Citation
Exploring the development of motivational cultural intelligence at Cru

Material Information

Title:
Exploring the development of motivational cultural intelligence at Cru
Creator:
Woodman, Jason
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( Master of public administration)
Degree Grantor:
University of Colorado Denver
Degree Divisions:
School of Public Affairs, CU Denver
Degree Disciplines:
Public administration
Committee Chair:
Boylard, Wendy
Committee Members:
Ronquillo, John

Notes

General Note:
Fall 2017

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright Jason Woodman. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
Running head: EXPLORING MCQ AT CRU
Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru
Jason Woodman
University of Colorado Denver School of Public Affairs
This client-based project is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Public Administration in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver Denver, Colorado
Fall
2017


Exploring MCQ at Cru
2
Capstone Project Disclosures
This client-based project was completed on behalf of Cru and supervised by PUAD 5361 Capstone course instructor Wendy L. Bolyard, PhD and second faculty reader John Ronquillo, PhD. This project does not necessarily reflect the views of the School of Public Affairs or the faculty readers. Raw data were not included in this document, rather relevant materials were provided directly to the client. Permissions to include this project in the Auraria Library Digital Repository are found in the final appendix. Questions about this capstone project should be directed to the student author.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
3
Table of Contents
Executive Summary......................................................................4
Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru................ 6
Literature Review......................................................................9
MCQ as a Dimension with Sub-dimensions.........................................10
Outcomes Predicted by Motivational CQ..........................................10
Critical Reviews of CQ........................................................ 11
Developing CQ in General.......................................................13
CQ and Cru.................................................................... 14
Methodology.......................................................................... 15
Sampling...................................................................... 16
Measurement and Data Collection................................................16
Hypotheses.....................................................................17
Results.............................................................................. 18
Analyzing the Data............................................................ 19
Discussion...........................................................................23
Validity and Reliability......................................................23
Limitations...................................................................24
Future Research...............................................................25
Recommendations...............................................................26
Conclusion...........................................................................29
References...........................................................................31
Appendix A
37


Exploring MCQ at Cru
4
Appendix B...................................................................39
Appendix C...................................................................40
Appendix D...................................................................46
Appendix E...................................................................50


Exploring MCQ at Cru
5
Executive Summary
This study is about how Cru staff can get smarter. It is about a specific theory of intelligence known as cultural intelligence. More specifically, it is about a dimension of cultural intelligence known as motivational cultural intelligence (MCQ). The literature review grounds the theory behind cultural intelligence in the greater idea that if Cru staff can develop MCQ they will be more effective both in their service to the diverse public of the U.S. and in managing their internal conflicts in an increasingly diverse organization.
Six variables related to developing MCQ were investigated. The first variable, staff ethnic identity, relates to a condition that existed before individuals joined staff with Cru. The next two variables, current immersion experience and past immersions experience, relate to indirect training experiences people have received either at Cru or before. The fourth and fifth variables relate to direct training programs at Cru, the “Core Training” required for all staff and the “Intro to Mission” course. The final variable was a new training developed for Cru based on CQ literature, a podcast written by the author called “Florecer.”
This study identified four variables with a significant positive difference on mean MCQ scores for Cru staff: 1) currently serving abroad, outside of one’s home country, 2) past immersion experience, 3) completing Cru’s Core Training, and 4) “Florecer,” the main treatment in this study. Eight recommendations based on these findings are discussed for Cru:
1. Incorporate MCQ development means in the literature into Cru’s future training.
2. Keep focus at Cru off of CQ language and explaining CQ theory.
3. Train through immersion experience that is domestic and cumulative.
4. Encourage summer immersion experiences and how to leverage these as training opportunities.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
6
5. Look to Cru staff with the most immersion experience.
6. Develop internal policy for collaborating with staff abroad.
7. Give MCQ development appropriate time and boundaries.
8. Differentiate mono-cultural understanding and ethnic identity from high MCQ.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
7
Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru
It is widely acknowledged that the U.S. is globalizing at an increasing rate. Ethnic and cultural diversity seems to continue growing and thriving. The influences of immigration, urbanization, and an increasing influx of expatriates are apparent. The public sector, corporations, schools, nonprofit organizations, and governments seem motivated to train culturally effective employees in both the foreign and domestic spheres. Yet important questions remain. What is “cross-cultural effectiveness?” What training is required to develop it?
Since its inception in 2003, Cultural Intelligence (CQ) has gained credibility among researchers. CQ has been defined as “the capability to function effectively across various cultural contexts” (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 3). The concept seems to get at the very thing that public sector organizations in the U.S. are looking for. This is especially true at Cru, the 501(c)(3) Christian organization for whom this research is designed. Not only do 14% of Cru staff identify as ethnic minorities (Cru Staff Demographics, 2016), but the organization works specifically with college students in the U.S., a public sector demographic that is diversifying (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2016). Working with the National Director of Culture and Mission for Cru, this research tests current and prospective training programs and explores antecedent conditions as they relate to CQ for Cru staff. The timing is optimal for Cru, as they plan to make cultural training mandatory for nearly 4,000 staff in the next 12 months (S. Crocker, personal communication, August 29, 2017).


Exploring MCQ at Cru
8
CQ has four main dimensions: cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and behavioral (Earley & Ang, 2003). In CQ theory, the four components of CQ are thought to be somewhat sequential (Early & Ang, 2003, p. 66; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p.5). These are represented in the diagram below (See Figure 1).
Figure 1. CO wheel (n.d.).
Before one can exhibit behavioral CQ in appropriate ways in another culture, one must engage their metacognitive CQ in order to develop a strategy to do so. Before that, one must have some cognitive CQ knowledge to strategize with. But before it all, one needs a sufficiently high motivational CQ to get started. “Without ample motivation for engaging inter-culturally, there’s little point in spending time and money on intercultural training” (Livermore, 2015, p. 28). While all four of these dimensions are worthy of further study, the scale of this research will focus on motivational CQ (MCQ) largely because of its theoretical primacy in one’s cross-cultural success. The literature review below further enumerates the outcomes that MCQ specifically predicts.
Despite the many advantages and performance predictors of MCQ, few organizations are implementing CQ development programs of any kind. This is partly because CQ is a relatively


Exploring MCQ at Cru
9
new construct. It is also due to the fact that little research has been done on programs that actually develop CQ, and less still on what develops specific dimensions of it. Cultural effectiveness in organizations today often seems to rely on a loose affiliation of immersion experiences, assumed cultural value training, and judgments based on ethnic identity. CQ researchers and pioneers themselves have noted these trends (Earley & Peterson, 2004, pp. 102-103).
These practices appear to have many problems and limitations. Immersion is usually expensive and can take several months or years. Further, it seems unclear exactly what immersion is a predictor of. Some organizations may hire individuals with international experience or send people overseas to gain CQ directly but they have no empirical means for determining how these qualities will relate to their cultural success. Some organizations even appear to make judgments about current or prospective employee’s ethnic identity and assume, for instance, that their Asian American employee will help them succeed in China. Such practices are highly non-scientific, and could even be considered discrimination in some cases. Given the speed of globalization and the limited time and money available to most public sector organizations for training culturally successful employees, a training mechanism that is cheaper, shorter, and more predictive of particular outcomes is a great need.
This research intends to help by answering the question: What kinds of programs or factors will ultimately develop MCQ? The following literature review and methodology presented for this research should guide future CQ research and inform organizations as they endeavor to use CQ to keep up with the speed of globalization.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
10
Literature Review
An early definition of CQ called it “a person’s capability to adapt effectively to new cultural contexts” (Earley & Ang, 2003, p. 59). The distinct qualities of CQ from its related constructs are well stated:
.. .following the definition of general intelligence by Schmidt and Hunter (2000), CQ is conceptualized as a specific form of intelligence focused on an individual’s ability to grasp and reason correctly in situations characterized by cultural diversity. Just as emotional intelligence (EQ) complements cognitive intelligence (IQ), in that both are important for an individual to find success at work and in personal relationships in an increasingly interdependent world (Earley & Gibson, 2002), we suggest that CQ is another complementary form of intelligence that can explain variability in coping with diversity and functioning in new cultural settings. Since the norms for social interaction vary from culture to culture, it is unlikely that cognitive intelligence, EQ, or social intelligence will translate automatically into effective cross-cultural adjustment and interaction (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 4)
CQ has evolved in theory from a three to a four-dimensional construct with metacognitive, cognitive, motivational, and behavioral components (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008). It is important to point out that these components are considered capabilities as opposed to personality traits. Theoretically, CQ is a much more malleable concept than personality (Earley & Ang, 2003). The distinction of CQ from trait-like personality characteristics is thus described: “In the broader nomological network of cultural intelligence, personality characteristics are conceptualized as antecedents or causal agents of cultural intelligence” (Earley & Ang, p. 160).


Exploring MCQ at Cru
11
Unlike personality, CQ is considered a capability that can be developed, a point which organizations interested in high CQ related outcomes should note (Earley & Ang, 2003).
MCQ as a Dimension with Sub-dimensions
As CQ theory advanced, motivation grew into one of four dimensions of CQ: Metacognitive CQ reflects the mental capability to acquire and understand cultural knowledge. Cognitive CQ reflects general knowledge and knowledge structures about cultures. Motivational CQ reflects individual capability to direct energy toward learning about and functioning in intercultural situations. Behavioral CQ reflects individual capability to exhibit appropriate verbal and non-verbal actions in culturally diverse interactions. (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 5)
More recently, Van Dyne et al. (2012) proposed eleven sub-dimensions of the original four higher order dimensions, or factors. “This expanded framework provides a better articulated conceptual space for each of four factors of cultural intelligence which should facilitate future research by providing more depth to the conceptualization of each factor of cultural intelligence” (Van Dyne et al., 2012, p. 296). In this framework, MCQ was conceived as having three subdimensions: “We draw on contemporary motivational perspectives to identify intrinsic and extrinsic interest (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 2002) as sub-dimensions of motivational CQ” (Van Dyne et al., 2012, p. 296).
Outcomes Predicted by Motivational CQ
The most promising aspects of CQ research lie in what CQ measurements, as they exist today, can predict. MCQ alone has been tied by itself to a host of practical outcomes. Chen, Liu, and Portnoy (2012) found high MCQ was linked to increased cultural sales in U.S. real estate firms. They defined “cultural sales” as “the number of housing transactions occurring between


