behavior does not necessarily reflect 

public behavior or a person’s intention is critical in many cultures. 

 Even within the American organizations, cultural differences create complications. For 

example, civilian and military cultural differences may increase collaborative difficulty (e.g., 

civilians may not respond to orders and they may not accept military leadership). Cultural 

differences at the organizational and professional levels must be also addressed. 

 The multicultural perspective taking approach is designed to remedy the shortcomings of 

the current approach to leader cultural training by identifying fundamental and advanced 

competencies for operating in multicultural environments, which include national, regional, 

socio-political, organizational and professional cultural influences. The multicultural perspective 

taking approach is designed to enable leaders and Soldiers at the direct, organizational, and 

strategic levels to extract, interpret, and utilize cultural information. 

 U. S. Army leaders who possess well-developed multicultural perspective taking skills 

should have increased ability to decipher novel cultural information encountered in any situation 

1 
or environment. Multicultural perspective taking skills are a set of competencies that enable 

leaders to make sense of and understand individuals’ perspectives (i.e., understandings) of 

situations. The ability to take-perspective in this way will enable leaders to interact with others 

and to function effectively within a new culture. The behavior of others that was previously 

mysterious will be interpretable by leaders who possess well-developed multicultural perspective 

taking skills. 

The United States Army Needs to Know More about Multicultural Perspective taking 

 The United States Army needs to know more about multicultural perspective taking for at 

least five reasons. First, currently, leaders are not receiving training that prepares them to 

function most effectively in novel cultures. For example, McFate (2005) reported that a 

commander from an infantry division stated, “I had perfect situational awareness. What I lacked 

was cultural awareness” (McFate, p. 43) McFate suggested that cultural knowledge should be a 

national priority. The IIR (2005) indicated that the current cultural awareness training for the 

Army is inadequate. It was reported that leaders believed “general education to develop the 

knowledge and skills related to understanding social structures would be more helpful than the 

specific cultural awareness training” (p. 35). The current training is considered basic and in some 

cases erroneous (p. 71, IIR). 

 Second, Army leaders need resources for understanding many different cultures. Leaders 

are faced with cultural differences associated with their fellow Soldiers, each branch of the 

military, U.S. agencies, coalition partners, friendly local nationals, enemies, insurgents, and so 

on. McFate (2005) reported that a Special Forces colonel revealed, “We literally don’t know 

where to go for information on what makes other society’s tick, so we use Google to make 

policy” (p. 46). Apparently, Army leaders are not supplied with the resources for understanding 

and working in unfamiliar multicultural environments. 

 Third, the United States seems to be trailing other nations with respect to abilities related 

to working effectively in other cultures. For example, it would appear that potential enemy 

soldiers might be more effective in understanding cultural differences than the U. S. Army 

Soldier. The IIR included evidence that not only are Arab/Muslim soldiers are more familiar 

with U.S. culture, they are also aware that U.S. Soldiers are unfamiliar with Arab/Muslim 

culture. Additionally, it was reported that in many cases, individuals from other cultures are 

aware that they do not know the American culture. Furthermore, these individuals are aware that 

Americans do not understand their culture. 

 Stewart and Bennett (1991) noted, “Americans frequently have difficulties in 

communicating and cooperating with their foreign counterparts. The original obstacles to crosscultural understanding may be conceptualized as differences in cultural assumptions and values. 

The Americans’ values and assumptions prevent them from objectively perceiving and 

understanding the underpinnings of the behavior of their counterparts. Their performance 

overseas would be enhanced if they understood both their own culture and that of their 

counterparts” (Stewart & Bennett, 1991, p. 174). 

2 
 Anecdotal evidence supports the notion that individuals from other countries tend to be 

better able to detect and decode cultural differences than Americans, possibly because they have 

an attitude that they need to understand others. For example, the second author was once told by 

a Dane “We don’t expect other people to speak Danish; we’re a small country.” In addition, 

others, for example Europeans, Canadians, and Australians, tend to travel internationally more 

than Americans and have more experience with cultures other than their own. 

 Fourth, the Initial Impressions Report emphasized that cultural training should include 

language, history, culture and customs, and it strongly emphasized the need for interpersonal 

competency. Specifically, the IIR suggested that leaders should be supplied “with a basis to 

better understand any culture in which they are operating, not just the specific culture of current 

theaters (p. 35).” 

Fifth, traditional approaches to training cultural understanding are not sufficient for 

providing U.S. Army leaders with the complex competencies required to function effectively in 

multicultural environments. The Army needs to take a ground-breaking approach to improving 

its ability to operate in multicultural environments by training and developing its leaders’ 

versatility in functioning in novel and multiple cultures. The multicultural perspective taking 

approach is focused on increasing leaders’ ability to extract, interpret, understand, and utilize 

cultural information in any culture. 

 

Purpose and Overview of the Report 

 The goal of the research project reported here was to define a set of multicultural 

perspective taking skills that will enable Army leaders to function effectively in multicultural 

(including multinational) operations. This research was conducted by reviewing relevant 

literature. Data collection was beyond the scope of this project; this effort instead lays out ideas 

to be tested in future research. 

 The report is structured as follows. First, the scope of the literature reviewed is 

articulated. Then, definitions of culture from various research literatures are presented. Next, 

three levels of Army leadership, direct, organizational, and strategic, are described, because 

multicultural perspective taking is related to each level. The next major section presents the 

multicultural perspective taking competencies. This section includes defining the competencies 

in two broad categories and providing an organizational framework of the interrelationships 

among them. The last major section presents recommendations for future research on 

multicultural perspective taking. 

KSAs necessary for competence in multicultural perspective taking and for training these 

competencies were extracted from extant research in a wide variety of literatures on an array of 

topics. Culture, cross-cultural, inter-cultural, multi-cultural, global, international, and 

multinational are terms relevant to many fields of study including cultural anthropology, social 

anthropology, cognitive anthropology, counseling psychology, developmental psychology, social 

psychology, organizational psychology, organizational behavior, international business, and 

adult education and development. Research on such topics as cross-cultural counseling 

psychology, person perception, cross-cultural person perception, cultural intelligence, police 

3 
interrogation (tactical questioning), global and international business, intercultural conflict 

management, intercultural competence, intercultural training, intercultural communication, 

diversity and cultural awareness training approached from the many fields contribute to the 

understanding of multicultural perspective taking. The literature reviewed was drawn primarily 

from the academic domain. 

Culture 

Culture is a complex phenomenon that involves beliefs, laws, morals, customs, values, 

assumptions, and thoughts. It is communicated through such artifacts as heroes, symbols, stories, 

and rituals, and is patterned, shared, and dynamic. A major component of culture is collective 

sensemaking and the social construction of reality. Thus, culture can be conceptualized as a 

shared cognitive frame of reference (Louis, 1980). Multicultural perspective taking skills are 

aimed at deciphering the frame of reference, sensemaking, and interpretive aspects of another’s 

cultural lens. 

 It should also be noted that culture has many foci. Culture exists with respect to any 

collection of individuals including groups (e.g., social groups, ethnic groups, sport groups, 

platoons), professions, organizations, nations, and so on. Indeed, individuals may belong 

simultaneously to multiple cultural units and be simultaneously affected by them (Chao & Moon, 

2005). Thus, each individual has his or her own understanding or worldview, and portions of that 

understanding overlap with others’ understandings. Multicultural perspective taking requires the 

perspective-taker to understand and to consider the various cultural influences on an individual 

or group of individuals, because cultural influences affect how one perceives and how one is 

perceived. 

 Definitions of Culture 

Culture is a complicated phenomenon and defining it completely is challenging. 

Fortunately, common themes run through definitions of culture regardless of whether the locus 

of interest is profession, work unit, team, ethnic group, organization, religion, region, country, 

and so on. 

 

These themes include the notion that culture is learned. Training that involves modifying 

the mind, emotions, social behaviors, tastes, and so on serves as one developmental mechanism. 

Another theme is that culture involves knowledge, beliefs, laws, morals, customs, and patterns of 

learned behavior and thoughts. Culture is communicated through artifacts, symbols, stories, 

rituals and so on. Culture is also the conceptualizations, skills, arts, and institutions of a set of 

people. An important theme is that cultural understandings are shared among members of a 

group, because culture’s function is to provide solutions to potential and actual problems. Group 

members pass cultural interpretations to newcomers (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). 

 This complex phenomenon, culture, has intrigued researchers in many fields who have 

attempted to define and study it. Below, we present features of culture that are highlighted in 

anthropology and sociology, intercultural communication and psychology, and organizational 

research. 

4 
Features of Culture Highlighted in Anthropology and Sociology 

 Anthropology provides several definitions of culture; a sample is provided below. 

 One well-accepted anthropological definition of culture was presented by Kluckhohn. 

“Culture consists in patterned ways of thinking, feeling and reacting, acquired and transmitted 

mainly by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups, including their 

embodiments in artifacts; the essential core of culture consists of traditional (i.e. historically 

derived and selected) ideas and especially their attached values” (Kluckhohn, 1951, as cited in 

Hofstede, 1980, p. 86). 

 With respect to determining the formation and development of culture, Ong stated, 

“‘culture’ is taken as historically situated and emergent, shifting and incomplete meanings and 

practices generated in webs of agency and power. Cultural change is not understood as unfolding 

according to some predetermined logic (of development, modernization, or capitalism) but as the 

disrupted, contradictory, and differential outcomes which involves changes in identity, relations 

of struggle and dependence, including the experience of reality itself” (Ong, 1987, pp. 2-3). 

 

 The cognitive approach to anthropology argues that culture “comprises the ideas, beliefs, 

and knowledge that characterize a particular group of people” (Fetterman, 1989, p. 27). This 

perspective highlights the cognitive aspects of culture at the exclusion of behavior. 

Kroeber and Parsons (1958), sociologists, defined culture as “transmitted and created 

content and patterns of values, ideas, and other symbolic-meaningful systems as factors in the 

shaping of human behavior and the artifacts produced through behavior” (p. 583). 

In summary, anthropologists highlight that culture is traditional, is learned, affects 

identity, is conveyed through symbols, is situated and emergent, and reflects patterns (e.g., of 

thinking, feeling, and reacting) (Fetterman, 1989; Kluckhohn, 1951; Ong, 1987). Sociologists 

have a similar perspective on culture and highlight that it is transmitted, is created, is symbolic, 

and shapes behavior (e.g., Kroeber & Parsons, 1958).

Features of Culture Highlighted in Intercultural Communication and Psychology 

 By defining culture as communication (Hall, 1959), including the silent language of nonverbal communication, anthropologist E. T. Hall became the father of the field of intercultural 

communication. Culture is the code that leaders must crack in order to work in multicultural 

environments effectively. 

 Other definitions emphasize the functional aspects of culture: 

Culture is the sum total of ways of living, including values, beliefs, esthetic 

standards, linguistic expression, patterns of thinking, behavioral norms, and styles 

 of communication which a group of people has developed to assure its survival 

 in a particular physical and human environment. Culture and the people who 

are a part of it interact so that culture is not static. Culture is the response of 

5 
a group of human beings to the valid and particular needs of its members. 

It, therefore, has an inherent logic and an essential balance between 

positive and negative dimensions” (Hoopes, 1979, p. 3, as cited in Hess, 1994, p. 4). 

Triandis (1972) distinguished subjective and objective aspects of culture. Objective 

culture includes the observable artifacts and provides the basis and expression of the subjective 

culture. According to Triandis, subjective culture refers to ways in which group members 

commonly perceive their objective environment. It should be noted that the objective 

environment is that which is “man-made,” that is, the artifacts. 

 In summary, these approaches define culture in terms of the functions it serves for its 

members, emphasizing that communication is comprised of and conveys culture and that culture 

provides its members with solutions for survival (Hess, 1994). Psychologists add focus on the 

objective and subjective aspects of culture (e.g., Triandis, 1972). 

Features of Culture Highlighted in Organizational Research 

 Culture in organizations refers to the organizational members’ shared beliefs and values 

that influence their thoughts and behavior. It also refers to a “set of cognitions” acquired through 

socialization and interactions. Members of a social unit share a set of cognitions (Cooke & 

Rousseau, 1988, p.247). One aspect of culture is the meaning that it provides individuals as they 

interpret their world (Rentsch, 1990). 