Exploring MCQ at Cru
12
people of different cultural origins” (Chen, Liu, & Portnoy, 2012, p. 94). MCQ was positively correlated to Nordic expatriate’s adjustment to the U.S. (GuQmundsdottir, 2015). A similar study found MCQ was positively related to work adjustment for expatriates living in Japan, and that it explained the adjustments better than the five factor personality assessment (Huff, Song, & Gresch, 2013). MCQ was “positively associated with increases in (a) cultural well-being reported by participants and (b) peer perceptions of suitability for overseas work” among U.S. university study abroad participants (Peng, Van Dyne, & Oh, 2015, p. 572). High MCQ was found to relate to “fewer psychological symptoms and sociocultural adaptation problems” among international students in New Zealand (Ward, Wilson, & Fischer, 2011, p. 138). Along with behavioral CQ, MCQ was positively related to cultural adaptation (Ang et al., 2007). Finally, according to Templer, Tay, and Chandrasekar (2006) who found MCQ positively correlated to realistic previews of cross-cultural adjustment for global professionals, “in-depth examination of motivational CQ, as one specific aspect of CQ, has the potential to advance our understanding of CQ and serves as a model of future research on CQ” (p. 155).
These results are promising, especially for organizations who train or intend to train employees for cross-cultural work, either domestically or abroad. Further, research demonstrates that the predictions of MCQ are not bound by a single ethnic or national cultural audience. Critical Reviews of CQ
At the outset, it is noted that the definition of CQ as “the capability to function effectively across various cultural contexts” leaves both “culture” and “cultural effectiveness” undefined (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 3). It should be noted that these ideas, although difficult to define, nonetheless have inescapable bearing on CQ research at a conceptual level.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
13
Blasco, Feldt, and Jakobsen (2012) argue that culture is a more flexible construct, from the post-modern perspective, than the CQ literature suggests. They point out that “the way culture is portrayed in much CQ literature as something that can be learned or studied in itself and thereafter used to steer a given cross-cultural encounter becomes highly problematic” (Blasco, Feldt, & Jakobsen, 2012, p. 236). The criticism of CQ is better stated by Barry and Ward (2006), as follows: “In essence, we believe that because there is no culture-free behavior, there can be no culture-free CQ” (p. 71). CQ research is different from cultural research since it is not itself researching any particular cultural cluster, but an etic set of intellectual capabilities (Ng & Early, 2006). The etic and emic characteristics of culture were discussed early in the CQ theory, but as it is unclear where to draw this line regarding culture, it is also unclear where to draw it regarding CQ (Early & Ang, 2003, pp. 64-67).
Ward, Fischer, Lam, and Hall (2009) further criticize the self-report nature of CQ measurement: “If CQ is a manifestation of intelligence, as argued by Earley and Ang (2003), ability testing is more appropriate than self-report” (p. 103). Ang and Van Dyne (2008) draw upon contemporary theories of multiple intelligences in their classification of CQ, but it is noteworthy that the other “intelligences” to which CQ is compared such as IQ and EQ (emotional intelligence quotient) have performance based measuring tools. This is perhaps due to the early phase in which CQ research finds itself.
A study from the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute gave a critical review of the CQS, the instrument used for measuring CQ in most research, stating that it has low criterion validity compared with other similar assessments (Gabrenya, Moukarzel, Pomerance, Griffith, & Deaton, 2011). It appears that CQ measurement lags behind its conceptual development.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
14
Developing CQ in General
There is little focused research on MCQ itself and comparatively less research on what develops any dimension of CQ at all. Early and Peterson (2004) proposed culturally intelligent training theory, but did not report testing it. Since that time, it is unclear if anyone has researched cultural training based on the four CQ dimensions. Further, where training has been found to increase MCQ, this has not been the primary target of research.
Fischer (2011) reported increased CQ in university students via a combination of lectures, and two simulation activities: BAFA BAFA and Excell. BAFA BAFA is a group based “intercultural assimilation game” aimed at sensitizing participants to cultural values and the emotional toll of cross-cultural interactions and communication (Fischer, 2011). Excell is a “behavior modification training” that allows participants to “practice culturally appropriate behaviors in a safe environment” (Fischer, 2011). Biicker and Korzilius (2015) used the Ecotones cultural simulation software, a game where players create an explanatory myth for a deliberately selected set of cultural options and then work on solving problems based on the cultures they create. Using this game, they were able to increase CQ for international business students (Biicker & Korzilius, 2015). Lecture format training for U.S. government contractors increased their cognitive and behavioral CQ, but their motivational CQ less significantly (Rehg & Gundlach, 2012). Wood and St. Peters (2014) found that short cross-cultural study tours increased metacognitive, cognitive, and motivational CQ, but not behavioral CQ. McNab and Worthley (2010) used experiential learning to increase metacognitive, behavioral, and motivational CQ, and found evidence that general self-efficacy mediates successful development of CQ. Reichard, Dollwet, and Louw-Potgieter (2014) developed a classroom training grounded in the theory of psychological capital, and consisting of three cross-cultural elements: self-


Exploring MCQ at Cru
15
efficacy, optimism, and resilience. While their training had a specific self-efficacy component that could relate to MCQ, their research was not focused on MCQ specifically and their training was found effective to increase cultural intelligence in general (Reichard, Dollwet, & Louw-Potgieter, 2014).
In an academic departure, Barnes, Smith, and Hernandez-Pozas (2017) published “suggestions” on how to teach students cultural intelligence with a three-pronged approach including a classroom community, specific classroom tactics, and an external learning community, bookended with CQ assessments. While they back their approach in educational literature, these authors did not report testing it.
In review of these development efforts, it appears that none of them are intentionally developing CQ by the theories that Early and Peterson (2004) suggested. While motivational CQ is positively linked to cultural adaptations for a variety of ethnic and cultural contexts, domestic and abroad, how to develop this capability remains unclear. Considering the outcomes which high MCQ predict and their potential value to organizations affected by globalization, it is curious to observe that what develops MCQ is being left untested.
In summary, CQ represents a young field of research. The motivational component of CQ appears to be one of the theory’s most novel aspects. While self-efficacy is an important component of MCQ, there is a gap in the literature regarding how to develop it.
CQ and Cru
Partly because CQ is such an individualistic construct, there is scant literature regarding its place in the public sector or in organizations of any type. Only one study could be found that addressed CQ in public administration and that was in Australia (Bice & Merriam, 2016). Another sole article addressed CQ in terms of inpatriates at multinational corporations (Frose,


Exploring MCQ at Cru
16
Kim, & Eng, 2016). However, Cru is a public sector, multinational service corporation that employees many inpatriates. It is a registered 501(c)(3) organization with a faith-based mission.
Conflict appears to be in inevitable part of any organization. At Cru, conflicts between cultural values can be expected to grow as its clientele diversifies and as the organization diversifies itself. “When two or more people are in a state of disharmony, imbalance, or incongruity, that causes dissonance (or discomfort). According to cognitive dissonance theory, people will act - will do something - to reduce or eliminate dissonance” (Ott, Parkes, & Simpson, 2003, pp. 135-136). Whether or not cognitive dissonance is a threat or an opportunity to Cru may very well depend on how employees act to eliminate it. Given the projected increase in cultural conflict, Cru appears to be an ideal candidate to pursue a culturally intelligent labor force and stands to benefit from the outcomes that high MCQ predicts.
Methodology
This research revolves around those associations, if any, that can increase MCQ for Cru staff. From discussions with the client and insight from the literature, the following research questions emerge. First, does it differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture? Second, does it differ by current immersion experience? Third, does it correlate to their past immersion experience? Fourth, does it differ by their completion of Core Training, Cru’s mandatory two year training for new staff? Fifth, does it differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission, a graduate level class required for all Cru staff? Sixth, does it differ after completing training specifically designed according to CQ research and focused on domestic diversity issues? To answer these first five questions, this research uses a causal comparative study. To answer the sixth question, the researcher developed such a training, titled it “Florecer,” and tested it using a true experiment.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
17
Sampling
This was quantitative research designed for large sample sizes and statistical analysis. A non-random convenience sample was drawn from employees at Cru who work with college students for this research, and individuals in that sample formed the units of analysis. Individuals are the unit of analysis for CQ, because CQ itself is an individual intelligence capability (Earley & Ang, 2003, p. 59; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 3). In CQ research, the average sample size seems to be around 250-300, but where developing CQ is concerned, sample sizes are typically below 100, partly because of the time investment needed for training interventions. Around 3,908 staff at Cru work with college students, and estimates suggest that 350 is an appropriate sample size for this population (Cru Staff Demographics, 2016; Orcher, 2014, p. 285). Measurement and Data Collection
All Cru staff who work with college students (n=3,908) received an email inviting them to participate in cultural research with a link to a survey to register. Participants were each given an initial survey that asked about their ethnic/cultural identity, whether they were currently serving immersed in a different culture, and what their cumulative past immersion experience added up to, if any. They were then randomly assigned to test and control groups. The training program used for the test group was a three-part podcast titled “Florecer,” written by the author. The training was contextualized specifically for the Cru staff and covered six topics based on the literature of MCQ theory and its development: 1. Being honest with yourself, 2. Examining your confidence levels, 3. Eating and socializing, 4. Grieving and mourning, 5. Counting the perks and the costs, and 6. Working for something bigger (Livermore, 2015). This training took a total of 2 hours and 40 minutes to complete. The control group listened to an audio message by Dr.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
18
John Piper unrelated to cultural intelligence which only took 45 minutes to complete. Both test and control group participants were given a month to listen to their respective audio files.
Additionally, members of both groups were randomly assigned to take pre-tests on their MCQ before they were given access to their test or control audio files. They answered questions directly from the expanded cultural intelligence scale (CQS), the current validated tool for measuring cultural intelligence (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008; Van Dyne et al., 2012). After listening to their respective audio files, participants took a post-test on their MCQ using the same assessment tool to complete their participation.
MCQ was calculated by averaging participants scores that were measured at the ordinal level with five questions from the CQS listed in the pre-and post-test questions (see Appendix A for a table with all survey questions, including pre-and post-test questions, and Appendix B for a measurement table which organizes the independent variables according to their measurements and hypotheses). While some statisticians appear to take issue with the practice of using means computed from ordinal data and using it as interval data, the practice was approved for this study (Dr. W. Bolyard, personal communication, October 29, 2017). For H1-H5, only averages for pretest scores were used in statistical analysis to ensure that results for the causal comparative study necessary for H1-H5 were separate from the experimental study necessary for H6. This limited the sample size for statistical analysis, but it ensured that the results were reliable.
Hypotheses
In addition to the research questions noted earlier, the following hypotheses were tested:
H1 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture.
H2 MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience.
H3 MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience.
H4 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training.
H5 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission.
H6 MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
19
This research includes a causal comparative study and a true experiment. The following chart shows the logic for how participants were asked questions and assigned to experimental
groups in the research design (see Figure 2):
Concerns Hypotheses 1-5 (Causal-comparative study)
Test H6 with a true experiment (Solomon four group design)
All Participants
Pre-test CQ training Post-test
Pre-test
[Dummy Training] Post-test
[null] [null]
CQ training [Dummy Training]
Post-test Post-test
Figure 2. Research Diagram.
For this research, the only dependent variable is MCQ. The independent variables are numbered and each corresponds to the hypothesis of the same number: 1. identification with a U.S. ethnic culture, 2. current immersion experience, 3. past immersion experience, 4. Cru’s core training, 5. Cru’s introduction to mission’s course, and 6. “Florecer”
Results
The following table states each hypothesis in this study along with the corresponding null hypothesis.
H1 Null 1 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. MCQ of Cru staff differs bv identification with U.S. ethnic culture.
H2 Null 2 MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. MCQ of Cru staff does not differ bv their current immersion experience.
H3 Null 3 MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. MCQ of Cru staff does not correlate to their past immersion experience.
H4 Null 4 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. MCQ of Cru staff differs bv their completion of Core Trainina.
H5 Null 5 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. MCQ of Cru staff differs bv their completion of Introduction of Mission.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
20
H6 MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer.
Null 6 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ after completing Florecer.
From the initial email invitation, 166 participants began participation, 88 completed participation, and an additional 22 did not complete participation but returned usable results. The table below details what each of the total usable participants completed (n=l 10).
Group 1 Initial survey, control training (Dr. Piper), MCQ post-test N=20
Group 2 Initial survey, test training (Florecer), MCQ post-test N=23
Group 3 Initial survey, MCQ pre-test, control training (Dr. Piper), MCQ post-test N=25
Group 4 Initial survey, MCQ pre-test, test training (Florecer), MCQ post-test N=20
These participants were randomly assigned to either groups 3 or 4. They only completed their MCQ pre-test. This data was usable fortesting H1-H5. N=22
Analyzing the Data
All data were computed using IBM SPSS version 24. See Appendix C for a comprehensive set of descriptive statistics for all variables. Because all of the data was self-reported by the participants, the “highest” answer to any MCQ question was 7, which was coded as “strongly agree.” The MCQ data for pre-tests and post-tests were averaged, so the theoretical “highest” MCQ score was 7.
Each hypothesis required using a unique set of participants (n). Where the participants were analyzed in groups, the number of participants is given for each group (nx). See Appendix D for a comprehensive set of the correlational and inferential statistical outputs for each hypothesis.
HI: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. A
one-way ANOVA was computed comparing the MCQ pre-test averages (n=67) of participants in four unique groups: 1) those who identified with U.S. majority ethnic culture (m=52), 2) those who identified with one or more U.S. majority ethnic culture (n2=5), 3) those who identified with both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture (n3=6), and 4) those who did not


Exploring MCQ at Cru
21
identify with any of the above (n4=4). Although the mean MCQ scores of those who identified with U.S. majority ethnic culture were the lowest (5.76), no significant difference was found between these four unique groups (F(3,63) = 2,64, p > .05). Therefore the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture.
H2: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. An Independent samples /-test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre-test scores (n=63) of those who indicated they were currently serving abroad, outside their home country (m=l 1) with those who did not indicate they were serving abroad (n2=52). A significant difference was found between the two groups (/(61) = 2,582, p < .05). The mean of the group indicating they were currently serving abroad (M= 6.509, sd = .42) was significantly higher than the mean of the group indicating they were not (M= 5.75, sd= .95). Therefore the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience.
H3: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. A Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient was calculated for the relationship between MCQ pre-test scores and past immersion experience for participating Cru staff (n=67). A strong positive correlation was found (irho (65) = .611,/? < .001), indicating a significant relationship between the variables. Those with more immersion experience tend to have higher MCQ. Therefore the null hypothesis is rejected: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience.
H4: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. An independent-samples t-test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre-test scores (n=67) of those who completed the training (m=18) to those who did not (n2=49). Because this training was issued after August 2016, there were fewer participants who completed it than those who had not. A significant difference was found between these groups (/(65) = 2.033,/) < .05). The


Exploring MCQ at Cru
22
mean MCQ of those who did not complete core training (M = 5.771, sd= .987) was significantly lower than the mean MCQ scores of those who did (M= 6.267, sd= .490). Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their completion of Core Training.
H5: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. An independent-samples t-test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre-test scores (n=67) of those who completed Cru’s graduate level introduction to mission course (m=27) to those who had not (n2=40). No significant difference was found (7(65) = ,707, p >
.05). The mean MCQ of those who did not complete the intro to mission class (M= 5.84, sd = .830) was not significantly different than the mean MCQ scores of those who did (M= 6.00, sd = 1.014). Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission.
H6: MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer. To understand the testing process, the following table labels the groups utilized in the Solomon four-group design:
Name MCQ Pre-test Florecer MCQ Post-test N
Group 1 No No Yes 20
Group 2 No Yes Yes 23
Group 3 Yes No Yes 25
Group 4 Yes Yes Yes 20
The testing process follows a flowchart developed by Braver and Braver (1988). The
actual calculations used here indicated on the shaded path:


Exploring MCQ at Cru
23
Figure 3: Statistical test flowchart. Adopted from Braver & Braver, 1988, p. 152.
A 2 x 2 ANOVA was calculated to examine the interaction effect between time and treatment on the average MCQ post-test scores of all groups in the Solomon four-group design. No interaction effect was found between the groups. Neither was the effect of treatment significant. We proceeded to calculate a one-way between-subjects ANCOVA to examine the effect of Florecer, covarying for the effect of the MCQ pre-test on MCQ of groups 3 and 4. The main effect for Florecer was significant (F(l, 42) = 5.046, p < .05). The mean MCQ scores for those who completed Florecer were higher (p = 6.040, sd= .739) versus control (p = 5.856, sd = .749). The mean difference was statistically significant (p < .05). Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
24
Discussion
This study identified four variables with a significant positive difference on mean MCQ scores for Cru staff: 1) currently serving abroad, outside of one’s home country, 2) past immersion experience, 3) completing Cru’s Core Training, and 4) “Florecer,” the main treatment in this study.
Validity and Reliability
Data for H1-H5 were analyzed carefully to protect against the effects of history on internal validity. H6 was tested with a true experiment, but with low external validity as all participants were from Cru, the organization for whom this research is written.
Internal validity is assessed by looking into the variables and their respective measures.
At this time, the CQS is the only valid measure for MCQ, and it has high content validity (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008).
The ethnic identity measure for HI was the least valid of all measures and the hardest variable to measure overall. Due to the difficulties of validity in this measure, HI was written to allow for identification with a minority culture to be a matter of personal choice. The current immersion experience measure for H2 has high criterion-related validity and can be independently verified by Cru. The past immersion experience measure for H3 has less criterion-related validity than the current immersion experience measure because while it should be possible to independently verify some of a person’s past immersion experiences, the full validity of this measure is based on the respondent’s truthfulness and perception in answering the question. The validity of self-report measures for completion of Core Training (H4) and Introduction to Mission (H5) could have been strengthened by independent verification with Cru. This was not pursued due to infeasibility.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
25
Additionally, the uneven number of completed participants in each test group indicates the attrition that may affect internal validity.
The reliability of this research is threatened by the Hawthorne effect, although the Solomon four group design theoretically mitigated the effects of pre-testing and post-testing on the participants. It is possible that social desirability threatened this research as well, especially if participants perceived that the training was meant to increase their CQ or their prospects at Cru. Mentions of both were deliberately omitted in this research to protect its reliability. Reliability was further ensured by giving participants in treatment and non-control groups different links to a separate but identical post-tests, thus keeping their results separate.
The generalizability of this research is limited largely to Cru. Results can only be approximately generalized to equivalent groups and individuals: college graduates, young adults, primarily of North American / European cultural moorings. Although this limits the overall generalizability, it is thought that this audience forms the primary pool from which U.S. corporations, schools, nonprofit organizations, and governments hire and train. These are the entities which stand to gain the most from the results of this research, so generalizability appears to be sufficiently maximized.
Limitations
The self-report nature of MCQ makes it hard to reliably measure, which creates a challenge for conducting CQ research. Further, any single organization will struggle to provide large enough sample sizes for the necessary research methods, and this was the case at Cru. With only 67 participants completing this study and theoretical data saturation requiring an additional 283 participants (Orcher, 2014), the data saturation for this study is only 19%.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
26
Two additional phenomenon related to time effected this study. The first was maturation. The effects of maturation were not tested on H4 or H5. With Core Training taking two years to complete (H4) and Intro to Mission taking a minimum of one week to complete (H5), it is important to interpret the results of those tests accordingly. Further, for H6, it should be noted that participants assigned to control groups spent approximately 90 minutes less time in the experiment compared to those who were assigned to Florecer. While the effects of maturation on participants were accounted for in the research design and statistical analysis, these measures were slightly limited by the uneven time participation of individuals based on their random group assignments.
Future Research
The CQ framework is advantageous for Cru in that it puts forth a coherent model that seems to be lacking in the larger body of cultural competency research. Further, CQ theory asserts that those with higher Motivational CQ will move on to develop the other dimensions of CQ (knowledge, strategy, and action) more easily (Early & Ang, 2003; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008). MCQ would seem to eventually have bearing on Cru’s outward service to a diverse audience, as well as its internal conflicts related to culture and cognitive dissonance.
In addition to addressing those limitations mentioned above, future research could focus on those specific aspects of Cru’s Core Training that differ MCQ scores for Cru staff. Different treatments could also be tested according to the Solomon four group method outlined here, varying treatment on duration, delivery style, and content.
While cumulative past immersion experience was found to increase MCQ, determining whether a day long, week long, or month long immersion experience is beneficial to developing MCQ was beyond the scope of this study. The first interval of past immersion experience was


Exploring MCQ at Cru
27
measured at just 6 months. Cru could conduct more research on these short-term immersion experiences.
While the Introduction to Mission course was not shown to increase MCQ in participants, it is noted that only 27 participants had completed the class. It is recommended that Cru conduct future research on this class specifically, as more participants are really needed to confirm the results stated here.
Future research could explore questions about how the interaction or combination of several variables in this study that are shown to differ MCQ. For example, if staff with more than 5 years or past immersion experience are likely to have a high MCQ, will staff who also finished Core Training and are currently serving abroad have and even higher MCQ?
It is not yet understood what variables act to negatively differ MCQ for Cru staff.
Because MCQ measurements are self reported, this is certainly possible. Exploring this phenomenon could be fruitful future research for Cru. Similarly, Cru could conduct more research on its most experienced staff to determine if there is a “threshold” of immersion experience after which one’s MCQ is no longer likely to increase.
Finally, future research could focus on what develops the other three dimensions of CQ (cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioral) for Cru staff.
Recommendations
Incorporate MCQ development means in the literature into Cru’s future training.
The literature suggesting means for developing MCQ appears reliable, as training that was based on it positively differed MCQ in participants. It is recommended that Cru continue to leverage these means, beginning by finding ways to scale “Florecer” and the six topics it introduced. Further, it is recommended that Cru continue to use Core Training as a means for developing


Exploring MCQ at Cru
28
MCQ in staff. Cru would greatly benefit from a distinct research project on its Core Training to determine how to maximize its MCQ related benefits. Regardless, it is recommended that principles of MCQ development be deliberately added to Core Training.
Keep focus at Cru off of CQ language and explaining CQ theory. Because the Hawthorne effect can have such an impact on MCQ, it is recommended that Cru focus its future training on the treatments that are shown to increase MCQ, not on explaining the CQ model itself. The more specific references to CQ are made in Cru’s training, the more likely they are to get false positives in future CQ assessments of staff. The effect extends beyond specific training references to the greater organizational culture. The more Cru touts itself as a “culturally intelligent” organization, the more they increase the chances of biasing their own staffs results when they are actually assessed. It would benefit Cru greatly if their most culturally intelligent staff were also the humblest.
Train through immersion experience that is domestic and cumulative. This study further reveals that creating immersion experiences for Cru staff is likely to increase their MCQ. Like MCQ, “immersion” is measured by self-report; this means these experiences will be difficult for Cru to design in practice. However, these experiences do not need to happen all at once. This study suggests that there is benefit in cumulative experience, meaning six one-moth experiences and one six month experience are equal in terms of their MCQ benefit. The wording in this study created the opportunity for people’s immersion experience to be entirely domestic. While it is unlikely that all immersion experiences are created equal, Cru can further look into creating immersion experiences that are domestic, as participation would cost significantly less.
Encourage summer immersion experiences and how to leverage these as training opportunities. Since many staff at Cru have opportunities to travel abroad in the summer, it is


Exploring MCQ at Cru
29
recommended that Cru look into intentional MCQ trainings for those who go on summer missions. While it was not tested in this study, it appears likely that combining intentional MCQ development in a pre- and post-test scenario for staff who are abroad for summer missions or one year assignments has potential to develop MCQ for staff.
Look to Cru staff with the most immersion experience. Cru appears to have a high number of staff (38 were identified in this study) with more than five years of past immersion experience. Since these staff had higher MCQ, Cru could look to these staff to participate in organizational ventures where the outcomes of a higher MCQ are desirable. If Cru wanted to assess the MCQ of staff without gaining organization wide participation, Cru should begin with their staff who have the most experience abroad.
Develop internal policy for collaborating with staff abroad. Cru ought to look to those who are currently serving abroad to capitalize on the benefits of its most culturally intelligent staff. Time zones and travel costs make it difficult to organize these people to work on the same organizational directives. However, many outreach programs and materials that Cru produces would benefit from going through the effort of working through these obstacles, since nearly all of them are aimed at a diverse citizenry. All such programs and materials will benefit from the influence of people with a high MCQ. Cru in the U.S. ought to consider developing organizational policy that encourages or even mandates collaboration with staff who are abroad on relevant projects.
Give MCQ development appropriate time and boundaries. For Cru to seriously engage in developing a culturally intelligent workforce, they will need a culture that allows their staff this time. At Cru, the missional needs tend to overwhelm young staff and make it difficult for them to set appropriate boundaries around their other responsibilities. This seemed to be a