 According to Schein (1990), culture is "(a) a pattern of basic assumptions, (b) invented, 

discovered, or developed by a given group, (c) as it learns to cope with its problems of external 

adaptation and internal integration, (d) that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, 

therefore (e) is to be taught to new members as the (f) correct way to perceive, think, and feel in 

relation to those problems" (p.111). Schein (1985) has emphasized culture as being a system of 

shared meanings that exist within a group. These meanings are enacted. According to Schein, 

culture is reflected in artifacts, values, and tacit assumptions. Schein also emphasized that 

leaders’ values are reflected in the organizational culture. 

 Within organizational research, culture is viewed as highly subjective, existing at an 

unconscious (subconscious) level, consisting of layers of cognition (Schein, 1985) based on 

assumptions about the way things are and the ways of dealing with the world. It is the social 

process that occurs within a group of people who hold a common set of assumptions, world 

views, values, behavioral norms, and material artifacts (Rousseau, 1988). 

 

Hofstede (1980), focusing on culture at the national level, defined culture as “the 

collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one human group from 

another” (p. 25). He presents culture as the collective analogue to personality at the individual 

level, citing Guildord’s (1959, as cited in Hofstede) definition of personality as “the interactive 

aggregate of personal characteristics that influence a human group’s response to its 

environment.” 

 

6 
 Louis (1980) emphasized the importance of interaction and socialization in organizational 

culture by adopting a definition of culture as a cognitive frame of reference. Culture is the 

pattern of cognition and the pattern of behavior transferred to each generation of the group. Louis 

emphasized several aspects of culture including psychological dimensions, historical and 

sociological factors, and cross-cultural factors. She notes that common understandings organize 

action and are expressed in nuanced language understood by the group. 

 Another conceptualization of culture is as a mosaic (Chao & Moon, 2005). Within this 

perspective, culture is conceptualized as a complex pattern of cultural identities based on 

demographic, geographic, and associative features within individuals. From this perspective, all 

individuals have access to multiple cultural identities, and identities are activated based on their 

strength, compatibility, and contextual demands. These identities become shared among others 

within an interpersonal network. Individuals who share identities with others may serve to bridge 

others who do not share cultural identities (Chao & Moon, 2005). 

 Another perspective views culture as the social or normative “glue” that serves to 

coordinate action in organizations (e.g., Tichy, 1982). Culture is an expression of shared values, 

social ideals, and beliefs (Louis, 1980). The shared values and belief patterns are manifested in 

such symbols as myths, rituals, stories, and nuanced language. 

 Intensity of culture is also discussed in organizational research. Intensity is the degree to 

which the content(s) is/are emphasized (Rousseau, 1988). Organizational cultures are considered 

to be weak when key values are not intensely shared, but strong when they are shared. (The 

strength of cultures may become important when considering cultural differences across military 

and civilian organizations or cultures across various services.) 

 In summary, organizational researchers define culture by culling from anthropology, 

sociology, intercultural communications, and psychology. They highlight cultural features such 

as learned, shared, functional, reflected in artifacts, and patterned. In addition, they emphasize 

the individual members of a culture, describing culture as a primary source of identity for its 

members (e.g., Chao & Moon, 2005; Louis, 1980; Schein, 1990) and as varying in degrees of 

intensity among the individual members (Rousseau, 1988). 

Summary 

 The definitions of culture from anthropology and sociology, intercultural communication 

and psychology, and organizational research have many common features. One pervasive and 

important feature of culture is that serves as a lens through which one perceives and makes sense 

of the environment (Rousseau, 1988). Thus, multiple cultures provide the cognitions or schemas 

individuals use to understand the world (e.g., Sackmann, 1992). Learning to see the world 

through the cultural lens and eyes of another is a key to success in a multicultural environment, 

and is the essence of multicultural perspective taking. 

 Army leaders must recognize that culture affects how one perceives others and how one 

is perceived by others. As the “silent language” of nonverbal communication (Hall, 1981, 

originally published in 1959), culture is the code that must be cracked in order to work 

7 
effectively in multicultural environments. We suggest that Army leaders need to go one step 

further and be able to predict the behavior of others, and that multicultural perspective taking 

will aid them in doing so. 

Direct, Organizational, and Strategic Levels of Leadership 

 

Astute understanding of culture at the direct, organizational, and strategic levels is 

necessary. Decisions made at each level affect the other levels directly or indirectly. Each level 

requires multicultural perspective taking skills, but the nature or focus of the skills required at 

each level may differ. Below, cultural issues and the need for multicultural perspective taking 

skills at each level are illustrated. 

Direct: Cultural Ignorance Kills 

 Insufficient understanding of the local culture may put civilians and Soldiers at risk. The 

direct level involves a “boots on the ground” perspective, because leaders at this level are 

interacting primarily with peers, host nationals, and to some extent, coalition partners, or NGOs. 

However, at the direct level, cultural misunderstandings may be deadly. For example, McFate 

writes: “The American gesture for stop (arm straight, palm out) means welcome in Iraq, whereas 

the gesture for go means stop to Iraqis (arm straight, palm down). This and similar 

misunderstandings have had deadly consequences” (p. 44). 

 Leaders need to understand the immediate environment where their lives are constantly at 

risk. Leaders trained by the Army may understand how to work in the military culture with 

diverse people from the U.S., and they may understand their mission and the risks associated 

with it. However, they need additional skills to be able to operate in a new foreign environment. 

On a day-to-day basis, these leaders must be able to communicate, engage, and cooperate with 

not-necessarily hospitable others while simultaneously understanding their own roles (which 

may be shifting) within this context. 

 At the direct level, usually, at least initially, much about the host country including its 

topography, customs, history, and language are unfamiliar. Leaders at this level will benefit from 

understanding these features and many other features of the host country including its sociopolitical-historical context. 

 Training of multicultural perspective taking skills that includes general cross-cultural and 

culture-specific foci can aid leaders in understanding the country’s cultural features. Such 

training may include information and skill training related to governing relationships/structure 

(power), concepts and means of face saving (private vs. public information 

sharing/communication), centers of loyalty, and power of commodities (e.g., money). At the 

direct level, some understanding of the languages, religions, and customs including those that 

may be readily apparent and those that may be extremely subtle will be beneficial. 

 Multicultural perspective taking skills are needed that enable leaders to extract and 

interpret relevant cultural information. A strong emphasis on personal and interpersonal skills is 

8 
likely required at the direct level. Negotiations conducted at the tactical level may impact the 

organizational and strategic levels. 

Organizational: Cultural Ignorance Promotes Negative Public Opinion 

 The organizational leaders’ view of the situation is “above” that of the “man on the 

street,” because they must fully understand the actions that are in the best interests of the unit. 

These leaders must take into account cultural differences in order to address a larger plan. In 

addition, these leaders must address multiple “cultures” including not only those internal to their 

respective unit, but also those associated with other organizations and nations. 

 Leaders at the organizational level are responsible for communicating, engaging, and 

facilitating cooperation with groups that are not necessarily hospitable, including host nationals, 

coalition forces, and, to some extent, NGOs. These leaders must motivate others to do the same 

and work with others from culturally dissimilar groups to achieve common goals. 

 At the organizational level, leaders must understand the relevant multiple cultures in the 

environment, including the cultural differences within a country and between the countries 

within a region. This understanding should also incorporate an understanding of how the Army 

can effectively operate within a host country and with its counterparts. Leaders at the 

organizational level must be able to understand cross-cultural issues and be able to translate them 

for others working on the team. This understanding must include both cultural differences and 

similarities. In addition, leaders at the organizational level serve as bridges to the higher levels. 

Therefore, they must be able to convey accurate and relevant cultural information to facilitate 

decision-making at higher levels. 

 Cultural ignorance at the organizational level has many likely implications. For example, 

a Marine in Iraq reported that attempts to influence public opinion using Iraqi media networks 

were not effective because Iraqis disseminate information through gossip. “Instead of tapping 

into their networks, we should have visited their coffee shops” (McFate, p. 44). Ineffective 

actions (with respect to culture) at the organizational level may not only translate into missedopportunities for conveying information and influencing opinion, but more alarmingly, may 

provoke negative public opinion of American forces and/or efforts among the host nationals. 

Decisions and actions at the organizational level of leadership will affect direct and strategic 

leaders. 

 Multicultural perspective taking competencies will aid organizational leaders in 

understanding the dynamics of military power in the context of a host country that may have one 

or more agenda different from that of the U.S. Army. For example, these leaders need to 

understand how to motivate others from various cultures, how to differentiate friendlies from 

enemies and how to interact with them appropriately, and how to train others in these 

distinctions. In addition, at the organizational level, it is essential to understand that different 

organizational cultures may exist within the enemy forces (i.e., insurgency forces) and that 

different organizational cultures may exist within the allied forces (e.g., across agencies, across 

branches of the military, units within a branch of the military). These leaders are often 

developing leadership skills and cultural understanding on the job. Thus, organizational-level 

9 
leaders may benefit from learning techniques that aid them in acquiring cultural acumen during 

on-the-job training. 

Strategic: Cultural Ignorance Leads to Destructive Policies 

 At the strategic level (i.e., the “35,000 foot view”), senior leaders and policy-makers must 

realize the challenges faced by leaders in direct and organizational positions and provide them 

with appropriate resources to meet those challenges. Strategic leaders must also consider the 

broader socio-political and strategic environment in order to appropriately direct those actions. 

 Potential effects of cultural ignorance at the strategic level include destructive policies 

that inadvertently bolster the enemy. Cultural ignorance may result in a failure to anticipate 

enemy strategy and tactics or failure to anticipate the second- and third-order effects of leader 

decisions. Moreover, cultural ignorance may lead to missed opportunities to forge or strengthen 

beneficial alliances. A long term (prospective and retrospective) cultural context must be 

considered in making strategic decisions. 

 Leaders at the strategic level require multicultural perspective taking competencies that 

promote the understanding of foreign operations. They need to know how to motivate people in 

these environments, know the geopolitical interrelationships among relevant units/groups, and 

know how to use military power in the context of host countries and among coalition members 

(especially those that may have agendas differing from those of the U.S.). 

Leadership Development: “Being a leader never stops” 

 “Leadership is influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while 

operating to accomplish the mission and improve the organization (IIR, p. iii, 2005).” The IIR 

noted that junior leaders are being given increasingly higher levels of responsibility including 

planning and executing missions that were formerly the responsibility of senior leaders. In the 

case of company-level leaders, this means that they are interacting more frequently with host 

nationals and with others from various cultures. The increased responsibilities create 

developmental opportunities for leaders at lower levels, but they also require the leaders to 

possess complex skills including multicultural perspective taking skills. One area for research on 

multicultural perspective taking is to develop training sequences that capitalize on these 

opportunities. 

 Although all leaders seemingly need the opportunity to learn about, and ability to 

function effectively in, another culture as quickly as possible, there may be different 

multicultural perspective taking requirements at each leadership level. However, additional 

information is needed in order to make clear recommendations regarding the specific unique 

requirements for each level of leadership. 

10 
Multicultural Perspective taking 

 Successful leadership, particularly with respect to team building, is challenging in a 

multinational context due to ambiguities associated with working with people from other 

cultures. For example, members of Western cultures tend to attribute ambiguous behavior to the 

individual rather than to external factors. In contrast, members of Eastern cultures are less 

inclined to make such attributions (Knowles, Morris, Chiu, & Hong, 2001). These attributional 

tendencies in combination with diverse culturally derived time perspectives create scenarios for 

ineffective collaboration (Saji, 2004). For example, a Westerner will tend to attribute an 

Easterner’s tardiness to dispositional characteristics such as laziness, whereas an Easterner might 

attribute it to external causes such as other obligations. Such an attribution (particularly if it is 

incorrect) will produce misinterpretations likely resulting in frustration, decreased trust, and 

potentially, conflict (e.g., Baron, 1997). The situation will be exacerbated to the extent that 

members are from cultures in which talking about disputes runs counter to cultural norms (Von 

Glinow, Shapiro, & Brett, 2004). 

 The ability to take the perspective of individuals within the context of their culture is 

critical for effective collaboration and coordination with coalition partners and host nationals, 

and for gaining an advantage ever the enemy. Multicultural perspective taking competencies are 

required to understand the world as another individual does by taking into account the cultural 

context in which the individual lives. That is, multicultural perspective taking skills enable 

leaders to see the world through another’s cultural and personal lenses. 