Exploring MCQ at Cru
30
major factor in the overall low participation and high attrition rates in this study. Therefore, it is all the more recommended that staff be held accountable to completing the training that develops their MCQ. It is important that staff give this process both the quantity of time and the quality of time that this process calls for.
Differentiate mono-cultural understanding and ethnic identity from high MCQ. Cru
leadership should not assume that the ethnic minority staff (or more accurately, those staff who identify with an audience besides U.S. majority ethnic culture) will possess a higher MCQ than other staff. Ethnic minorities can often have deep understandings of their own culture. However, having a deep mono-cultural understanding is not the same thing as having a high motivational cultural intelligence. It is recommended that leadership at Cru understand this, and demonstrate their understanding.
Conclusion
Developing MCQ at Cru is not simple. However, this study presents very valuable information that can guide this process for staff for years to come. Many options for developing culturally intelligent staff at Cru that are more expensive and time consuming can be avoided by following the recommendations put forth here. Additionally, by sticking with a CQ construct in their training, Cru can be much more specific and confident about the outcomes of their staff training and development efforts.
It ought to be remembered that MCQ is just one of four components that make up CQ. While MCQ has theoretical primacy in CQ development, the higher aspiration for Cru ought to be having culturally intelligent staff. The CQ literature suggests that a higher CQ effects work adjustment for expatriates (Huff, Song, & Gresch, 2013; GuQmundsdottir, 2015), cultural wellbeing and peer perception of suitability for overseas work (Peng, Van Dyne, & Oh, 2015, p.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
31
572), decreasing psychological symptoms and cultural adaption issues (Ward, Wilson, &
Fischer, 2011, p. 138), and realistic previews of cross-cultural adjustments (Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2006). Many of these outcomes would greatly benefit Cru’s faith-based mission to all peoples, even when the focus is only domestic. By following the recommendations set forth in this study, Cru can potentially set itself on a brilliant trajectory of greater missional effectiveness through its staff for many years to come.
For an explanation of how this research relates to the MPA competencies at the School of Public Affairs for the University of Colorado Denver, see Appendix E.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
32
References
Ang, S. & Van Dyne, L. (2008) Conceptualization of Cultural Intelligence: Definition,
Distinctiveness, and Nomological Network. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. 3-15. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Ang, S. & Van Dyne, L. (2008) Development and Validation of the CQS: The Cultural
Intelligence Scale. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. 16-39. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K.Y., Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N.A. (2007). Cultural Intelligence: Its Measurement and Effects on Cultural Judgment and Decision Making, Cultural Adaptation and Task Performance. Management and Organizational Review 3(3), 335-371. doi: 10.1111/j.l740-8784.2007.00082.x
Bandura, A. (2002). Social Cognitive Theory in Cultural Context. Applied Psychology: An International Review 51(2), 269-290.
Barnes, K.J., Smith, G.E., & Hernandez-Pozas, O. (2017). What’s Your CQ? A Framework to Assess and Develop Student Cultural Intelligence. Organization Management Journal 14(1), 34-44. doi: 10.1080/15416518.2017.1293425
Berry, J. W., & Ward, C. (2006). Commentary on “Redefining interactions across cultures and organizations.” Group & Organization Management 31(1), 64-77.
Bice, S. & Merriam, A. (2016). Defining Asia Capabilities for Australia’s Public Service. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75(3), 263-279. doi: 10.1111/1467-
8500.12189


Exploring MCQ at Cru
33
Blasco, M., Feldt, L.F., & Jakobsen, M. (2012). If only cultural chameleons could fly too: A
critical discussion of the concept of cultural intelligence. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 12(2), 229-245. doi: 10.1177/1470595812439872
Braver, M.C.W., & Braver, S. (1988). Statistical Treatment of the Solomon Four-Group Design: A Meta-Analytic Approach. Psychological Bulletin 104(1), 150-154. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.104.1.150
Biicker, J.J.L.E. & Korzilius, H. (2015). Developing cultural intelligence: assessing the effect of the Ecotonos cultural simulation game for international business students. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 26(15), 1995-2014. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1041759
Chen, X.P., Liu, D., & Portnoy, R. (2012). A Multilevel Investigation of Motivational Cultural Intelligence, Organizational Diversity Climate, and Cultural Sales: Evidence From U.S. Real Estate Firms. Journal of Applied Psychology 9 7(1), 93-106. doi: 10.1037/a0024697
CQ wheel (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.7clingo.com/cultural-intelligence/assessment/
(2016). Cru Staff Demographics. Retrieved from Cru.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum.
Early, P.C. & Ang, S. (2003) Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Early, P.C. & Peterson, R.S. (2004). The Elusive Cultural Chameleon: Cultural Intelligence as a New Approach to Intercultural Training for the Global Manager. Academy of Management Learning and Education 3(1), 100-115.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
34
Elenkov, D.S. & Manev, I.M. (2009). Senior expatriate leadership’s effects on innovation and the role of cultural intelligence. Journal of World Business 44(2009), 357-369. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2008.11.001
Fischer, R. (2011). Cross-cultural training effects on cultural essentialism beliefs and cultural intelligence. International Journal of InterculturalRelations 35(2011), 767-775. doi:
10.1016/j ijintrel.2011.08.005
Frose, F.J., Kim, K., & Eng, A. (2016). Language, Cultural Intelligence, and Inpatriate Turnover Intentions: Leveraginf Values in Multinational Corporations through Inpatriates. Management International Review, 56, 283-301. doi: 10.1007/sl 1575-015-0272-5 Gabrenya, W.K., Moukarzel, R.G., Pomerance, M.H., Griffith, R.L., & Deaton, J. (2011). A
Validation Study of the Defense Language Office Framework for Cultural Competance and an Evaluation of Available Assessment Instruments. Retrieved from: http:// scholar. googleusercontent. com/scholar? q=cache: 7 9xR0Ezl -g8J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,36 GuSmundsdottir, S. (2015). Nordic expatriates in the US: The relationship between cultural
intelligence and adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47(2015), 175-186. doi: 10.1016/j ijintrel.2015.05.001
Huff, K.C., Song, P., & Gresch, E.B. (2013). Cultural intelligence, personality, and cross-cultural adjustment: A study of expatriates in Japan. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 38(2014), 151-157. doi: 10.1016/j ijintrel.2013.08.005 Livermore, D. (2015). Leading with Cultural Intelligence: The Real Secret to Success. New York, NY: American Management Association.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
35
MacNab, B.R. & Worthley, R. (2010). Individual characteristics as predictors of cultural intelligence development: The relevance of self-efficacy. International Journal of InterculturalRelations 36(2012), 62-71. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.12.001
Mosakowski, E., Calic, G., & Earley, P.C. (2013). Cultures as Learning Laboratories: What Makes Some More Effective Than Others? Academy of Management Learning & Education 12(3), 512-526. doi: 10.5465/amle.2013.0149
Ng, K. Y., & Early, P.C. (2006). Culture and Intelligence: old constructs, new frontiers. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 4-19. doi: 10.1177/1059601105275251
Ott, J.S., Parkes, S.J., and Simpson, R.B. (2003). “Motivation” (132-141) in Ott, J.S., Parkes, S.J., and Simpson, R.B. (eds.) Classic readings in Organizational Behavior, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Orcher, L.T. (2014). Conducting Research: Social and Behavioral Science Methods. CA: Pyrczak Publishing.
Peng, A.C., Van Dyne, L., & Oh, K. (2015). The Influence of Motivational Cultural Intelligence on Cultural Effectiveness Based on Study Abroad: The Moderating Role of Participant’s Cultural Identity. Journal of Management Education 39(5), 572-596. doi: 10.1177/1052562914555717
Rehg, M.T. & Gundlach, M.J. (2012). Examining the influence of cross-cultural training on cultural intelligence and specific self-efficacy. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 19(2), 215-232. doi: 10.1108/13527601211219892
Reichard, R.J., Dollwet, M., & Louw-Potgieter J. (2014). Development of Cross-Cultural
Psychological Capital and Its Relationship With Cultural Intelligence and Ethnocentrism.


Exploring MCQ at Cru
36
Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies 21(2), 150-164. doi: 10.1177/1548051813515517
Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N.A. (2006). Motivational Cultural Intelligence, Realistic Job Preview, Realistic Living Conditions Preview, and Cross-Cultural Adjustment. Group and Organizational Management 31(1), 154-173. doi: 10.1177/1059601105275293
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics, 2015 (NCES 2016-014), Chapter 3. Retrieved from: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98
Van Dyne, L., Ang S, Ng K.Y., Rockstuhl, T., Tan M.L., & Koh C. (2012). Sub-Dimensions of the Four-Factor Model of Cultural Intelligence: Expanding the Conceptualization and Measurement of Cultural Intelligence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 6(4), 295-313. doi: 10.1111/j.l751-9004.2012.00429.x
Ward, C., Fischer, R., Lam, F.S.Z., & Hall, L. (2009). The Convergent, Discriminant, and Incremental Validity of Scores on a Self-Report Measure of Cultural Intelligence. Education and Psychological Measurement 69(1), 85-105. doi: 10.1177/0013164408322001
Ward, C., Wilson, J., & Fischer, R. (2011). Assessing the predictive validity of cultural
intelligence over time. Personality and Individual Differences 51(2011), 138-142. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.032
Wood, E.D. & St. Peters, H.Y.Z. (2014). Short-term cross-cultural study tours: impact on
cultural intelligence. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 25(4),
558-570. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.796315


Exploring MCQ at Cru
37
Woodman, J.V. (2017). Research Diagram. Denver, CO.
Yunlu, D.G. & Clapp-Smith, R. (2014). Metacognition, cultural psychological capital and motivational cultural intelligence. Cross Cultural Management 21(4), 386-399. doi: 10.1108/CCM-07-2012-0055


Exploring MCQ at Cru
38
Appendix A Survey Questions
The following table organizes the survey questions that will be asked of research participants:
Survey type Question Answer Type Related Variable
Initial Survey 1. Name Fill in the blank [back up in case email address fails]
Initial Survey 2. Email address Fill in the blank [used to deliver training]
Initial Survey 3. I currently serve as a full time, part-time, or affiliate staff with Cru Yes/No (checkbox) [used for ensuring eligibility]
Initial Survey 4. Thinking about my ethnic identity, I identify most strongly with... A) U.S. majority ethnic culture B) one or more U.S. minority ethnic culture(s) C) Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority ethnic culture(s) D) I do not identify with any of the above Ethnic Identity (IV)
Initial Survey 5. I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country A) Yes B) No C) I can fairly call more than one country my home, including the one I serve in now. Current Immersion Experience (IV)
Initial Survey 6. Thinking about all of my experience being immersed in a foreign culture, both domestically and internationally, my total experience adds up to: A) None B) 0-6 months C) 6-12 months K) 4.5-5 years L) More than 5 years Past Immersion experience (IV)
Initial Survey I have completed Cru’s Core Training (issued after August, 2016) Yes/No (checkbox) Core Training (IV)
Initial Survey I have completed Cru’s Introduction to Missions Course (available through IBS, the institute of Biblical Studies). Yes/No (checkbox) Introduction to Missions (IV)