 Cultural influences, as noted above, are complex. Therefore, in order to be able to take 

the perspective of another who is from a different culture, leaders must understand how to 

identify cultural components, understand their influences on individuals, and understand how to 

interpret key cultural information. In addition, leaders must be able to identify and interpret an 

individual’s unique understandings and cultural lenses. 

 The ability to take the perspective of individuals within the context of their culture 

enables Army leaders to understand other cultures at a level finer than the understanding of 

culture afforded by simply using global cultural dimensions alone (e.g., Hofstede, 2001). 

Perspective taking is the active consideration of another’s point of view (Galinsky, 2002) and is a 

skill related to empathy that may play a role in the effectiveness of working with diverse 

individuals. Individual level perspective taking is a cognitive process by which an individual is 

able to identify the thoughts and/or feelings of another. Eisenberg, Wentzel, and Harris (1998) 

defined cognitive perspective taking as “the process in which an individual tries to understand 

another's internal states and thoughts by cognitively placing himself or herself in the other 

person's situation.” 

Perspective taking is similar to such concepts as role taking, role perception, and empathy 

(Davis, 1994; Galinsky, 2002; Sessa, 1996). Perspective taking has been defined as a 

dispositional and as a cognitive process (Davis, 1994). The focus of the present work is on 

cognitive perspective taking, which has been defined as “the process in which one individual 

attempts to imagine the world of another” (Davis, 1994) and as “the cognitive process of 

11 
understanding how another person thinks and feels about the situation and why they are behaving 

as they are” (Sessa, 1996, p. 105). 

 Within social-cognition research, perspective taking is highly related to (or confused 

with) other concepts. Perspective taking should not be confused with schema accuracy. Schema 

accuracy in this context refers to the extent to which the observer’s schema of the actor is 

accurate. Although researchers sometimes assess accuracy and then make assertions about 

perspective taking, Davis (1994) notes that “accuracy in predicting others’ thoughts or emotions 

is not prima facie evidence of successful role taking, nor is inaccuracy necessarily evidence of 

role taking failure.” In other words, one may have an idea about how another thinks, but may not 

be able or willing to put oneself cognitively in the “other’s shoes.” 

 Unlike empathy, individual level perspective taking does not require the individual to 

experience another’s emotions (Duan & Hill, 1996). Individual perspective taking is related to a 

decreased tendency to commit person perception errors (e.g., fundamental attribution error, selfserving bias; Reimer, 2001). High individual perspective taking tends to be reciprocal such that 

those high in this ability are also able to offer information about their positions and feelings, and 

they frame their information in a manner that others can understand and interpret easily (Feffer 

& Suchotliff, 1966; Sermat & Smyth, 1973). 

Multicultural perspective taking competencies enable leaders to take the perspective of 

another within the cultural context. Multicultural perspective taking competencies include the 

abilities to extract, interpret, and understand cultural information, thereby affording the leader 

flexibility in applying cultural lenses. Perhaps most importantly, multicultural perspective taking 

competencies enable leaders to adapt quickly when they encounter individuals or groups from 

unfamiliar or novel cultures. These competencies may also enable leaders to communicate more 

effectively regarding their own culture. Thus, to the extent that Army leaders possess the set of 

multicultural perspective taking competencies their likelihood of success in different cultures 

may increase. 

 Acquiring multicultural perspective taking competencies involves a complex learning 

process. Research in developmental psychology that investigated the development of perspective 

taking and empathy in children (Flavell, 1968; Selman, 1971; Selman, 1977) provides a possible 

framework for training multicultural perspective taking. First, perspective-takers must be able to 

suspend egocentric thought (Gladstein, 1983) by understanding that mental states, including 

thoughts and emotions, exist and that their mental states many not be the same as those of 

another. Although most normal adults have developed the ability to suspend egocentric thought, 

in situations perceived as risky or in situations evoking intense emotion, normal adults find it 

difficult to do so and therefore, are unable to take others’ perspectives (Johnson, 1971). Second, 

perspective-takers must understand that sometimes in order to obtain knowledge about another’s 

mental state, they must exert effort. Third, perspective-takers must develop the ability to obtain 

knowledge through inference, previous experience, or other processes (e.g., nonverbal cues). 

Fourth, perspective-takers must develop the ability to apply their knowledge in specific 

situations (Flavell, 1968). 

12 
 Perspective taking skills can and have been trained in clinical and organizational settings 

(e.g., Davis, Conklin, Smith, & Luce, 1996; Duan & Hill, 1996; Long, Angera, Carter, 

Nakamoto, & Kalso, 1999; Ray & Ray, 1986; Rogers, 1975; Sessa, 1996). Methods used for 

training perspective taking takes many forms. Some common components include emphasizing 

the need to recognize another’s roles or imagining oneself in the other’s situation; practicing 

suspension of one’s own mental states and inferring another’s preferences; focusing on 

situational cues (e.g., nonverbal behavior); and imagining the others’ thoughts and feelings 

(Long et al., 1999; Ray & Ray, 1986; Rogers; 1975; Sessa, 1996). 

 Multicultural perspective taking is complex and involves multiple competencies. 

Multicultural perspective taking competencies, utilized in combination, will increase leaders’ 

cultural understanding and therefore, their ability to interact with and function in another culture. 

These competencies are presented in two sets: fundamental and advanced. 

 Fundamental multicultural perspective taking competencies are those competencies that 

leaders will likely develop for effective functioning as leaders. These competencies are needed 

by leaders in any context. However, some of them overlap with the competencies required for 

multicultural perspective taking. The Army is currently addressing these competencies in 

training, but several specific competency components within this category that have particular 

relevance to multicultural perspective taking are highlighted below. 

 Advanced multicultural perspective taking competencies are those that must be 

developed and utilized in combination with the fundamental competencies. The advanced 

competencies enable leaders to obtain cultural information “on site” and to evaluate and interpret 

it. Below, the competency sets and specific competencies within each set are described. 

Fundamental Competencies to Support Multicultural Perspective taking 

 Fundamental competencies to support multicultural perspective taking are those 

competencies that are relevant to leadership in any context. The Army is already training 

fundamental competencies (Halpin, 2005). However, Army leaders may need additional training 

focused on comprehending the links between these competencies and their usefulness in 

operating in a multicultural environment. 

 Three sets of Fundamental Competencies are discussed below: self-awareness, personal 

and interpersonal, and regional expertise. The purpose of the discussion below is to emphasize 

competencies within these sets that are most essential to multicultural perspective taking. 

Self-Awareness Competencies 

 The Self-awareness set of competencies is associated with leaders gaining an 

understanding of themselves through self-development. Self-development is defined as “The 

ability to achieve continued psychological growth through self-awareness... ” (Organizational 

Research Group, 1998). It includes the ability to develop self-confidence, an awareness of one’s 

strengths and weaknesses, and the ability to balance one’s work and personal lives 

(Organizational Research Group, 1998). Self-development is an essential component for leader 

development (Browning & Van Velsor, 1999; Essens, Vogelaar, Mylle, Blendell, Paris, Halpin, 

13 
& Baranski, 2005). Self-development increases one’s self understanding with respect to all 

aspects of self. 

 Self-awareness is one of the starting points for understanding the culture of others (e.g., 

Hofstede, 2001; Pedersen, 2004). Several areas of self-awareness likely to be closely associated 

with the ability to take perspectives in multicultural contexts include: knowledge of one’s 

strengths and weaknesses, self-confidence with respect to competencies relevant to multicultural 

perspective taking, ability to achieve continued psychological growth, skills related to emotional 

intelligence, knowledge of one’s own cultural values and biases, awareness of one’s 

idiosyncratic biases, and knowledge and understanding of the influence of one’s perspective on 

his/her interactions and perceptions. Self-awareness is also critical to multicultural perspective 

taking because as one is exposed to other cultures, it will require personal growth. Continued 

growth in the area of self-awareness is most important, because self awareness will enable an 

individual to understand fully his or her reactions to the behavior, beliefs, attitudes, and so on of 

another (See Table 1). 

Table 1. 

Self-Awareness Competencies 

Knowledge of one’s own culture and idiosyncratic biases 

Ability to regulate emotions 

Knowledge/understanding of the influence of one’s 

 perspective on his/her interactions and perceptions 

Knowledge of one’s strengths and weaknesses 

Skills to achieve continued psychological growth 

High levels of self-confidence 

Self-regulation 

Skills related to emotional intelligence 

Of the competencies listed in Table 1, perhaps the two most critical self-awareness 

competencies with respect to multicultural perspective taking are (1) knowledge of one’s own 

culture and idiosyncratic biases and (2) the ability to regulate emotions. 

 Knowledge of one’s own culture and idiosyncratic biases will enable leaders to recognize 

that they (and everyone else) understand their internal and external worlds using a cognitive 

structure (schema or personal construct system) that has been and continues to be developed 

based on the leaders’ idiosyncratic experiences and cultural influences (Hofstede, 2001). Gaining 

an understanding of one’s own beliefs, values, and biases, and realizing that the culture in which 

one is embedded is a primary source of them is one step toward being able to develop 

multicultural perspective taking. 

 An important element of this self-awareness competency is the understanding that 

perceptual reality is entirely subjective and that through strong social processes including social 

construction, groups of people (teams, armies, regions, societies, countries, etc.) come to a 

commonly defined subjective reality. This reality may become reified and be perceived as having 

14 
strong influence on the group to the point that it is perceived to be undeniable and unchangeable. 

Individuals in the group may perceive great risks associated with not accepting or with refusing 

to conform to the expectations produced by the socially constructed reality (if they are even able 

to think outside of the socially constructed boundaries). This socially constructed reality is 

culture (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Understanding that his or her own beliefs, values, and so on 

are unconsciously influenced by subjectively defined social constraints will increase one’s 

awareness that this is also true for others. 

 Awareness of their idiosyncratic biases will aid leaders in better understanding their 

reactions to novel stimuli including customs, believes, and thoughts, and in increasing their 

openness to trying to understand other’s worldviews. The knowledge and understanding of the 

influence of one’s perspective on his/her interactions and perceptions are also highly critical to 

multicultural perspective taking. Every leader exists and acts within a cultural context. 

Therefore, this understanding also includes the ability to define one’s self within that cultural 

context. As leaders interact with others, particularly those from diverse cultures, they must be 

aware that others are responding to the leader and to the leader’s culture. Leaders should also 

become astutely aware of their schema for cultural understanding (i.e., they should understand 

the degree of expertise they possess in understanding cultures in general). 

 The ability to balance one’s emotions is another essential self-awareness competency. 

Taking the perspective of another may evoke potent emotional reactions. Empathetic reactions 

are consistent with perspective taking. Empathy involves cognitive and affective components. 

One view of empathy suggests that situational characteristics will determine the degree to which 

the cognitive or affective component is accentuated (e.g., Gladstein, 1983). Although 

intellectual empathy (i.e., cognitive empathetic processes) and empathetic emotions (i.e., 

affective empathetic experiences) are typically viewed as coexisting (Duan & Hill, 1996), other 

research has supported the notion that intellectual empathy and empathetic emotions may have 

independent effects on interpersonal behavior (e.g., Gladstein, 1983). 

 Empathy is an affective response experienced as a result of understanding the emotional 

state of another, which matches or approximates what the other person is experiencing 

(Eisenberg, Wentzel, & Harris, 1998). Empathy may result in other emotional responses 

including sympathy, which is an affective response of sorrow, distress, or concern felt on behalf 

of the target. Sympathetic leaders will not necessarily experience the same emotion as the other, 

but they will experience other-oriented concern (cf. Eisenberg et al., 1998). Clearly, Army 

leaders may gain insight into the other through their experienced empathy, but they must learn to 

control affective empathy to avoid becoming sympathetic to an extent that interferes with their 

ability to accomplish the mission. 

 Empathy may evoke a variety of responses, including assisting the other person (Batson, 

Eklund, Chermot, Hoyt, & Ortiz, 2007), or removing the individual from one’s presence or 

leaving the presence of the individual. The degree of personal distress is a factor that influences 

the behavioral implications of empathy and must be considered (Carlo, Allan, & Buhman, 1999; 

Eisenberg et al., 1998). Strong emotions typically diminish cognitive functioning, therefore, 

Army leaders must learn to regulate or balance their emotional responses as they take the 

perspective of another. 