Exploring MCQ at Cru
39
Survey type Question Answer Type Related Variable
Pre-and 1. I enjoy interacting with people from different seven point Likert scale MCQ
post- test cultures. (DV)
Pre-and 2. I am confident that I can socialize with locals seven point Likert scale MCQ
post- test in a culture that is unfamiliar to me. (DV)
Pre-and 3. I am sure that I can deal with the stresses of seven point Likert scale MCQ
post- test adjusting to a culture that is new to me. (DV)
Pre-and 4. I enjoy living in cultures that are unfamiliar seven point Likert scale MCQ
post- test to me. (DV)
Pre-and 5. I am confident that I can get accustomed to seven point Likert scale MCQ
post- test the shopping conditions in a different culture. (DV)
[Post- B. I completed the electronic training I received Yes/No (checkbox) CQ specific
test only] as part of this study training


Exploring MCQ at Cru
40
Appendix B
Independent Research Variables
The following table organizes the independent variables according to their measurements and hypotheses:
Hypothesis Independent Variable Measurement Level of Measurement
H1: Identification with an ethnic minority group in the U.S. increases MCQ. Ethnic Identity Survey Question #4 Nominal
H2: A current immersion experience increases MCQ. Current Immersion Experience Survey Question #5 Nominal
H3: Past immersion experiences increase MCQ. Past Immersion Experience Survey Question #6 Interval
H4: Completing Cru’s core training does not increase MCQ. Core training Survey Question #8 Nominal
H5: Completing Cru’s introduction to mission course does not increase MCQ. Introduction to Missions Survey Question #9 Nominal
H6: Completing “Florecer” increases MCQ. Random Group assignment 1-4 Avg. of post-test survey questions (lower scores=higher CQ) Interval


Exploring MCQ at Cru
41
Appendix C
Descriptive Statistics
Frequency Percent
Valid *U.S. majority ethnic culture 81 73.6%
One or more U.S. minority culture(s) 12 10.9%
Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture(s) 10 9.1%
1 do not identify with any of the above 6 5.5%
Total 109 99.1%
Missing System 1 .9%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 4: Ethnic Identity Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance = . 769
Frequency Percent
Valid I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country 18 16.4%
*l am not currently serving abroad, outside my home country 87 79.1%
I can fairly call more than one country my home, including the one I serve in now 4 3.6%
Total 109 99.1%
Missing System 1 .9%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 5: Current Immersion Experience Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance = .187


Exploring MCQ at Cru
42
Frequency Percent
Valid None / no experience 3 2.7%
0-6 months 25 22.7%
7-12 months 12 10.9%
1-1.5 years 2 1.8%
1.5-2 years 8 7.3%
2 - 2.5 years 10 9.1%
2.5 - 3 years 8 7.3%
3 - 3.5 years 2 1.8%
4 - 4.5 years 1 .9%
*More than 5 years 38 34.5%
Total 109 99.1%
Missing System 1 .9%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 6: Past Immersion Experience Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance =17.95
Frequency Percent
Valid Yes 30 27.3%
*No 79 71.8%
Total 109 99.1%
Missing System 1 .9%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 7: Completed Cru's Core Training data. Frequency Percent
Valid Yes 34 30.9
No 75 68.2
Total 109 99.1
Missing System 1 .9
Total 110 100.0
Figure 8: Completed Cru's Intro to Mission Course


Exploring MCQ at Cru
43
The proceeding tables show MCQ test data. The range is 1-7, with the theoretically highest MCQ score being 7.
The table below represents the mean MCQ pre-test data:
Pre-test MCQ Average
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 3.20 1 .9% 1.5% 1.5%
3.60 2 1.8% 3.0% 4.5%
3.80 2 1.8% 3.0% 7.5%
4.40 2 1.8% 3.0% 10.4%
4.60 1 .9% 1.5% 11.9%
5.20 3 2.7% 4.5% 16.4%
5.40 3 2.7% 4.5% 20.9%
5.60 7 6.4% 10.4% 31.3%
5.80 6 5.5% 9.0% 40.3%
6.00 8 7.3% 11.9% 52.2%
*6.20 12 10.9% 17.9% 70.1%
6.40 3 2.7% 4.5% 74.6%
6.60 2 1.8% 3.0% 77.6%
6.80 7 6.4% 10.4% 88.1%
7.00 8 7.3% 11.9% 100.0%
Total 67 60.9% 100.0%
Missing System 43 39.1%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 9: Pre-testMCO averages. Mode = * | variance = .829


Exploring MCQ at Cru
44
The table below represents the mean MCQ post-test data:
Post-test MCQ Average
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid 3.20 1 .9% 1.1% 1.1%
3.80 1 .9% 1.1% 2.3%
4.00 1 .9% 1.1% 3.4%
4.60 1 .9% 1.1% 4.5%
4.80 2 1.8% 2.3% 6.8%
5.00 1 .9% 1.1% 8.0%
5.20 4 3.6% 4.5% 12.5%
5.40 6 5.5% 6.8% 19.3%
5.60 13 11.8% 14.8% 34.1%
5.80 8 7.3% 9.1% 43.2%
*6.00 14 12.7% 15.9% 59.1%
6.20 13 11.8% 14.8% 73.9%
6.40 9 8.2% 10.2% 84.1%
6.60 3 2.7% 3.4% 87.5%
6.80 4 3.6% 4.5% 92.0%
7.00 7 6.4% 8.0% 100.0%
Total 88 80.0% 100.0%
Missing System 22 20.0%
Total 110 100.0%
Figure 10: Post-testMCO averages. Mode = * | variance = .479


Exploring MCQ at Cru
45
The following charts show the mean MCQ post-test scores for the randomly assigned groups. The first group is those who took no MCQ pre-test and listened to a “dummy training” (n=20):
Post-test MCQ Average
Group ID: Control and Post-test
Post-test MCQ Average
The second group is those who took no MCQ pre-test and listened to “Florecer” (n=23):
Post-test MCQ Average
Group ID: Florecer and Post-test
Post-test MCQ Average


Exploring MCQ at Cru
46
The third group is those who took a MCQ pre-test and listened to a “dummy training”
(n=25):
Post-test MCQ Average
Group ID: Control, Pre-test, and Post-test
Post-test MCQ Average
The fourth group is those who took a MCQ pre-test and listened to “Florecer” (n=20):
Post-test MCQ Average
Group ID: Florecer, Pre-test, and Post-test
Post-test MCQ Average


Exploring MCQ at Cru
47
Appendix D
Correlational and Inferential Statistics
The following tables are the comprehensive sets of the appropriate correlational and inferential statistical print outs for each hypothesis.
HI: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture
Descriptives
Pre-test MCQ Average
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum
U.S. majority ethnic culture 52 5.7577 .93165 .12920 5.4983 6.0171 3.20 7.00
One or more U.S. minority culture(s) 5 6.0800 .54037 .24166 5.4090 6.7510 5.60 7.00
Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture(s) 6 6.4667 .67725 .27649 5.7559 7.1774 5.60 7.00
1 do not identify with any of the above 4 6.7500 .30000 .15000 6.2726 7.2274 6.40 7.00
Total 67 5.9045 .90477 .11054 5.6838 6.1252 3.20 7.00
AN OVA Pre-test MCQ Average Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 6.030 3 2.010 2.638 .057
Within Groups 47.998 63 .762
Total 54.029 66


Exploring MCQ at Cru
48
H2: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience.
Group Statistics
Currently Immersed N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pre-test MCQ Average I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country 11 6.5091 .41341 .12465
I am not currently serving abroad, outside my home country 52 5.7500 .95126 .13192
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
gy 95% Confidence Mean Error Interval of the
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Differen ce Differen ce Difference Lower Upper
Pre-test Equal MCQ variances Average assumed 2.993 .089 2.58 2 61 .012 .75909 .29396 .17128 1.34690
Equal variances not assumed 4.18 3 36.0 72 .000 .75909 .18149 .39103 1.12715
H3: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience.
Correlations
Pre-test MCQ Average Immersion Experience
Spearman's rho Pre-test MCQ Average Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .611**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 67 67
Immersion Experience Correlation Coefficient .611** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 67 67
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).


Exploring MCQ at Cru
49
H4: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training.
Group Statistics
Completed Cru's Core Training N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pre-test MCQ Average Yes 18 6.2667 .48990 .11547
No 49 5.7714 .98658 .14094
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances F Sig. t df t-test for Equality of Mean: Std. Mean Error Sig. (2- Differen Differen tailed) ce ce s 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper
Pre-test MCQ Equal variances Average assumed 5.450 .023 2.033 65 .046 .49524 .24366 .00862 .98185
Equal variances not assumed 2.718 59.00 4 .009 .49524 .18220 .13065 .85982
H5: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission.
Group Statistics
Completed Cru's Intro to Mission Class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Pre-test MCQ Average Yes 27 6.0000 1.01375 .19510
No 40 5.8400 .83045 .13131
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
gy 95% Confidence Mean Error Interval of the
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Differen ce Differen ce Difference Lower Upper
Pre-test MCQ Equal variances assumed .610 .438 .707 65 .482 .16000 .22621 -.29178 .61178
Average Equal variances .680 48.2 .500 .16000 .23517 -.31276 .63276
not assumed 84


Exploring MCQ at Cru
50
H6: MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer.
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: MCQ
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Siq.
Corrected Model .256® 1 .256 .390 .536
Intercept 1420.864 1 1420.864 2163.174 .000
prepost .256 1 .256 .390 .536
Florecer .000 0
prepost * Florecer .000 0
Error 24.960 38 .657
Total 1446.080 40
Corrected Total 25.216 39
a. R Squared = .010 (Adjusted R Squared = -.016)
Descriptive Statistics
Dependent Variable: Post-test MCQ Average
Group ID Mean Std. Deviation N
Control, Pre-test, and Post- 5.8560 .74949 25
test (Group 3)
Florecer, Pre-test, and Post- 6.0400 .73870 20
test (Group 4)
Total 5.9378 .74201 45
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Dependent Variable: post_cq_avg
Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared
Corrected Model 19.710® 2 9.855 91.653 .000 .814
Intercept 1.757 1 1.757 16.345 .000 .280
mean MCQ pre- 19.334 1 19.334 179.807 .000 .811
test
Florecer .543 1 .543 5.046 .030 .107
Error 4.516 42 .108
Total 1610.800 45
Corrected Total 24.226 44
a. R Squared = .814 (Adjusted R Squared = .805)


Exploring MCQ at Cru
51
Appendix E MPA Competencies
The competencies I gained during my time at the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver were incorporated into this project. The most apt competencies demonstrated are in: 1. the area of leading and managing in public governance, 2. the area of analyzing, synthesizing, thinking critically, solving problems, and making decisions, and 3. the area of communicating and interacting productively with a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry.
In the area of leading and managing in public governance, this project specifically draws out the competency of applying organizational theory and behavior to organizational improvement. The Organizational Management and Behavior class PUAD 5002 was especially helpful for expressing domestic cultural issues that drove the research questions as cognitive dissonance in a nonprofit organization. In understanding the nonprofit sector to be a personnel heavy organizational environment, the political and human resource frames of understanding were necessary underpinnings for the successful design and data collection of this research. Further, the results themselves point to diverse leadership models that echo those presented in Public Service Leadership PUAD 5006. The models and theories for leadership among different cultures presented in that class helped pushed the research in the direction of CQ.
In the area of analyzing, synthesizing, thinking critically, solving problems, and making decisions, this project relies on the competencies gained in Research and Analytic Methods PUAD 5003 to select and use appropriate research methods to find, collect, synthesize, and analyze data. The opportunity to test a hypothesis with a Solomon four-group research design


Exploring MCQ at Cru
52
was seeded in this class, and the statistical analyses required by the project would have been unapproachable without this primer.
In the area of communicating and interacting productively with a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry, two additional competencies are demonstrated. The first was an understanding and appreciation of the values of diverse backgrounds and viewpoints in a democracy, as well as an application of tools to engage and manage them. Many equity issues that are being addressed by nonprofits of various types were explored in Economic Development, PUAD 6600. Managing Diversity, PUAD 5260, was also invaluable in this regard. The assignment to write a value proposition for a diversity initiative drove a desire in this project to go a step beyond empathy and positively engage longstanding issues of equity and cultural tension in the U.S.
The second competency in this area was to communicate effectively in writing to diverse audiences. Finding language to operationalize ethnic and cultural issues for Cru, an organization that is not only growing in its diverse workforce but that serves an even more diverse citizenry, was challenging. Communicating results exasperated that challenge. But practice for doing this was gained in papers written for Introduction to Public Administration, PUAD 5001, and in the Seminar for Nonprofit Management, PUAD 5110. Both classes returned written and verbal feedback from professors and students on the quality and clarity of my writing that influenced the style and presentation of this project, aiming it more specifically at the diverse workforce that Cru hopes to grow.


School of Public Affairs
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER
Form Name: Submission Time: Browser:
IP Address: Unique ID: Location:
capstone repository permission December 8, 2017 9:40 am Chrome 62.0.3202.94 / Windows 7 8.10.140.190 370067469
37.750999450684, -97.821998596191
Description Area
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS ELECTRONIC CAPSTONE REPOSITORY
Description Area Dear Capstone Author and Capstone Client:The Auraria Library
Digital Library Program is a nonprofit center responsible for the collection and preservation of digital resources for education.The capstone project, protected by your copyright, and/or created under the supervision of the client has been identified as important to the educational mission of the University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library.The University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library respectfully requests non-exclusive rights to digitize the capstone project for Internet distribution in image and text formats for an unlimited term. Digitized versions will be made available via the Internet, for on- and off-line educational use, with a statement identifying your rights as copyright holder and the terms of the grant of permissions.Please review, sign and return the follow Grant of Permissions. Please do not hesitate to call me or email your questions.Sincerely,Matthew C. MarinerAuraria LibraryDigital Collections ManagerMatthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303.556.5817
Grant of Permissions
Description Area In reference to the following title(s):
Author (Student Name) Jason Woodman
Title (Capstone Project Title) Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru
Publication Date December 2017
I am the: Client
Description Area As client of the copyright holder affirm that the content submitted is identical to that which was originally supervised and that the content is suitable for publication in the Auraria Library Digital Collections.


Description Area
This is a non-exclusive grant of permissions for on-line and off-line use for an indefinite term. Off-line uses shall be consistent either for educational uses, with the terms of U.S. copyright legislation's "fair use" provisions or, by the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library, with the maintenance and preservation of an archival copy. Digitization allows the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library to generate image-and text-based versions as appropriate and to provide and enhance access using search software.
This grant of permissions prohibits use of the digitized versions for commercial use or profit.
Signature
Your Name Scott Crocker
Date 12/8/17
Email Address
ATTENTION
Description Area Grant of Permissions is provided to:
Auraria Digital Library Program / Matthew C. MarinerAuraria Libraryl 100 Lawrence | Denver, CO
80204matthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303-556-5817


School of Public Affairs
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER
Form Name: Submission Time: Browser:
IP Address: Unique ID: Location:
capstone repository permission December 7, 2017 7:32 pm Mobile Safari 11.0 / iOS 24.8.154.67 369951177
39.92850112915, -104.95590209961
Description Area
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS ELECTRONIC CAPSTONE REPOSITORY
Description Area Dear Capstone Author and Capstone Client:The Auraria Library
Digital Library Program is a nonprofit center responsible for the collection and preservation of digital resources for education.The capstone project, protected by your copyright, and/or created under the supervision of the client has been identified as important to the educational mission of the University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library.The University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library respectfully requests non-exclusive rights to digitize the capstone project for Internet distribution in image and text formats for an unlimited term. Digitized versions will be made available via the Internet, for on- and off-line educational use, with a statement identifying your rights as copyright holder and the terms of the grant of permissions.Please review, sign and return the follow Grant of Permissions. Please do not hesitate to call me or email your questions.Sincerely,Matthew C. MarinerAuraria LibraryDigital Collections ManagerMatthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303.556.5817
Grant of Permissions
Description Area In reference to the following title(s):
Author (Student Name) Jason Woodman
Title (Capstone Project Title) Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru
Publication Date December 6th, 2017
I am the: Author (student)
Description Area As copyright holder or licensee with the authority to grant copyright permissions for the aforementioned title(s), I hereby authorize Auraria Library and University of Colorado Denver to digitize, distribute, and archive the title(s) for nonprofit, educational purposes via the Internet or successive technologies.


Description Area
This is a non-exclusive grant of permissions for on-line and off-line use for an indefinite term. Off-line uses shall be consistent either for educational uses, with the terms of U.S. copyright legislation's "fair use" provisions or, by the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library, with the maintenance and preservation of an archival copy. Digitization allows the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library to generate image-and text-based versions as appropriate and to provide and enhance access using search software.
This grant of permissions prohibits use of the digitized versions for commercial use or profit.
Signature
Your Name
Date
December 7th, 2017
Email Address
ATTENTION
Description Area Grant of Permissions is provided to:
Auraria Digital Library Program / Matthew C. MarinerAuraria Libraryl 100 Lawrence | Denver, CO
80204matthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303-556-5817


Full Text

PAGE 1

Running head: EXPLORING MCQ AT CRU Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru Jason Woodman University of Colorado Denver School of Public Affairs Fall 2017

PAGE 2

Exploring MCQ at Cru 2 Capstone Project Disclosure This client based project was completed on behalf of C ru and supervised by PUAD 5361 Capstone course instructor Wendy L. Bolyard, PhD and second faculty reader John Ronquillo , PhD . This project does not necessarily reflect the views of the School of Public Affairs or the faculty readers. Raw data were not inc luded in this document, rather relevant materials were provided directly to the client. Permissions to include this project in the Auraria Library Digital Repository are found in the final appendix . Questions about this capstone project should be directed to the student author.

PAGE 3

Exploring MCQ at Cru 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary 4 Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru 6 Literature Review 9 MCQ as a Dimension with Sub dimensions .10 Outcomes Predicted by Motivational CQ .10 11 13 14 Methodology 15 16 Measurement and Data Collection 16 Hypothese 17 18 19 Di scussion 23 Validity and Reliabil ity 25 26 Appendix A

PAGE 4

Exploring MCQ at Cru 4 Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E

PAGE 5

Exploring MCQ at Cru 5 Executive Summary This study is about how Cru staff can get smarter. It is about a specific theory of intelligence known as cultural intelligence. More specifically, it is about a dimension of cultural intelligence known as motivational cultural intellige nce (MCQ). The literature review grounds the theory behind cultural intelligence in t he greater idea that if Cru staff can develop MCQ they will be more effective both in their service to the diverse public of the U.S. and in managing their internal confli cts in an increasingly diverse organization. Six variables related to developing MCQ were investigated. The first variable, staff ethnic identity, relates to a condition that existed before individuals joined staff with Cru. The next two variables, current immersion experience and past immersions exp erience, relate to indirect training experiences people have received either at Cru or before. The fourth and fifth variables relate to direct raining r equired for all staff and ission course. The final variable was a new training developed for Cru based on This study identified four variables with a significant positive difference on mean MCQ scores for Cru staff: 1) currently serving abr in this study. Eight r ecommendations based on these findings are discussed for Cru: 1. Incorporate MCQ development means in the literature into future training. 2. Keep focus at Cru off of CQ language and explaining CQ theory. 3. Train through immersion experience that is domestic and cumulative. 4. Encourage summer immersion experiences and how to leverage these as trainin g opportunities.

PAGE 6

Exploring MCQ at Cru 6 5. Look to Cru staff with the most immersion experience. 6. Develop internal policy for collaborating with staff abroad. 7. Give MCQ development appropriate time and boundaries. 8. Differentiate mono cultural understanding and ethnic identity from high MCQ.

PAGE 7

Exploring MCQ at Cru 7 Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru It is widely acknowledged that the U.S. is globalizing at an increasing rate. Ethnic and cultural diversity seems to continue growing and thriving. The influences of immigration, urbanization, and an increasing influx of expatriates are apparent . T he public sector , corporations, schools, nonpro fit organizations, and governments seem motivated to train culturally effective employees in both the foreign and domestic spheres. Yet important questions remain. What is cultural What training is required to develop it? Since its i nception in 2003, Cultural Intelligence (CQ) has gained credibility among researchers. CQ has been defined as capability to function effectively across various cultural (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008 , p. 3). The concept seems to get at the very thing that public sector organizations in the U.S. are looking for. This is especially true at Cru, the 501(c)(3) Christian organization for whom this research is designed. Not only do 14% of Cru staff identify as ethnic minorities ( Cru Staff Demographics, 2016 ), but the organization works specifically with college students in the U.S . , a public sector demographic that is diversifying ( U.S. Department of Education, National Center fo r Education Statistics, 2016 ). Working with the National Director of Culture and Mission for Cru, this research tests current and prospective training programs and explor es antecedent conditions as they relate to CQ for Cru staff. The timing is optimal for Cru, as they plan to make cultural training mandatory for nearly 4,000 staff in the next 12 months (S. Crocker, personal communication, August 29, 2017).

PAGE 8

Exploring MCQ at Cru 8 CQ has four main dimensions: cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and behavioral (Earley & Ang, 2003). In CQ theory, the four components of CQ are thought to be somewhat sequential (Early & Ang, 2003, p. 66; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p.5). These are represented in the diagram below ( See Figure 1 ) . Before one can exhibit behavioral CQ in appropriate ways in another culture, one must engage their metacognitive CQ in order to develop a strategy to do so. Before that, one must have some cognitive CQ knowledge to strategize with. But before it all, one needs a sufficiently high motivational CQ to get started. ample motivatio n for engaging inter culturally, little point in spending time and money on intercultural (Livermore, 2015, p. 28). W hile all four of these dimensions are worthy of further study, the scale of this research will focus on motivational CQ ( MCQ) largely because of its theoretical primacy in cross cultural success. The literature review below further enumerates the outcomes that MCQ specifically predicts . Despite the many advantages and performance predictors of MCQ, few organizations are implementing CQ development programs of any kind. This is partly because CQ is a relatively Figure 1 . CQ wheel (n.d.).

PAGE 9

Exploring MCQ at Cru 9 new construct. It is also due to the fact that little research has been done on programs that actually develop CQ, and less still on what develops specific dimensions of it. Cultural effectiveness in organizations today often seems to rely on a loose affiliation of immersion experiences, assumed cultural value training, and judgments based on ethnic identity. CQ researchers and pioneers themselves have noted these trends (Earley & Peterson, 2004, pp. 102 103). These practices appear to have many problems and limitations. Immersion is usually expensive and can take several months or years. Further, it seems unclear exactly what immersion is a predictor of. Some organizations may hire individuals with international experience or send people overseas to gain CQ directly but they have no empirical means for determining how these qualitie s will relate to their cultural success. Some organizations even appear to make judgments about current or prospective employee ethnic identity and assume, for instance, that their Asian American employee will help them succeed in China. Such practices a re highly non scientific, and could even be considered discrimination in some cases. Given the speed of globalization and the limited time and money available to most public sector organizations for training culturally successful employees, a training mech anism that is cheaper, shorter, and more predictive of particular outcomes is a great need. This research intends to help by answering the question: What kind s of programs or factors wi ll ultimately develop MCQ? The following literature review and methodo logy presented for this research should guide future CQ research and inform organizations as they endeavor to use CQ to keep up with the speed of globalization.