15 
 Although the self-awareness competencies represent a subset of personal competencies, 

they are particularly salient in multicultural perspective taking and therefore are highlighted in 

the present framework. 

Personal and Interpersonal Competencies 

 The second set of Fundamental Competencies is the set of Personal and Interpersonal 

Competencies. The Army is already addressing many fundamental personal and interpersonal 

competencies related to multicultural perspective taking (Essens et al., 2005; Halpin, 2005). 

 

In Table 2, Personal and Interpersonal competencies related to multicultural perspective 

taking are presented. These competencies are necessary to support the extraction and 

interpretation competencies, and to compare and integrate the acquired information with regional 

expertise and information from the schema for culture. 

 With respect to Personal competencies, Hofstede (2001) noted that inflated egos, low 

personal tolerance for uncertainty, histories of emotional instability, known racism or extreme 

political sympathies inhibit understanding and ability to function in novel cultures. Many 

personal competencies, such as self-management and self-motivation, may contribute to 

multicultural perspective taking. Integrity is essential as leaders attempt to gain information from 

others. Many of the personal competencies clearly require some form of cognitive processing. 

Leaders must be able to learn from experience, engage in continuous learning, and be adaptable 

(Kolb, 1984; Renwick, 2004) in order to increase their multicultural perspective taking ability. 

These competencies are required because as leaders encounter novel cultural situations, they 

must adapt and integrate the new information with existing information. In addition, Army 

leaders must able to maintain high situational awareness, make good situational assessments, and 

make good decisions as they extract cultural information. Managing ambiguity, information, and 

complexity (e.g., Rhinesmith, 1993) are essential skills in taking perspective, because the 

environment will provide too much information. It will be necessary for leaders to first organize 

and sort information, and then identify and eliminate superfluous information. These personal 

skills in combination with regional expertise and a schema for understanding culture will 

promote multicultural perspective taking competence. 

 Perhaps the most important personal competency is critical thinking. Critical thinking is 

the “ability to analyze and apply information logically using a systems perspective to creatively 

define and solve problems” and it involves pattern recognition skills (Organizational Research 

Group, 1998). Because, as noted above, another’s cultural lens must be inferred on the basis of 

complex sets of sometimes extremely subtle information, critical thinking skills are essential. 

 With respect to Interpersonal competencies, competencies associated with leadership, 

maintaining commander intent, providing team maintenance, motivating others, providing and 

maintaining vision, and teamwork are important (Adler, 2002; Conner, 2000; Connerley & 

Pedersen, 2004; Maznevski & DiStefano, 2000; Essens et al., 2005). Conflict resolution, 

interpersonal sensitivity, emotional intelligence, and social awareness competencies enable 

16 
leaders to gain insight into another’s perspective. Openness and trust building (e.g., Spreitzer, 

Shapiro, & Von Glinow, 2002) are essential in gaining information from others. 

 The IIR stated that the Army “should focus on interpersonal skills” and that leaders 

should learn to “treat someone how you would want to be treated or how a person should be 

treated (p. 34).” Treating an individual from another culture with respect was also emphasized. 

Table 2. 

Personal & Interpersonal Competencies 

Personal Competencies Interpersonal Competencies 

Ability to learn through experience Communication skills 

Adaptability Emotional intelligence 

Continuous learning Interpersonal sensitivity 

Creativity Leadership 

Critical thinking Listening 

Decision making Maintaining commander intent 

Directing and controlling Motivate others 

Information management Openness 

Integrity Providing team maintenance 

Managing ambiguity Providing and maintaining vision 

Managing complexity Relationship building 

Motivate self Social awareness 

Planning Teamwork 

Self-management Trust building 

Situational assessment 

Situational awareness 

Most interpersonal competencies are important for multicultural perspective taking. 

However, if training focus must be limited to only a few competencies, then communication 

(including listening skills) and relationship building should be trained. Communication skills 

include the ability to express one’s thoughts so that others can comprehend them accurately, 

listening skills, and the ability to convey meaning using verbal and nonverbal communication 

(Organizational Research Group, 1998). Communication competencies are required to build trust 

and to extract cultural clues. The ability to observe nonverbal communication in others and the 

awareness of one’s own nonverbal communication are also communication competencies. 

 Relationship building competencies include the ability to develop and maintain positive 

relationships with others and the ability to build trust and to mitigate conflict. Relationship 

building also involves social awareness and interpersonal sensitivity (Organizational Research 

Group, 1998). Relationship building competencies are helpful for gaining regional expertise, 

extracting cultural clues, and acquiring information for developing a schema for cultural 

understanding. 

17 
 In summary, of the competencies listed in Table 2, perhaps the three most critical 

personal and interpersonal competencies with respect to multicultural perspective taking are (1) 

critical thinking, (2) communication skills, and (3) relationship building competencies. 

Regional Expertise 

 Culture exists at different levels and in different configurations of social groups, 

including ethnicity, religion, organization, and nation. Specific cultural knowledge associated 

with the cultural target(s) is essential to multicultural perspective taking. Because one of the 

most important cultural targets of Army leaders is national or regional, the specific cultural 

knowledge emphasized in this report is regional expertise. 

 Regional expertise is fundamental to multicultural perspective taking. Regional expertise, 

which includes knowledge about the specific region and target culture, enables leaders to utilize 

their self-awareness and personal and interpersonal competencies effectively. For example, in 

order to treat someone with respect, it is necessary to understand how that individual understands 

respect including the hand gestures, language, dress, facial expressions, behavior, and so on that 

signify respect. Similar knowledge is required to build trusting relationships. In other words, as, 

McFate noted, Soldiers must understand the enemy’s’ “interests, habits, intentions, beliefs, social 

organizations, and political symbols – in other words – their culture (p. 43).” 

 Regional expertise includes knowledge of regional geography, history, politics, social 

structures, religion, customs, values, and language. An understanding of the internal logic of the 

regional culture and of cultural paradoxes (Bird & Osland, 2003) will aid Army leaders. 

 One important consideration is that the “region” of regional expertise must be clear. 

Otherwise, leaders may misunderstand a situation and make critical mistakes. Regional 

knowledge in one area of a country may not apply to another area. Another consideration is to 

ensure that the content of training for regional expertise is current. Cultures change rapidly and 

out of date information may be less helpful than no information at all (cf. McFate, 2005). 

 Knowledge of “helpful stereotypes” (the term “regional prototypes” might be more useful 

in the Army context) may serve to provide leaders with a “quick reference” or “best guess” for 

the culture. These prototypes include a bundle of cultural information that is descriptive rather 

than evaluative and that is modified as experience increases (Bird & Osland, 2003). The caution, 

of course, is to avoid using the prototype mindlessly. 

 Conversely, Army leaders would benefit from knowing how others perceive them. In 

other words, understanding the stereotype that their counterparts have of them would be 

extremely useful. In addition, simply understanding that others are likely to be aware that they 

know little about Army leaders and those others are aware that Army leaders know little about 

them will aid leaders. 

 Typically, regional expertise is aimed at identifying differences between the target region 

(culture) and one’s own region (culture), and knowledge of such differences is important. 

However, another influential component of regional expertise is the knowledge of similarities 

18 
19 

between the regional culture and one’s own culture. One function of knowledge of similarities is 

that it will aid leaders in developing common ground with others. Examples of general 

knowledge areas that contribute to regional expertise are listed in Table 3. 

Table 3. 

Regional Expertise 

Knowledge of regional geography, history, politics, social 

structures, religion, customs, values, language, etc. 

Knowledge of similarities and differences between the regional 

and one’s own cultures 

Skill to use descriptive “helpful prototypes” 

Knowledge of how those in the regional culture perceive the 

United States Army (and other self-relevant cultural targets) 

Summary of Fundamental Competencies 

 The complexity of multicultural perspective taking begins to become apparent in the 

discussion of the three sets of Fundamental Competencies. Competencies such as self-awareness, 

personal and interpersonal, and regional expertise are multifaceted. Each set contains many 

specific KSAs. The above discussion was not meant to be exhaustive. The competencies 

presented above are those considered to be most essential to multicultural perspective taking. 

While the Army is addressing fundamental competencies in training (Halpin, 2005), training 

should also call attention to the essential roles these competencies play in developing 

multicultural perspective taking. 

 In summary, seven fundamental competencies should be emphasized in developing 

multicultural perspective taking. These competencies are defined in Table 4. Two self-awareness 

competencies to develop are (1) knowledge of one’s own culture and idiosyncratic biases and (2) 

the ability to regulate emotions. The three most critical personal and interpersonal competencies 

with respect to multicultural perspective taking are (1) critical thinking, (2) communication 

skills, and (3) relationship building competencies. Two aspects of regional expertise to focus on 

are (1) the knowledge of the region and language and (2) the knowledge of the similarities and 

differences between the regional and one’s own cultures. 
20 

Table 4. Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies: Fundamental Competencies and Definitions 

Definition 

Self-Awareness Technically, a personal competency that includes knowledge and 

knowledge of strengths and weaknesses; ability to reflect on one’and self-regulation 

 Knowledge of own culture and biases Understanding own cultural values and idiosyncratic biases; know

understanding of one’s perspective on his/her interactions and per

place one’s self within a cultural context; understanding that one being within a cultural context 

 Ability to regulate emotions Ability to experience empathy without becoming sympathetic to t

interferes with the ability to accomplish the mission 

Personal and Interpersonal Individual level knowledge, skills, and abilities required to assist 

associate, and work with others 

 Critical thinking Ability to analyze and apply information logically using a system

creatively define and solve problems; involves pattern recognition critical thinking2

 Communication Ability to express one's thoughts so that others can comprehend th

skills; ability to convey meaning and to understand using verbal acommunication2

 Relationship building Ability to develop and maintain positive relationships with others

and to mitigate conflict; involves social awareness and interperso

Regional Expertise Knowledge of specific region, country, or culture 

Knowledge of regional customs, geography, history, language, postructures, values, and so on; skill to use descriptive prototypes 

 Knowledge of region and language 

Knowledge of and understanding of implications of similarities aregional and one’s own cultures; understanding the internal logic regional culture. 

 Knowledge of similarities and  differences between regional and own  cultures 
Advanced Competencies to Support Multicultural Perspective taking 

 Advanced multicultural perspective taking competencies are those that must be 

developed and utilized in combination with the fundamental competencies. Advanced 

competencies do not necessarily need to be developed after fundamental competencies, but are 

considered to be advanced because they are competencies that typically are not explicitly trained. 

However, because Army leaders are increasingly expected to work in multicultural 

environments, these advanced competencies should be incorporated into future training 

programs. 

 The advanced competencies enable leaders to obtain cultural information “on site” and to 

evaluate and interpret it. Advanced competencies in combination with the fundamental 

competencies are associated with being able to extract and interpret another’s understandings 

(schemas) and with ultimately being able to take the other’s perspective. 

 Advanced competencies include three sets of complex competencies. A schema for 

cultural understanding guides the processing and organization of information related to culture. 

Extraction and interpretation competencies are required to elicit, observe, and understand 

cultural clues. These competencies are likely interrelated. The following sections describe the 

most essential competencies within each set. 

Schema for Cultural Understanding 

 A schema for cultural understanding provides leaders with the capability to organize and 

make sense of novel cultural information. In general, schemas are “knowledge structures that 

guide the comprehender’s interpretations, inferences, expectations, and attention” (Graesser & 

Nakamura, 1982, p. 60). Thus, cognition is organized and it is this structured knowledge that 

enables individuals to understand, interpret, and give meaning to stimuli (Rumelhart, 1980). 

Schemas serve to develop meanings and interpretations regarding any content domain. Schemas 

are particularly useful for interpreting ambiguous stimuli (Rumelhart, 1980), because essentially, 

schemas enable individuals to make sense of their experiences. Not only do schemas aid in 

sensemaking, they also influence the perception and recall of subsequent experiences. By 

affecting attention, encoding, and recall, schemas influence information processing. Schemas 

may contain information related to a specific domain, be interrelated, represent knowledge at all 

levels of abstraction, and influence perception and memory (Rumelhart, 1980). They are formed 

through direct or indirect experience (e.g., through interaction and communications with others). 

Once a schema is formed, new experiences or information that are not at odds with the existing 

schema may simply be added to it through the process of accretion. In addition, schemas are 

dynamic and may be adapted. Novel experiences for which existing schemas are not completely 

sufficient provide opportunities for the elaboration of an existing schema (e.g., tuning). If such 

experiences are radically different from existing schemas then cognitive restructuring may occur 

and a completely new schema may develop (Rumelhart, 1980). 

 Expert schemas increase an individual’s ability to adapt to novel situations. Expert 

schemas enable experts to acquire new knowledge more easily and quickly than novices, because 

experts can understand and retain new information by linking it to their existing schemas 

21 
(Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1986). The schemas of experts can be characterized as deep and 

multileveled, with many connections between and within levels. Novices, in contrast, develop 

shallow schemas consisting of many details connected to a few general ideas. 

 In addition, experts have learned solutions to a wide variety of problems in the 

knowledge domain. Upon recognition of the problem, they can, with little effort, retrieve and 

apply a solution (Van Lehn, 1989). Thus, experts have the advantage of achieving solutions to 

problems quickly. Experts typically represent problems in terms of general, abstract principles, 

although novices categorize problems based upon concrete surface features (Borko & 

Livingston, 1989; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982; Hillerband & Claiborn, 1990). An expert's 

recognition of the underlying principles often aids in reaching a correct solution. Because of their 

in-depth knowledge of the domain, experts can use efficient problem-solving strategies. For 

example, experts develop rules that allow them to engage in more forward search, a strategy that 

reduces strain on working memory and lessens the chance of making errors. 

 Army leaders must develop expert schemas for cultural understanding. Because schemas 

guide perception, one purpose of a schema for cultural understanding is to increase leaders’ 

ability to extract and interpret cultural influences in novel situations. The more sophisticated 

(expert) and broad leaders’ understandings of how to understand culture and cultural influences, 

the more adaptable and effective leaders will be. An expert schema for cultural understanding 

will increase the likelihood that leaders will perceive observable, including the most subtle and 

obscure, cultural clues (e.g., cultural artifacts). The schema for cultural understanding will also 

influence the interpretation of the cultural clues. For example, an expert schema will provide 

general categories to consider in the interpretation process. Schemas will provide a structure for 

organizing the cultural information. 

 Expert schemas from cultural understanding will include many types of knowledge (see 

Table 5 for examples.) Three components of a schema for cultural understanding may be of 

primary importance. One primary component is the understanding of cultural impact, which 

involves understanding that individuals exist simultaneously in multiple cultures and that these 

cultures will be influencing individuals’ identity, thoughts, and behavior. An understanding of 

cultural impact will also include the knowledge that others have a view of one’s own culture and 

some knowledge of what that view is. Perhaps most importantly, an expert understanding of the 

impact of culture will contain knowledge that variance exists within cultures and explicit 

recognition that similarities as well as differences exist across cultures (e.g., Hofstede, 2001; 

Pedersen, 2004). 

 Another important component of an expert schema for cultural understanding is the 

understanding of cultural identifiers, which involve knowledge that cultural information is 

embedded in artifacts, beliefs, values, assumptions (e.g., physical settings, stories, symbols, 

heroes, rituals, jargon/language, and social structure). In other words, leaders need to understand 

where cultural information and clues are embedded. 

 Understanding of cultural barriers is also an essential component of a schema for cultural 

understanding. This understanding includes the knowledge that cultural information is tacit and 

subtle. Leaders must understand that important cultural clues exist in what is and what is not 

22 
said, seen, heard, or done. Others from different cultures experience unverbalized self-talk, and it 

is critical to “hear” what someone is thinking but not saying. Furthermore, cultural barriers exist, 

in part, because some cultural information is so deeply assimilated that it exists in the 

subconscious. In addition, leaders must grasp that trust is a major cultural barrier and that trust 

and other barriers are expressed and understood differently in different cultures. 

 Other examples of knowledge that should be included in a schema for understanding 

culture are knowledge related to understanding that culture affects perceptions of reality 

(including one’s own) and actually serves to “blind” one from fully deciphering and 

understanding another’s culture. This understanding is clearly related to the fundamental 

competencies of self-awareness, particularly with respect to understanding one’s own cultural 

biases (e.g., Hofstede, 2001; Pedersen, 2004). 

 A schema for understanding culture should contain the knowledge that culture influences 

verbal and nonverbal communication, and that it influences the expression of respect, saving 

face, trust, and other interpersonal variables, many of which will affect relationship building 

 Schema for cultural understanding may also include knowledge of macro-level features 

of national cultures. Understanding various differentiating national value profiles such as those 

articulated by Hofstede (2001; 1980), Schwartz (1992), Trompenaars (1994), and House (2004) 

may aid Army leaders in gaining an initial understanding of cultural differences. One caution is 

that relying exclusively on macro cultural features may limit multicultural perspective taking, 

because nationality may serve as a basis for stereotyping rather than for understanding, and 

because nationality represents only one cultural target of which there may be many. However, 

these models provide frameworks for perceiving and organizing differences between cultures. As 

mentioned above, an expert schema for cultural understanding would recognize similarities and 

differences. 

 An expert schema for cultural understanding should also include information regarding 

respect for each person’s unique cultural experience with the recognition and acceptance that 

others’ ways of viewing their internal and external worlds are valid. This does not mean that 

leaders should value another’s way of thinking. Leaders must recognize that culture, indeed 

reality, is subjective and socially constructed, while simultaneously appreciating that subjective 

realities become reified and serve as potent forces guiding and restricting behavior (Berger & 

Luckmann, 1966). 

 Moreover, a schema for understanding culture should include an understanding that 

others have developed an understanding of one’s own culture or are also trying to understand 

one’s own culture (Pedersen, 2004). In an antagonistic environment, cultural ignorance may be 

used as a weapon. 

 In summary, of the competencies listed in Table 5, perhaps the three most essential 

elements of a schema for cultural understanding with respect to multicultural perspective taking 

are (1) understanding of cultural impact, (2) understanding of cultural identifiers, and (3) 

understanding of cultural barriers. However, this is a preliminary assessment, and additional 

research is required to identify the contents of an expert schema on culture. Schema data 

23 
provided by cultural experts would be particularly informative in identifying the schema content 

to be trained. 

Table 5. 

Schema for Understanding Culture 

Physical settings 

Stories, symbols, heroes, rituals, jargon/language, etc. 

Social structure and relationships 

Artifacts, beliefs, values, assumptions 

Similarities and differences across cultures 

People existing in multiple cultures simultaneously 

Verbal and nonverbal communication 

Trust 

Interrelationships among culture, identity, behavior 

Subconscious responses 

Each person’s uniqueness 

What is not seen, said, done, or heard 

Hearing what someone is thinking but not saying 

Disagreements within cultures 

Identifying and overcoming barriers to inter-cultural communication 

Understanding how others view one’s own culture 

Intercultural communication 

Skills for entering new cultures 

Cultural components and dimensions (e.g., values, time orientation) 

Cultural barriers 

Cultural identifiers 

 Cultural impact 

Extraction Competencies 

 Cultural information is embedded in cultural artifacts including symbols, stories, 

nonverbal behavior, a group’s priorities, and the way in which people disagree (and over what 

they disagree – i.e., the controversial issues). These are clues to understanding the culture and the 

individuals’ world-view. Multicultural perspective taking requires that leaders are able to extract 

these clues. 

 Extraction competencies include the ability to recognize and eliminate or minimize 

cultural barriers. This competency must be engaged in order to use the ability to “hear” what 

someone is thinking but not saying, and to use unobtrusive measures to collect cultural data. 

Extraction competencies yield the cultural clues. 

24 
 Extraction competencies include the abilities to observe, elicit, and mine cultural clues 

and cues. Surface differences and similarities between languages, religions, and customs may be 

readily apparent, but a leader with a well-developed schema for understanding culture will 

realize that subtle, underlying, implicit differences and similarities may also exist. Extraction 

competencies will enable leaders to extract this meaningful cultural information from limited 

data. The data collection techniques shown in Table 6 are designed to elicit interpretable cultural 

information. Leaders must be able to use data collection techniques to extract relevant cultural 

information and accurately assess its validity . 

Table 6. 

Data Collection Techniques 

Anthropological techniques 

Ethnographic techniques 

Ethnoscience/cognitive anthropology techniques 

Phenomenological techniques 

Sensemaking 

Perspective taking behaviors and cognitions 

Social perspective taking behaviors and cognitions 

Tactical questioning 

 Anthropologists conduct cultural audits using many extraction techniques including 

surveys, participatory action research, rapid ethnographic assessment, needs assessment, social 

impact assessment, focus group research, social network analysis, ego-centered networks, and 

specialized networks. In addition, anthropologists focus on tacit knowledge management 

(Gwynne, 2003). More recently, cognitive anthropologists have “new ethnography,” which is “a 

set of field techniques designed to produce an understanding of cultural categories and 

distinctions meaningful to the members of a given society” (p. 332, Gwynne, 2003). The new 

ethnography is based on the idea that culture influences how people categorize everything and 

that these categories may be expressed by language. One such technique is to have people make 

lists. Although this technique is somewhat impractical in a military context, a keen ear or eye 

may detect relevant categorical information simply by listening and observing carefully. 

 Ethnoscience and cognitive anthropology techniques are very similar. Sample techniques 

include: collecting native terms, formulating culturally appropriate questions, identifying 

cultural/semantic domains and domain members, discovering taxonomic structures, selecting 

contrast sets for analysis, looking for attributes, and constructing a paradigm (Sidky, 2004). 

 The data collection and interpretation approach typically used by anthropologists 

produces ethnography. Ethnography is defined as “data about a particular culture, compiled, 

analyzed, digested, and written down” (p. 333; Gwynne, 2003). Ethnographic techniques are 

methods for extracting cultural information including how to enter a new culture, how to conduct 

interviews and participant observation, how to apply projective techniques, how to observe 

systematically, how to use third party information and documents, and how to glean information 

from conversations. Ethnographic techniques also address how to analyze the data collected by 

25 
thinking, triangulating, and identifying patterns using such devices as key events, maps, 

flowcharts, organizational charts, matrices, content analysis, and statistics. The extraction 

competencies of ethnography are multicultural perspective taking competencies. 

Pedersen (2004) articulated many skills required for multicultural learning including 

interviewing, questioning, comparing, identifying assumptions, using feedback, listening, 

organizing facts, describing feelings, reporting, and summarizing. Perhaps one of the most 

essential abilities when extracting cultural information is to defer judgment and to remain openminded (Pedersen, 2004). All relevant data must be respected. This issue highlights how selfawareness competencies are important with respect to extraction competencies. 

 One goal of phenomenological study is to understand the other’s meanings 

(understandings). Phenomenological study is based on the notion that reality (including ones’ 

self) is subjectively defined. According to Stablien (2002), “phenomenology is the study of 

human experience” (p. 2). Multicultural perspective taking includes understanding the other as 

the other understands himself or herself; therefore, phenomenological study is relevant. 

Phenomenological data collection involves sound description (e.g., based on observations, 

written work, statements) in order to gain an overall impression. Descriptions are analyzed by 

breaking them down into meaning units while retaining the informant’s language. The meaning 

units are used to extract the other’s meaning in terms of themes. The leader would interpret the 

themes using his/her language and then resynthesize it into a “situated description.” That is, the 

leader would formulate an understanding of other’s understanding of the given situation. (Theme 

extraction is clearly an extraction competency, and interpretation and resynthesis are 

interpretation competencies. This is an example of the close association of these competency 

sets.) 

 Sensemaking is a constructive process of creating meaning (Sondak, 2002). It is a process 

that involves attending to language. It is social, retrospective, enactive, selective, continuous and 

unavoidable. Much of sensemaking is associated with labeling and assimilating new information 

(Weick, 1995). Typically, sensemaking is a social process and requires interaction, input, and 

validation from others. In addition, people’s actions tend to create the very environment they 

attempt to make sense of and sense is made by acting and observing ones’ own behaviors. For 

humans, who encounter and engage in novel behavior and environments, sensemaking is a 

continuous and unavoidable experience (Sondak). Therefore, leaders’ levels of self-awareness 

will affect their sensemaking processes. Furthermore, within the context of multicultural 

perspective taking, leaders making sense from another’s perspective will have an increased 

understanding of the others’ sense of identity. 