PAGE 10

Exploring MCQ at Cru 10 Literature Review An early definition of CQ called it a person capability to adapt effectively to new cultural (Earley & Ang, 2003, p. 59). The distinct qualities of CQ from its related constructs are well stated: the definition of general intelligence by S chmidt and Hunter (2000), CQ is conceptualized as a specific form of intelligence focused on an ability to grasp and reason correctly in situations characterized by cultural diversity. Just as emotional intelligence (EQ) complements cognitive intelligence (IQ), in that both are important for an individ ual to find success at work and in personal relationships in an increasingly interdependent world (Earley & Gibson, 2002), we suggest that CQ is another complementary form of intelligence that can explain variability in coping with diversity and functionin g in new cultural settings. Since the norms for social interaction vary from culture to culture, it is unlikely that cognitive intelligence, EQ, or social intelligence will translate automatically into effective cross cultural adjustment and interaction (A ng & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 4) CQ has evolved in theory from a three to a four dimensional construct with metacognitive, cognitive, motivational, and behavioral components (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008). It is important to point out that these components are consider ed capabilities as opposed to personality traits. Theoretically , CQ is a much more malleable concept than personality (Earley & Ang, 2003). The distinction of CQ from trait like personality characteristics is thus described: In the broader nomological net work of cultural intelligence, personality characteristics are conceptualized as antecedents or causal agents of cultural (Earley & Ang, p. 160).

PAGE 11

Exploring MCQ at Cru 11 Unlike personality, CQ is considered a capability that can be developed, a point which organizat ions interested in high CQ related outcomes should note (Earley & Ang, 2003). MCQ as a Dimension with Sub dimensions As CQ theory advanced, motivation grew into one of four dimensions of CQ: Metacognitive CQ reflects the mental capability to acquire and understand cultural knowledge. Cognitive CQ reflects general knowledge and knowledge structures about cultures. Motivational CQ reflects individual capability to direct energy toward learning about and functioning in intercultural situations. Behavioral CQ reflects individual capability to exhibit appropriate verbal and non verbal actions in culturally diverse interactions. ( Ang & Van Dyne, 2008 , p. 5) More recently, Van Dyne et al. (2012) proposed eleven sub dimensions of the original four higher order dimensions, or factors. expanded framework provides a better articulated conceptual space for each of four factors of cultural intelligence which should facilitate future researc h by providing more depth to the conceptualization of each factor of cultural (Van Dyne et al., 2012, p. 296). In this framework, MCQ was conceived as having three sub dimensions: draw on contemporary motivational perspectives to identify intrinsic and extrinsic interest (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and self efficacy (Bandura, 2002) as sub dimensions of motivational (Van Dyne et al., 2012, p. 296). Outcomes Predicted by Motivational CQ The most promising aspects of CQ research lie in what CQ measurements, as they exist today, can predict. MCQ alone has been tied by itself to a host of practical outcomes. Chen, Liu, and Portnoy (2012) found high MCQ was linked to increased cultural sales in U.S. real estate firms. They defined as number of housing transactions occurring between

PAGE 12

Exploring MCQ at Cru 12 people of different cultural (Chen, Liu, & Portnoy, 2012, p. 94). MCQ was positively correlated to Nordic adjustment to the U.S. (Guðmundsd ó ttir, 2015). A similar study found MC Q was positively related to work adjustment for expatriates living in Japan, and that it explained the adjustments better than the five factor personality assessment ( Huff, Song, & Gresch, 2013) . MCQ was associated with increases in (a) cultura l well being reported by participants and (b) peer perceptions of suitability for overseas among U.S. university study abroad participants ( Peng, Van Dyne, & Oh, 2015, p. 572). High MCQ was found to relate to psychological symptoms and sociocultural adaptation among international students in New Zealand (Ward, Wilson, & Fischer, 2011 , p. 138). Along with behavioral CQ, MCQ was positively rela ted to cultural adaptation (Ang et al., 2007). Finally, according to Templer, Tay, and Chandrasekar (2006) who found MCQ positively correlated to realistic previews of cross cultural adjustment for global professionals, in depth examination of motivationa l CQ, as one specific aspect of CQ, has the potential to advance our understanding of CQ and serves as a model of future research on (p. 155). These results are promising, especially for organizations who train or inte nd to train employees for cross c ultural work, either domestically or abroad. Further, research demonstrates that the predictions of MCQ are not bound by a single ethnic or national cultural audience. Critical Reviews of CQ At the outset, it is noted that the definition of CQ as the ca pability to function effectively across various cultural leaves both and undefined (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 3) . It should be noted that these ideas , although difficult to define, nonetheless have inescapable bearing on CQ research at a conceptual level.

PAGE 13

Exploring MCQ at Cru 13 Blasco, Feldt, and Jakobsen (2012) argue that culture is a more flexible construct, from the post modern perspective, than the CQ literature suggests. They point out that way culture is portrayed in much CQ literature as something that can be learned or studied in itself and thereafter used to steer a given cross cultural encounter becomes highly problematic ( Blasco, Feldt, & Jakobsen , 2012, p. 236). The criticism of CQ is be tter stated by Barry and Ward (2006), as follows: essence, we believe that because there is no culture free behavior, there can be no culture free (p. 71). CQ research is different from cultural research since it is not itself researching any parti cular cultural cluster, but an etic set of intellectual capabilities (Ng & Early, 2006). The etic and emic characteristics of culture were discussed early in the CQ theory, but as it is unclear where to draw this line regarding culture, it is also unclear where to draw it regarding CQ (Early & Ang, 2003, pp. 64 67). Ward, Fischer, Lam, and Hall (2009) further criticize the self report nature of CQ measurement: CQ is a manifestation of intelligence, as argued by Earley and Ang (2003), ability testing is more appropriate than self (p. 103). Ang and Van Dyne (2008) draw upon contemporary theories of multiple intelligences in their classification of CQ, but it is noteworthy that the other to which CQ is compared such as IQ and EQ (em otional intelligence quotient) have performance based measuring tools. This is perhaps due to the early phase in which CQ research finds itself. A study from the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute gave a critical review of the CQS, the instrum ent used for measuring CQ in most research, stating that it has low criterion validity compared with other similar assessments ( Gabrenya, Moukarzel, Pomerance, Griffith, & Deaton, 2011). It appears that CQ measurement lags behind its conceptual development.

PAGE 14

Exploring MCQ at Cru 14 Developing CQ in General There is little focused research on MCQ itself and comparatively less research on what develops any dimension of CQ at all. Early and Peterson (2004) proposed culturally intelligent training theory, but did not report testing it. Since that time, it is unclear if anyone has researched cultural training based on the four CQ dimensions. Further, where training has been found to increase MCQ, this has not been the primary target of research. Fischer (2011) reported increased CQ in university students via a combination of lectures, and two simulation activities: BAFA BAFA and Excell. BAFA BAFA is a group based assimilation aimed at sensitizing participants to cultural values and the emotional toll of cross cultural interactions and communication (Fischer, 2011) . Excell is a modification that allows participants to culturally appropriate behaviors in a safe environme (Fischer, 2011). Bücker and Korzilius (2015) used the Ecotones cultural simulation software , a game where players create an explanatory myth for a deliberately selected set of cultural options and then work on solving problems based on the cultures the y create. Using this game, they were able to increase CQ for international business students ( Bücker & Korzilius, 2015) . Lecture format training for U.S. government contractors increased their cognitive and behavioral CQ, but their motivational CQ less significantly (Rehg & Gundlach, 2012). Wood and St. Peters (2014) found that short cross cultural study tours increased me tacognitive , cognitive , and motivational CQ, but not behavioral CQ. McNab and Worthley (2010) used experiential learning to increase metacognitive , behavioral, and motivational CQ, and found evidence that general self efficacy mediates successful developme nt of CQ. Reichard, Dollwet, and Louw Potgieter (2014) developed a classroom training grounded in the theory of psychological capital, and consisting of three cross cultural elements: self -

PAGE 15

Exploring MCQ at Cru 15 efficacy, optimism, and resilience. While their training had a spec ific self efficacy component that could relate to MCQ, their research was not focused on MCQ specifically and their training was found effective to increase cultural intelligence in general (Reichard, Dollwet, & Louw Potgieter, 2014). In an academic depar ture, Barnes, Smith, and Hernandez Pozas ( 2017 ) published on how to teach students cultural intelligence with a three pronged approach including a classroom community, specific classroom tactics, and an external learning community, bookended with CQ assessments. While they back their approach in educational literature , the se authors did not report testing it . In review of these development efforts, it appears that none of them are intentionally developing CQ by the theories that Early and Pet erson (2004) suggested. While motivational CQ is positively linked to cultural adaptations for a variety of ethnic and cultural contexts, domestic and abroad, how to develop this capability remains unclear. Considering the outcomes which high MCQ predict a nd their potential value to organizations affected by globalization, it is curious to observe that what develops MCQ is being left untested. In summary, CQ represents a young field of research. The motivational component of CQ appears to be one of the the most novel aspects. While self efficacy is an important component of MCQ, there is a gap in the literature regarding how to develop it. CQ and Cru Partly because CQ is such an individualistic construct, there is scant literature regarding its place in the public sector or in organizations of any type. Only one study could be found that addressed CQ in public administration and that was in Australia ( Bice & Merriam, 2016). Another sole article addressed CQ in terms of inpatriates at multinational corporations ( Frose,

PAGE 16

Exploring MCQ at Cru 16 Kim, & Eng, 2016 ). However, Cru is a public sector, multinational service corporation that employees many inpatriates. It is a registered 501(c)(3) organization with a faith based mission. Conflict appears to be in inevitabl e part of any organization. At Cru, conflicts between cultural values can be expected to grow as its clientele diversifies and as the organization diversifies itself. two or more people are in a state of disharmony, imbalance, or incongruity, that causes dissonance (or discomfort). According to cognitive dissonance theory, people will act will do something to reduce or eliminate ( Ott, Parkes, & Si mpson , 2003, p p . 135 136). Whether or not cognitive dissonance is a threat or an opportunity to Cru may very well depend on how employees act to eliminate it. Given the projected increase in cultural conflict, Cru appears to be an ideal candidate to pursue a culturally intelligent labor force and stands to benefit from the o utcomes that high MCQ predicts. Methodology This research revolves around those associations, if any, that can increase MCQ for Cru staff. From discussions with the client and insight from the literature, the following research questions emerge . First, does it differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture ? Second , does it differ by current immersion experience ? Third, does it correlate to their past immersion experience ? Fourth, does it differ by their completion of Core Training, mandatory two year training for new staff ? Fifth, does it differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission, a graduate level class required for all Cru staff ? Sixth, does it differ a fter completing training specifically designed according to CQ research and focused on domestic diversity issues ? To answer these first five questions, this research uses a causal comparative study . To answer the sixth question, the researcher developed su ch a training, titled it and tested it using a true experiment .