 Tactical questioning and interrogation are methods for extracting information. These 

methods are typically employed in difficult or hostile interpersonal situations (e.g., the target 

may be inclined to be less than totally honest). Nevertheless, these methods may have something 

to offer leaders who are attempting to extract cultural information. Techniques such as using 

language that the other uses and understands, treating the other with respect, attempting to think 

as one who is in the other’s situation might think, considering what one who is in the other’s 

situation might do, feel, or say, and remembering that there is good in most people (Inbau, Reid, 

& Buckley, 1986) will yield cultural information. The emphasis on interpreting and observing 

26 
nonverbal behavior is relevant to extraction competencies. Also, the technique of asking baiting 

questions and asking why others might be inclined to behave in particular manners are relevant 

techniques (Inbau et al.). These methods (and others discussed below) illustrate multicultural 

perspective taking as an iterative process. Extracted information will be interpreted. The 

interpretations will contribute to the schema for understanding culture and regional expertise, 

which will then inform extraction. Thus, some extraction techniques will be differentially 

effective in various situations depending, in part, on the degree of the leader’s expertise. 

 Specific behaviors and cognitions associated with social or ethnic perspective taking 

(Quintana, 1994) are important extraction competencies. One set of social perspective taking 

skills facilitates one’s own perspective taking and another set may help others to take 

perspective. Skills that elicit information about the other’s point of view enhance perspective 

taking. These skills include role reversal techniques and direct questioning. Role reversal 

requires the leader and the other to provide each other’s position, rationale, and feelings in an 

accurate and sincere manner (Johnson, 1971). Then, they provide feedback to each other. Role 

reversal skills increase the quality and quantity of accurate information available to leaders about 

the other and enable the leader to provide the other with accurate information. A leader using 

direct questioning would simply direct questions to the other regarding the processes and 

feelings (Falk & Johnson, 1977). Another social perspective taking behavior is self-disclosure, 

which aids the other to develop an accurate understanding of the leader. High perspective taking 

is associated with high self-disclosure of information about one’s stance on issues, feelings, and 

thoughts. It is also associated with framing information such that the other may readily 

understand it (e.g., Feffer & Suchotliff, 1966). It should be noted that the other typically 

reciprocates disclosure, thus it serves to increase perspective taking for both parties (Sermat & 

Smyth, 1973). 

 

 Relationship building lays a foundation for perspective taking behaviors. Communicating 

interest in the other and creating a psychologically safe environment for disclosure increases the 

likelihood of acquiring meaningful information regarding another’s perspective (Falk & Johnson, 

1977; Johnson, 1971). This is an example of the intricate relationships among personal and 

interpersonal competencies with the extraction competencies. 

 Although many of the extraction techniques described above may appear to be 

impractical in combat situations, they may be readily applicable in other situations in which 

Army leaders work. In addition, aspects of the techniques may be adaptable to various situations. 

Regardless of the techniques used, Hofstede’s (1991) cautions regarding collection of cultural 

data should be heeded when utilizing extraction competencies. He suggested that researchers (in 

this case, leaders) should remain descriptive and nonjudgmental, collect verifiable data (maintain 

objectivity), and resist stereotyping. 

 Extraction competencies are listed in Table 7. Three primary extraction competencies are 

the focus here. First, the ability to elicit and detect cultural information requires effective 

observation, communication, questioning and interviewing skills. Leaders must use multiple 

sources of cultural information (e.g., informants, media). Second, the ability to suspend judgment 

( and to minimize one’s own biases and to use such techniques as role reversal, paraphrasing, 

direct questioning, and egocentrism reduction). Third, the ability to identify patterns and 

27 
triangulate involves the ability to systematically and reliably identify and comprehend 

consistencies, patterns, and relationships among pieces of cultural information. In addition, 

leaders must be able to identify similarities, common ground, mutual knowledge, and 

differences. 

 In summary, the three primary extraction competencies are (1) ability to elicit and detect 

cultural information, (2) the ability to suspend judgment, and (3) the ability to identify patterns 

and triangulate. 

Table 7. 

Extraction Competencies 

Skills and abilities for eliciting and detecting cultural information: 

 Observing 

 Listening 

 Communicating 

 Tactical questioning 

 Culturally appropriate interviewing 

 Using informants 

 Using second source data (e.g., newspapers, media) 

 Selecting contrast sets 

 Collecting data unobtrusively 

Skill in using such techniques as: 

 Role reversal 

 Paraphrasing 

 Direct questioning 

 Egocentrism-reduction 

Ability to: 

 Identify patterns and priorities 

 Triangulate information 

 Identify domain members 

 Discover taxonomic structures 

 Remain nonjudgmental and “objective” 

 Disagree with someone from another culture 

 Uncover controversial issues 

 Extract the unspoken thoughts 

 Decrease cultural barriers 

Interpretation Competencies 

The various definitions of culture presented above demonstrate the complexity of the 

phenomenon, but cognition is a core of most definitions. For example, culture is considered to 

include shared beliefs, thinking styles, a set of cognitions (Cooke & Rousseau, 1988), layers of 

cognition (Schein, 1985), the correct way to think, shared meanings (Rentsch, 1990; Schein, 

1985), cognitive frames of reference (Louis, 1980), patterned ways of thinking (Kluckhohn, 

28 
1951), programming of the mind (Hofstede, 1980), and ideas, beliefs, and knowledge 

(Fetterman, 1989). Cognition provides the cultural lens with acuity. In this regard, culture is 

conceptualized, in part, as a schema (organized knowledge structure) that enables interpretation 

and understanding of artifacts. 

 

Therefore, leaders must be able to interpret the extracted cultural clues as the other 

interprets them. Leaders must interpret the clues from the perspective of individuals within the 

context of the individuals’ cultures (and schemas). The leaders will use extracted information, 

their schema for understanding culture, their regional expertise, their self-awareness 

competencies, and their critical thinking (a personal competency) in combination as they apply 

interpretation competencies. 

Interpretation competencies are those competencies that are required to understand the 

extracted cultural information as a member of the culture would (see Table 8.) Essentially, 

interpretation competencies enable the leader to reveal the other’s schema for making sense of or 

attributing meaning to cultural artifacts. These competencies include the ability to synthesize and 

integrate extracted information in order to identify similarities/common ground/mutual 

knowledge and to identify differences (Quintana, 1994). Typically, there will be gaps in the 

extracted information. Therefore, leaders must be capable of imputing information in order to fill 

in the missing information. 

 Perhaps one of the most important interpretation competencies is the ability to reconstruct 

the world cognitively. That is, leaders must be able to suspend their own ways of thinking and 

use, at least momentarily, the other’s way of thinking. Leaders must possess the ability to 

understand “objective” data from multiple subjective perspectives. Army leaders must not only 

recognize and accept subjective understanding, but also must be able to think in ways different 

from how they typically think. In addition, cognitive reconstruction requires the ability to shift 

from one mental reconstruction to another. 

Table 8. 

Interpretation Competencies 

Synthesize and integrate extracted information 

Coordinate and integrate perspectives 

Identify similarities/common ground/mutual knowledge 

Identify differences 

Cognitively reconstruct the world 

Role taking 

Develop accurate schemas of individual, group, organization, region, 

 understandings, expectations, beliefs, emotions, etc. 

Understand the relationships between culture, identity, and behavior 

Visualize 

Defer judgment 

Retain objectivity 

29 
30 

 Role taking is considered a social perspective taking skill and requires “the ability to infer 

another’s capabilities, attributes, expectations, feelings, and potential reactions” (Selman, 1971, 

p. 1722). In taking another’s role, leaders must be able to differentiate their own perspective 

from that of the other. Furthermore, they must be able to cognitively assess the emotional and 

cognitive elements of the other’s perspective. 

 Another important interpretation competency is the ability to visualize. Interpreting 

cultural clues from the perspective of another requires the ability to imagine and reflect. This 

ability enables leaders to maintain cognitive flexibility in order to mentally evaluate alternative 

interpretations. The ability to visualize includes the ability to think creatively, to visualize, and to 

impute missing information, and requires both openness to experience and tolerance for 

ambiguity. 

 The culminating interpretation competency is the ability to integrate and ascertain 

meaning. This is a highly complex competency that involves the ability to ascertain meaning 

from synthesizing, coordinating, and integrating extracted information. This ability requires a 

high degree of critical thinking 

 In summary, three primary interpretation competencies are the: (1) ability to cognitively 

reconstruct, (2) ability to visualize, and (3) ability to integrate and ascertain meaning. 

Summary of Advanced Competencies 

 The complexity of multicultural perspective taking becomes apparent in the discussion of 

the three sets of Advanced Competencies. A schema for cultural understanding, extraction 

competencies, and interpretation competencies are each multifaceted. An expert schema for 

cultural understanding involves intricate organization of a large knowledge set. Extraction and 

interpretation competency sets each contain many specific competencies. The discussion of the 

advanced competencies was not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to highlight the primary 

competencies most essential to multicultural perspective taking. The advanced competencies 

represent a conceptualization of new sets of competencies that the Army should consider 

training. The training should include articulation of the essential roles these competencies play in 

developing multicultural perspective taking. In addition, training should draw attention to the 

relationships among the fundamental and advanced competencies in multicultural perspective 

taking. 

 In summary, nine advanced competency components should be emphasized in 

developing multicultural perspective taking. These competencies are defined in Table 9. Three 

components of schema for cultural understanding to develop are: (1) understanding of cultural 

impact, (2) understanding of cultural identifiers, and (3) understanding of cultural barriers. The 

three most critical extraction competencies with respect to multicultural perspective taking are: 

(1) the ability to elicit and detect cultural information, (2) the ability to suspend judgment, and 

(3) the ability to identify patterns and triangulate. Three principal interpretation competencies 

are: (1) the ability to reconstruct cognitively, (2) the ability to visualize, and (3) the ability to 

integrate and ascertain meaning. 
31 

Table 9. Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies: Advanced Competencies and Definitions Sets of Advanced Competencies and Primary Competencies in Each Set 

Definition 

Schema for Understanding Culture Capability to organize and make sense of novel cultural informatio Understanding of cultural impact 

Understanding of simultaneous multiple cultures; the relationships behavior, thoughts; how others’ view one’s own culture; variance eand similarities exist across cultures 

 Understanding of cultural identifiers 

Understanding that cultural information is embedded in artifacts, bassumptions (e.g., physical settings, stories, symbols, rituals, langustructure); awareness of indicators that confirm or counter previou

 Understanding of cultural barriers 

Understanding that cultural information is tacit and subtle and exisnot seen, said, heard, or done; exists in subconscious; understandinconcepts are expressed and understood differently in different cultu

Extraction Ability to observe, elicit, and mine cultural clues and cues.  Ability to suspend judgment 

Ability to minimize one’s own biases; ability to reflect on other’s paccurately extract other’s perspective (role reversal, paraphrasing, egocentrism reduction); ability to identify what another is attendin

 Ability to elicit and detect cultural  information 

Observation, communication, questioning and interviewing skills; of cultural information (e.g., informants, media) 

 Ability to identify patterns and  triangulate 

Ability to systematically and reliably identify and comprehend conrelationships among pieces of cultural information; ability to identground/mutual knowledge and differences 

Interpretation Ability to understand extracted cultural information as a member o Ability to integrate and ascertain  meaning 

Ability to ascertain meaning from synthesizing, coordinating, and information 

Ability to imagine and reflect, to think creatively, to visualize, and 

information. (Requires openness to experience, tolerance for ambig

 Ability to visualize 

Ability to understand “objective” data from multiple subjective pershift from one reconstruction to another. 

 Ability to cognitively reconstruct 
Framework of Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies 

 The complex nature of multicultural perspective taking is evident in the review of the 

fundamental and advanced competency sets. Although some of the linkages among the 

competencies were presented above, a preliminary framework of multicultural perspective taking 

and a description of the influences among the competencies are presented in this section. 

 The goal of multicultural perspective taking is to function effectively within a crosscultural environment. As shown in Figure 1, extraction and interpretation competencies, 

advanced competencies, are the core of the multicultural perspective taking framework. The 

arrow indicates that extraction of cultural information is necessary for the interpretation of 

cultural information. Interpretation is also directly influenced by the leader’s regional expertise 

and schema for understanding culture. Although reciprocal relationships may exist among the 

competencies identified, but the figure primarily indicates directions of likely interest for the 

development of cross-cultural perspective taking. 

 

 Regional expertise is a specialized portion of the schema for understanding culture. 

Although schema for understanding culture applies to all cultures, regional expertise includes a 

specific schema containing organized knowledge regarding the region (or target culture). These 

two schemas will be intricately related (i.e., a regional expertise schema may be nested in the 

schema for understanding culture). Therefore, increased development in one will most likely 

lead to increased development of the other. Regional expertise and a well-developed schema for 

cultural understanding influence interpretation. Indeed, one form of interpretation is to compare 

cultural information to cultural knowledge contained in the schema for cultural understanding 

and regional expertise. The product of this process may be subjected to visualization, integration, 

and cognitive reconstruction (i.e., interpretation competencies) yielding a refined interpretation 

of cultural information. This interpretation may iterate through the schemas and interpretation 

competencies until an accurate interpretation is obtained. This process will serve to strengthen 

interpretation competencies and to develop regional expertise and the schema for understanding 

culture. The latter two will enhance the leader’s ability to extract cultural information. 

 A well-developed schema for understanding culture and a high degree of regional 

expertise will support leaders’ ability to elicit and detect cultural information, because they offer 

a sophisticated understanding of what to elicit and therefore enable leaders to attend to (and to 

detect) and utilize relevant cultural information. In addition, leaders’ ability to identify patterns 

and to triangulate will be enhanced to the extent that they possess well-developed schemas for 

understanding culture and a high degree of regional expertise. 

32 
Extraction 

Self-Awareness 

Personal & Interpersonal 

 Skills 

Regional Expertise

Schema for 

Understanding Culture

Interpretation 

Take-perspective 

using another’s 

cultural & personal 

lenses 

Function effectively 

within the cultural environment 

Figure 1. Primary Elements of a Framework of Multicultural Perspective taking 

Competencies 

Extraction competencies are supported by personal and interpersonal competencies and 

self-awareness competencies. Communication skills, relationship building skills, and critical 

thinking (personal and interpersonal competencies) will aid leaders as they reflect on another’s 

perspective, elicit and detect cultural information, and identify patterns and triangulate cultural 

information (i.e., extraction competencies). Self-awareness enables leaders to avoid becoming 

overly influenced or blinded by their own cultural and idiosyncratic biases as they seek to extract 

cultural information. Emotions out of balance will also interfere with extraction; therefore, 

leaders must possess the ability to regulate emotions in order to extract cultural information 

effectively 

 Although any experience may potentially improve one’s self-awareness competencies, 

this is not reflected in Figure 1. However, self-awareness competencies and many personal and 

interpersonal competencies will likely have reciprocal relationships. This relationship is probably 

strongest for the interpersonal competencies, because self-awareness is considered essential for 

developing interpersonal skills (Browning & Van Velsor, 1999) and some personal competencies 

(e.g., self-regulation). 

 One relationship not shown in Figure 1 is the potential moderating effect of the selfawareness competencies on the relationship between extraction competencies and personal and 

33 
interpersonal competencies. It is likely that the extent to which one’s personal and interpersonal 

competencies may be maximally effective in supporting extraction competencies is dependent 

upon the development of one’s self-awareness competencies. 

Self-awareness competencies will be related to interpretation competencies. For example, 

lack of self-awareness regarding one’s biases toward people from a particular country (i.e., 

stereotypes) may cause a leader to misinterpret the behavior of a coalition partner from that 

country. In addition, critical thinking, a personal competency, is also essential to the effective 

utilization of interpretation competencies. 

 Again, this model is preliminary, but it offers a starting point for understanding 

multicultural perspective taking skills. Additional data obtained from military and nonmilitary 

individuals who have experience working in cultures other than their own and who have 

experience taking the perspective of others from multiple cultures will augment the information 

obtained from literature (and from the authors’ personal experiences) on which the model is 

based. 

Influences among Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies 

 The framework presented here is intended to highlight some of the linkages among the 

multicultural perspective taking competencies. The relationships among these variables may be 

somewhat more complex than presented in Figure 1. Another depiction of the interrelationships 

among the competencies is presented in Table 10. An “x” indicates that the competency listed in 

the row influences the competencies in the category reflected in the column. Again, this 

depiction is not intended to show all of the relationships, but rather to highlight the competencies 

most closely related to other competency sets. Although this depiction is general, it does 

illuminate the competencies that are closely related to other competency categories suggesting 

that they might be the focus of early training efforts. 

 Scanning Table 10, it becomes apparent that knowledge of one’s own culture and biases, 

a self-awareness competency, is an important competency because it is expected to be related to 

all of the other competency sets. This type of self knowledge will enable leaders to better 

develop and utilize their personal and interpersonal skills, it will minimize bias in understanding 

and using regional expertise and a schema for cultural understanding, and it will enable leaders 

to use their extraction and interpretation competencies effectively. Similarly, critical thinking is a 

crucial personal competency that is related to all other competency sets. Because all of the 

competencies have a cognitive orientation, the notion that critical thinking is related to all other 

competency sets is no surprise. 

 Other important competencies are both of the regional expertise competencies, which are 

related to four competency sets. Also related to four competency sets are understanding cultural 

impact and understanding cultural barriers, which are components of schema for cultural 

understanding. Although these competencies and regional expertise may actually influence selfawareness, their relationships to the other competencies are considered more important for 

multicultural perspective taking. An extraction competency, the ability to suspend judgment, and 

an interpretation competency, ability to cognitively reconstruct, are also related to four 

34 
35 

competency sets. Again, although they may be related to regional expertise, the other 

relationships may be more significant for multicultural perspective taking. 

The ability to balance emotions (a self-awareness competency) is associated with three 

sets of competencies, personal and interpersonal, extraction, and interpretation. Also associated 

with three other competency sets is understanding cultural identifiers (schema for cultural 

understanding). Additionally, it is likely to be related to regional expertise, extraction 

competencies, and interpretation competencies. The ability to visualize, an interpretation 

competency, is expected to be connected to self-awareness, personal and interpersonal 

competencies, schema for cultural understanding, and extraction competencies. 

 Reviewing the table by evaluating the information in the columns reveals that the 

advanced competencies are perhaps the most complex, because they are hypothesized to be 

associated with more competencies from other sets. For example, the set of extraction 

competencies is expected to be linked to all of the competencies in the other sets. The set of 

interpretation competencies and schema for understanding culture are expected to be associated 

with eleven and nine, respectively of the 13 competencies from the other sets. In contrast, the 

fundamental competencies of self-awareness and regional expertise are expected to be associated 

with five competencies from the other sets. The personal and interpersonal competency set, 

which is a large set, is expected to be linked to eight other competencies. 
Table 10. 

Influences among Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies 

Fundamental Competencies Advanced C

Primary Competencies within SelfAwareness Personal and Interpersonal Regional Expertise Schema for Understanding 

Culture 

Competency Categories ExtraSelf-Awareness  Knowledge of own culture and biases x x x  Ability to balance emotions x Personal and Interpersonal  Communication skills  Relationship building competencies  Critical thinking x x x Regional Expertise  Knowledge of region and language x x  Knowledge of similarities and differences between regional and own cultures 

x x 

Schema for Understanding Culture  Understanding of cultural impact x x  Understanding of cultural identifiers x  Understanding of cultural barriers x x Extraction  Ability to suspend judgment x x x  Ability to elicit and detect cultural information 

x 

 Ability to identify patterns and triangulate 

x 

36 
37 

Interpretation  Ability to integrate and ascertain meaning 

x 

 Ability to visualize x x  Ability to cognitively reconstruct x x x Note: An “x” indicates that the competency listed in the row will influence the competencies in the category in th
Summary of Multicultural Perspective taking Competencies 

 The knowledge of macro-level features of national cultures may increase of cultural 

awareness and understanding by differentiating national value profiles. Frameworks such as 

those developed by Hofstede (1980), Schwartz (1992), and Trompenaars (1994) may be 

beneficial in gaining an initial understanding of cultural differences. However, relying 

exclusively on macro cultural features may be limiting, because nationality may serve as a basis 

for stereotyping rather than for understanding. 

The ability to extract meaningful cultural information from observable data is critical for 

Army leaders to gain a deeper and more functional understanding of their cultural environments 

than that afforded by knowledge of cultural profiles. Meaning is embedded in cultural artifacts in 

the forms of beliefs, values, and assumptions (Schein, 1992). Army leaders need to develop skills 

in extracting meaningful, but tacit, cultural information from limited available data. 

 For Army leaders, the ability to take the perspective of individuals within the context of 

their culture is critical for effective collaboration and coordination with coalition partners and 

host nationals. Leaders with highly developed multicultural perspective taking competencies are 

able to see the world through another’s cultural lens. The ability to take the perspective of 

individuals within the context of their culture enables Army leaders to function effectively within 

the culture and in interactions with others. 

 Competencies associated with multicultural perspective taking may be categorized in two 

major sets, fundamental and advanced competencies. The competencies across sets are proposed 

to be related to one another as represented in Figure 1 and Table 10. These representations of the 

linkages should be useful in planning and developing training programs for multicultural 

perspective taking. In addition, all competencies have a cognitive orientation and all of them are 

relevant to a general approach to multicultural perspective taking (with the exception of regional 

expertise). 

Future Research to Support Development of Training Systems 

 The ultimate goal of a research program on multicultural perspective taking is to produce 

a training that increases Army leaders’ abilities to function effectively in multicultural 

environments. Although the framework and best training practices presented above offer 

reasonable starting points for future research, additional research is needed to determine how to 

build the best training system. Suggestions for future research and project work include: (1) 

composing a multidisciplinary research team, (2) applying best practices for developing training 

systems including the use of the best practices for adult and intercultural learning, (3) 

determining a realistic sequence for competency training, and (4) incorporating training 

evaluation and realizing the effort will likely be iterative. 

38 
Composing a Multidisciplinary Research Team 

 The multicultural perspective taking competencies were extracted from a broad review of 

literatures in cultural anthropology, social anthropology, counseling psychology, developmental 

psychology, social psychology, organizational psychology, organizational behavior, international 

business, and adult education. This foundational work serves as a starting point, but, obviously, 

these competencies are complex and future work will be well served by a project team that 

includes members from multiple disciplines. Expertise represented on the team should include 

the areas of industrial/organizational psychology, training, cognitive and cultural anthropology, 

cross-cultural counseling psychology, international business, adult education, and intercultural 

communications and relations. 

Applying Best Practices for Developing Training Systems and Using Best Training 

 Practices for Adult and Intercultural Learning 

 The application of the best practices for developing training systems should be applied in 

the development of training systems for multicultural perspective taking competencies. Training 

principles from industrial/organizational psychology and the organizational training literature 

(e.g., Goldstein & Ford, 2002) will serve as a good foundation. For example, according to 

traditional training research, in order to develop effective training systems, a needs assessment 

must be conducted in which the requisite competencies to be trained are identified (Goldstein & 

Ford, 2002). Although the above work serves as a foundation, effective training systems tend to 

be based on needs assessments that include task, person, and context analyses. Additional data 

obtained from Army leaders who are working within multicultural contexts should be included in 

the identification of the most essential competencies and in the development of the training 

system. 

 Information from subject matter experts should inform the training. For example, Army 

leaders encounter a wide-range of situations requiring multicultural perspective taking 

competencies, including engaging the enemy, dealing with the local populace, and teaming with 

coalition partners. Furthermore, they interact with military personnel, civilians, and children in 

multicultural contexts. The differences in competency needs for these various contexts are 

important to understand when developing a training system. In addition, the expert schema for 

understanding culture may be the most important multicultural perspective taking competency 

and subject matter experts can provide essential information required for training this 

competency. 

The training system should include the best practices for adult learning (e.g., Kolb, 1984). 

Reported above is a review of the best practices for developing multicultural perspective taking 

competencies that revealed such techniques as focused readings, practical exercises, and rolemodeling as useful training tools for the multicultural perspective taking competencies. These 

best practices are based on methods used in the adult learning and intercultural training 

literatures. 

 The training system must also be practical and may include stand-alone components 

amenable to delivery via CD-ROM or web technology. For example, one possible component of 

39 
the training could be interactive videos that present opportunities for practicing skills and that 

provide feedback. Possibly, a branching method could be incorporated in which trainees respond 

to a virtual other and feedback would appear as the other’s response to the trainee. An 

explanation of the other’s response would be provided or offered as another learning opportunity. 

In general, the training system should contain multiple methods and technologies. 

Determining a Realistic Sequence for Competency Training 

 Subject matter experts, task analysis, and contextual analysis information will aid in 

determining a realistic sequence for training competencies. Although the competencies are 

categorized as fundamental and advanced, this distinction was based on what the Army is 

currently training versus what might be added to training. However, the most appropriate 

sequencing may involve crossing these categories. 

 As described above, Army leaders exist at three levels, direct, organizational, and 

strategic. It is quite likely that some blended set of fundamental and advanced competencies are 

needed at each level. However, the emphasis or use of multicultural perspective taking 

competencies most likely differs at each level. A better understanding of these differences will 

enhance the possibility of developing a properly sequenced training system that takes advantage 

of the “on-the-job” training opportunities available at one level of leadership that will develop 

leaders’ competencies for the next level. 

Incorporating Training Evaluation and Realizing the Effort Will Likely Be Iterative 

 The contexts in which leaders are expected to apply multicultural perspective taking are 

complex. Therefore, constant evaluation and refinement of the training system will be necessary. 

The effort to address multicultural challenges is large and will likely be in a continuous state of 

improvement. Training systems should include feedback loops such that evaluations of current 

efforts provide insights into improving new efforts. 

40 
References 

Adler, N. J. (2002). International dimensions of organizational behavior (4th Ed.). Cincinnati, 

Ohio: South-Western. 

Baron, R. A. (1997). Positive effects of conflict: Insights from social cognition. In C. K. DeDreu 

& E. Van de Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 177-191). London: Sage 

Publications. 

Baron, R. A. (1988). Attributions and organizational conflict: The mediating role of apparent 

sincerity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 111-127. 

Batson, C. D., Eklund, J. H., Chermok, V. L., Hoyt, J. L., & Ortiz, B. G.. (2007). An additional 

antecedent of empathic concern: Valuing of the welfare of the person in need. Journal of 

Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 65-74. 

Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1986). Educational relevance of the study of expertise. 

Interchange, 17, 10-19. 

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday. 

Bird, A., & Osland, J. (2003). Teaching cultural sense-making. In Boyacigiller, N. A., Goodman, 

R. A., Phillips, M. E., & Colleagium (Eds.). Crossing cultures: Insights from master 

teachers. London: Routledge. 

Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics 

instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26,

473-498. 

Browning, H., & Van Velsor, E. (1999). Three keys to development: Defining and meeting your 

leadership challenges. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership. 

Carlo, G., Allen, J. B., & Buhman, D. C. (1999). Facilitating and disinhibiting prosocial 

behaviors: The nonlinear interaction of trait perspective taking and trait personal distress 

on volunteering. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 189-197. 

Chao, G.T., & Moon, H. (2005). The cultural mosaic: A metatheory for understanding the 

complexity of culture. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1128-1140. 

Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg 

(Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence 

Erlbaum. 

Conner, J. (2000). Developing the global leaders of tomorrow. Human Resource Management, 

39, 147-157. 

41 
Connerley, M. L., & Pedersen, P. (2005). Leadership in a diverse and multicultural environment: 

developing awareness, knowledge, and skills. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

Cooke, R. A., & Rousseau, D. M. (1988). Behavioral norms and expectations: A quantitative 

approach to the assessment of organizational culture. Group and Organization Studies, 

13, 245-273. 

Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 

Inc. 

Davis, M. H., Conklin, L., Smith, A., & Luce, C. (1996). Effect of perspective taking on the 

cognitive representation of persons: A merging of self and other. Journal of Personality 

and Social Psychology, 70, 713-726. 

Driskell, J. E, Radtke, P, H, & Salas, E. (2003). Virtual teams: Effects of technological mediation 

on team performance. Group-Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7, 297-323. 

Duan, C. & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of Counseling 

Psychology, 43, 261-274. 

Eisenberg, N., Wentzel, N. M., & Harris, J. D. (1998). The role of emotionality and regulation in 

empathy-related responding. School Psychology Review, 27, 506-522. 

Essens, P. J. M. D., Vogelaar, A. L. W., Mylle, J. J. C., Blendell, C., Paris, C., Halpin, S. M., & 

Baranski, J. V. (2005). Military command team effectiveness: Model and instrument for 

assessment and improvement. NATO RTO technical report AC/323(HFM-087) TP/59, 

April 2005. 

Falk, D. R., & Johnson, D. W. (1977). The effects of perspective taking and egocentrism on 

problem solving in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups. The Journal of Social 

Psychology, 102, 63-72. 

Feffer, M., & Suchotliff, L. (1966). Decentering implications of social interactions. Journal of 

Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 415-422. 

Fetterman, D. M. (1989). Ethnography: Step by step (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. 

Flavell, J. H. (1968). The development of role-taking and communication skills in children. New 

York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

Galinsky, A. D. (2002). Creating and reducing intergroup conflict: The role of perspective taking 

in affecting out-group evaluations. In H. Sondak (Ed.), Toward phenomenology of groups 

and group membership (pp. 85-113). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd. 

Gladstein, G. A. (1983). Understanding empathy: Integrating counseling, developmental, and 

social psychology perspectives. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 467-482. 

42 
Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2002). Training in organizations (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: 

Wadsworth. 

Graesser, A. C., & Nakamura, G. V. (1982). The impact of schema on comprehension and 

memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in 

research and theory (Vol. 16, pp. 60-109). New York: Academic Press. 

Gwynne, M. A. (2003). Applied anthropology. New York: Allyn & Bacon. 

Hall, E.T. (1959). The silent language. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. 

Halpin, S. (2005). Leadership Development Research Unit. Briefing presented to the Senior 

Advisory Panel on Leading Multinational Teams, Washington, DC. 

Hess, J. D. (1994). The whole world guide to culture learning. Yarmouth, Me.: Intercultural 

Press. 

Hillerbrand, E. T., & Claiborn, C. D. (1990). Examining reasoning skill differences between 

expert and novice counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 684-691. 

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGrawHill. 

Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related 

values. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. 

Hoopes, D. S. (1979). Intercultural communication concepts and the psychology of intercultural 

 experience. In M. D. Pusch (Ed.) Multicultural education: A cross-cultural training 

 approach. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. 

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.) (2004). Culture, 

leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: 

Sage Publications. 

Inbau, F. E., Reid, J. E., & Buckley, J. P. (1986). Criminal interrogation and confessions. 3rd Ed. 

Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins. 

Initial Impressions Report on Leader Challenges: Operation Enduring Freedom & Operation 

Iraqi Freedom. (2005). Center for Army Lessons Learned, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. 

Johnson, D. W. (1971). Role reversal: A summary and review of the research. International 

Journal of Group Tensions, 1, 318-334. 

43 
Kluckhohn, C. (1951). The study of culture. In D. Lerner & H.D. Haswell (Eds.), The policy 

sciences (pp. 86-101). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. 

Knowles, E. D., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. & Hong, Y. (2001). Culture and the process of person 

perception: Evidence for automaticity among East Asians in correcting for situational 

influences on behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1344-1356. 

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., and Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive 

 classic in adult education and human resource development (6th Ed.). Amsterdam; 

 Boston: Elsevier.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and 

development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. 

Kroeber, A.L., & Parsons, T. (1958). The concepts of culture and of social system. American 

Sociological Review, 23, 582-583. 

Long, E. C. J., Angera, J. J., Carter, S. J., Nakamoto, M., & Kalso, M. (1999). Understanding the 

one you love: A longitudinal assessment of an empathy training program for couples in 

romantic relationships. Family Relations, 48, 235-242. 

Louis, M. R. (1980). Surprise and sense making: What newcomers experience in unfamiliar 

organizational settings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 226-251. 

Maznevski, M., & DiStefano, J. (2000). Global leaders are team players: developing global 

leaders through membership on global teams. Human Resource Management, 39, 195-

208. 

McFate, M. (2005). The military utility of understanding adversary culture. Joint Force 

Quarterly, 38, 42-48. 

Mitchell, G. (1998). The trainer's handbook: The AMA guide to effective training (3rd ed.). New 

 York: AMACOM. 

Ong, A. (1987) Spirits of resistance and capitalist discipline: Factory women in Malaysia.

Albany: State University of New York Press. 

Organizational Research Group. (1998). Development of a competency profiling system: 

Identification of personal and interpersonal competencies. Final Report to the Dayton 

Business Committee - Income Development Team. 

Pedersen, P. B. (2004). 110 experiences for multicultural learning. Washington, DC: APA. 

Pedersen, P. (1995). The five stages of culture shock: Critical incidents around the world. 

Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. 

44 
Quintana, S. M. (1994). A model of ethnic perspective taking ability applied to MexicanAmerican children and youth. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18, 419-

448. 

Ray, E. B., & Ray, G. B. (1986). Teaching conflict management skills in corporate training: A 

perspective taking approach. Communication Education, 35, 288-290. 

Reimer, T. (2001). Attributions for poor group performance as a predictor of perspective taking 

and subsequent group achievement: A process model. Group Processes and Intergroup 

Relations, 4, 31-47. 

Rentsch, J. R., (1990). Climate and culture: Interaction and qualitative differences in 

organizational meanings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 668-681. 

Renwick, G. (2004). Reflections on the future of training. In D. Landis, J. M. Bennett, & M. J. 

Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage 

Publications. 

Rhinesmith, S. (1993). A manager's guide to globalization: Six keys to success in a changing 

world. Alexandria, Va. Homewood, Ill.: American Society for Training and 

Development; Business One Irwin. 

Rogers, C. R. (1975). Empathic: An unappreciated way of being. The Counseling Psychologist, 

5, 2-10. 

Rousseau, D. M. (1988). The construction of climate in organizational research. In C. L. Cooper, 

& I. T. Robertson, (Eds.). International review of industrial and organizational 

psychology (pp. 139-158). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons. 

Rumelhart, D. E. (1980). On evaluating story grammars. Cognitive Science, 4, 313-316. 

Sackmann, S. A. (1992). Culture and subcultures: An analysis of organizational knowledge. 

Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 140-161. 

Saji, B. S. (2004). Workforce diversity, temporal dimensions and team performance. Cross 

Cultural Management, 11, 40-59. 

Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership: A dynamic view. San Francisco, CA: 

Jossey-Bass. 

Schein, E. H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45, 109-119.

Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

45 
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances 

 and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 

25, 1-65. 

Selman, R. L. (1971). Taking another’s perspective: Role-taking development in early 

 childhood. Child Development, 42, 1721-1734. 

Selman, R. L. (1977). A structural-developmental model of social cognition; Implications 

 for intervention research. The Counseling Psychologist, 6, 3-6. 

Sermat, V. & Smyth, M. (1973). Content analysis of verbal communication in the 

 development of a relationship: Conditions influencing self-disclosure. Journal of 

 Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 332-346. 

Sessa, V. I. (1996). Using perspective taking to manage conflict and affect in teams. Journal of 

Applied Behavioral Science, 32, 101-115. 

Sidky, H. (2004). Perspective on culture: A critical introduction to theory in cultural 

anthropology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 

Spreitzer, G. M., Shapiro, D. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2002). Helping transnational team’s 

members to sense trust: A counterintuitive approach to leadership. In H. Sondak (Ed.), 

Toward phenomenology of groups and group membership (pp. 85-113). Amsterdam: 

Elsevier Science Ltd. 

Sondak, H. (2002). Toward phenomenology of groups and group membership. New York: JAI. 

Stablien, R. (2002). Using existential-phenomenology to study a work team. In H. Sondak, (Ed.). 

Toward phenomenology of groups and group membership. New York: JAI. 

Stewart, E. C., & Bennett, M. J. (1991). American cultural patterns: A cross-cultural perspective 

 (Rev. ed.). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. 

Tichy, N. M. (1982). Managing change strategically: The technical, political, and cultural keys. 

Organizational Dynamics, 11, 59-80. 

Triandis, H. C. (1972). The analysis of subjective culture. New York: Wiley-Interscience. 

Trompenaars, A. (1994). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding diversity in global 

business. Burr Ridge, Ill.: Irwin Professional Publishing. 

Van Lehn, K. (1989). Problem solving and cognitive skill acquisition. In M. Posner (Ed.), 

Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 527-579). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

46 
Von Glinow, M. A., Shapiro, D. L., & Brett, J. M. (2004). Can we talk, and should we? 

Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams. Academy of Management Review, 

29, 578-592. 

Weick, K. (1995). Sense-making in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 

47