PAGE 17

Exploring MCQ at Cru 17 Sampling This was quantitative research designed for large sample sizes and statistical analysis. A non random convenience sample was drawn from employees at Cru who work with col lege students for this research, and individuals in that sample formed the units of analysis. Individuals are the unit of analysis for CQ, because CQ itself is an individual intelligence capability ( Earley & Ang, 2003, p. 59; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008, p. 3 ). In CQ research, the average sample size seems to be around 250 300, but where developing CQ is concerned, sample sizes are typically below 100, partly because of the time investment needed for training interventions. Around 3,908 staff at Cru work with co llege students, and estimates suggest that 350 is an appropriate sample size for this population (Cru Staff Demographics, 2016; Orcher, 2014, p. 285). Measurement and Data Collection All Cru staff who work with college students (n=3,908) received an email inviting them to participate in cultural research with a link to a survey to register . Participants were each given an initial survey that asked about their ethnic/cultural identity, whether they were currently serving immersed in a different culture, and what their cumulative past immersion experience added up to, if any . They were then randomly assigned to test and control grou ps. The t raining program used for the test group was a three part podcast titled writte n by the author. The training was contextualized specifically for the Cru staff and covered six topics based on the literature of MCQ theory and its development: 1. Be ing honest with yourself , 2. Examining your confidence levels , 3. Eating and socializing , 4. Grieving and mourning , 5. Counting the perks and the costs, and 6. Working for something bigger (Livermore, 2015) . This training took a total of 2 hours and 40 minutes to complete. The control group listened to an audio message by Dr.

PAGE 18

Exploring MCQ at Cru 18 John Piper unrelated to cultural i ntelligence which only to ok 45 minutes to complete. Both test and control group participants were given a month to listen to their respective audio files. Additionally, m embers of both groups were randomly assigned to take pre tests on their MCQ before th ey were given access to their test or control audio files . They answered questions directly from the expanded cultural intelligence scale ( CQS), the current validated tool for measuring cultural intelligence ( Ang & Van Dyne, 2008; Van Dyne et al., 2012). After listening to their respective audio files, participants took a post test on their MCQ using the same assessment tool to complete their participation. MCQ was calculated by averaging participants scores that were measured at the ordinal level with fi ve questions from the CQS listed in the pre and post test questions (see Appendix A for a table with all survey questions, including pre and pos t test questions, and Appendix B for a measurement table which organizes the independent variables according to their measurements and hypotheses). While some statisticians appear to take issue with the practice of using means computed from ordinal data and using it as interval data, the practice was approved for this study (Dr. W. Bolyard, personal communication, O ctober 29, 2017). For H1 H5, only averages for pre test scores were used in statistical analysis to ensure that results for the causal comparative study necessary for H1 H5 were separate from the experimental study necessary for H6. This limited the sample size for statistical analysis, but it ensured that the results were reliable. Hypotheses In addition to the research questions noted earlier, the following hypotheses were tested: H1 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. H2 MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. H3 MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. H4 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. H5 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. H 6 MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer.

PAGE 19

Exploring MCQ at Cru 19 This research includes a causal compara tive study and a true experiment. The fo llowing chart shows the logic for how participants were asked questions and assigned to experimental groups in the research design (see Figure 2) : Figure 2 . Research Diagram. For this research, the only dependent variable is MCQ. Th e independent variables are numbered and each corresponds to the hypothesis of the same number : 1. identification with a U.S. ethnic culture , 2. current immersion experience, 3. past immersion experience , 4 . s core training, 5 . introduction to course, and 6 . Results The following table states each hypothesis in this study along with th e corresponding null hypothesis. H1 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. Null 1 MCQ of Cru staff differs by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. H2 MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. Null 2 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their current immersion experience. H3 MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. Null 3 MCQ of Cru staff does not correlate to their past immersion experience. H4 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. Null 4 MCQ of Cru staff differ s by their completion of Core Training. H5 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. Null 5 MCQ of Cru staff differs by their completion of Introduction of Mission.

PAGE 20

Exploring MCQ at Cru 20 H 6 MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer. Null 6 MCQ of Cru staff does not differ after completing Florecer. From the initial email invitation, 166 participants began participation, 88 completed participation, and an additional 22 did not complete participation but returned usable results. The table below details what each of the total usable participants completed (n=110). Group 1 Initial survey, control training (Dr. Piper), MCQ post test N=20 Group 2 Initial survey, test training (Florecer) , MCQ post test N=23 Group 3 Initial survey, MCQ pre test, control training (Dr. Piper), MCQ post test N=25 Group 4 Initial survey, MCQ pre test, tes t training (Florecer), MCQ post test N=20 These participants were randomly assigned to either groups 3 or 4. They only completed their MCQ pre test. This data was usable for testing H1 H5. N=22 Analyzing the Data All data were computed using IBM SPSS version 24. See Appendix C for a comprehensive set of descriptive statistics for all variables. Because all of the data was self reported by the participants, the answer to any MCQ question was 7, which was coded as strongly The MCQ data for pre tes ts and post tests were averaged, so the theoreti cal MCQ score was 7 . Each hypothesis required using a unique set of participants (n) . Where the participants were analyzed in groups, the number of particip ants is given for each group (n x ). See Appendix D for a comprehensive set of the correlational and inferential statistical outputs for each hypothesis. H1: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture. A one way ANOVA was computed comparing the MCQ pre test averages (n=67 ) of participants in four unique groups: 1) those who identified with U.S. majority ethnic culture (n 1 =52 ) , 2) those who identified with one or more U.S. majority ethnic culture (n 2 =5 ) , 3) those who identified with both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture (n 3 =6 ) , and 4) those who did not

PAGE 21

Exploring MCQ at Cru 21 identify with any of the above (n 4 =4 ) . Although the mean MCQ scores of those who identified with U.S. majority ethn ic culture were the lo west (5.76 ), n o significant difference was found between these four unique groups ( F (3,63) = 2.64 , p > .05). Therefore the null hypothesi s was rejected : MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture . H2: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. An Independent samples t test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre test scores (n=63) of those who indicated they were currently serving abroad, outside their home country (n 1 =11) with those who did not indicate they were serving abroad (n 2 =52). A significant difference was found between the two groups ( t (61) = 2.582, p < .05). The mean of the group indicating they were currently serving abroad ( M = 6.509, sd = .42) was significantly higher than the mean of the group indicating they were not ( M = 5.75, sd = .95). Therefore the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. H3: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. A rho correlation coefficient was calculated for the relationship between MCQ pre test scores and past immersion experience for participating Cru staff (n=67) . A strong positive correlation was found ( rho (65) = .611, p < .001), indicating a significant relatio nship between the variables. Those with more immersion experience tend to have higher MCQ. Therefore the null hypothesis is rejected: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. H4: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. An independent samples t test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre test scores (n=6 7 ) of those who completed the training (n 1 =18 ) to those who did not (n 2 =49 ) . Because this training was issued after August 2016, there were fewer parti cipants who completed it than those who had not. A significant difference was found between these groups ( t (65) = 2.033 , p < .05). The

PAGE 22

Exploring MCQ at Cru 22 mean MCQ of those who did not complete core training ( M = 5.771, sd = .987 ) was significantly lower than the mean MCQ scores of those who did ( M = 6.267 , sd = .490 ). The refore, the null hypothesis was accepted : MCQ of Cru staff differs by their completion of Core Training. H5: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. An independent samples t test was conducted comparing the mean MCQ pre test scores (n=6 7 ) of those who completed graduate level introduction to mission course ( n 1 =27 ) to those who had not (n 2 =40 ). No significant difference was found ( t (6 5) = .707 , p > .05). The mean MCQ of those who did not complete the intro to mission class ( M = 5.84, sd = .830 ) was not significantly different than the mean MCQ scores of t hose who did ( M = 6.00, sd = 1.014 ). The refore, the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. H6: MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer. To understand the testing process, the following table labels the groups utilized in the Solomon four group design: Name MCQ Pre t est Florecer MCQ Post test N Group 1 No No Yes 20 Group 2 No Yes Yes 23 Group 3 Yes No Yes 25 Group 4 Yes Yes Yes 20 The testing process follows a flowchart developed by Braver and Braver (1988). The actual calculations used here indicated on the shaded path:

PAGE 23

Exploring MCQ at Cru 23 Figure 3 : Statistical test flowchart. Adopted from Braver & Braver, 1988, p. 152. A 2 x 2 ANOVA was calcu lated to examine the interaction effect between time and treatment on the average MCQ post test scores of all g roups in the Solomon four group design. No interaction effect was found between the groups . Neither was the effect of treatment significant. W e proceeded to calculate a one way between subjects ANCOVA to examine the effect of Florecer , covarying for the effect of the MCQ pre test on MCQ of groups 3 and 4 . The main effect for Florecer was significant ( F (1, 42) = 5.046, p < .05). T he mean MCQ scores for those who completed Florecer were higher ( = 6.040, sd = .739) versus control ( = 5.856, sd = .749). The mean difference was statistically significant ( p < .05). Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected: MCQ of Cr u staff differs after completing Florecer.

PAGE 24

Exploring MCQ at Cru 24 Discussion This study identified four variables with a significant positive difference on mean MCQ scores for Cru staff: 1) currently serving abroad, ou tside of home country, 2) past immersion experience, 3) completing Core Training, and 4 ) the main treatment in this study . Validity and R eliability Data for H1 H5 were analyzed carefully to protect against the effects of history on internal validity. H6 was tested with a true experiment, but with low external validity as all participants were from Cru, the organization for whom this research is writte n. Internal validity is assessed by looking into the variables and their respective measures. At this time, the CQS is the only valid measure for MCQ, and it has high content validity (Ang & Van Dyne, 2008). The ethnic identity measure for H1 was the le ast valid of all measures and the hardest variable to measure overall. Due to the difficulties of validity in this measure, H1 was written to allow for identification with a minority culture to be a matter of personal choice. The current immersion experien ce measure for H2 has high criterion related validity and can be independently verified by Cru. The past immersion experience measure for H3 has less criterion related validity than the current immersion experience measure because while it should be possib le to independently verify some of a past immersion experiences, the full validity of this measure is based on the truthfulness and perception in answering the question. The validity of self report measures for completion of Core Trai ning (H4) and Introduction to Mission (H5) could have been strengthened by independent verification with Cru. This was not pursued due to infeasibility.

PAGE 25

Exploring MCQ at Cru 25 Additionally, the uneven number of completed participants in each test group indicates the attrition th at may affect internal validity. The reliability of this research is threatened by the Hawthorne effect, although the Solomon four group design theoretically mitigated the effects of pre testing and post testing on the participants. It is possible that so cial desirability threatened this research as well, especially if participants perceived that the training was meant to increase their CQ or their prospects at Cru. Mentions of both were deliberately omitted in this research to protect its reliability. Rel iability was further ensured by giving participants in treatment and non control groups different links to a separate but identical post tests, thus keeping their results separate. The generalizability of this research is limited largely to Cru. Results can only be approximately generalized to equivalent groups and individuals: college graduates, young adults, primarily of North American / European cultural moorings. Although this limits the overall generalizability, it is thought that this audience forms the primary pool from which U.S. corporations, schools, nonprofit organizations, and governments hire and train. These are the entities which stand to gain the most from the results of this research, so generalizability appears to be sufficiently maximize d. Limitat ions The self report nature of MCQ makes it hard to reliably measure, which creates a challenge for conducting CQ research. Further, any single organization will struggle to provide large enough sample sizes for the necessary research methods, a nd this was the case at Cru. With only 67 participants completing this study and theoretical data saturation requiring an additional 283 participants (Orcher, 2014), the data saturation for this study is only 19%.

PAGE 26

Exploring MCQ at Cru 26 Two additional phenomenon related to tim e effected this study. The first was maturation. The effects of maturation were not tested on H4 or H5. With Core Training taking two years to complete (H4) and Intro to Mission taking a minimum of one week to complete (H5), it is important to interpret th e results of those tests accordingly. Further, for H6, it should be noted that participants assigned to control groups spent approximately 90 minutes less time in the experiment compared to those who were assigned to Florecer. While the effects of maturati on on participants were accounted for in the research design and statistical analysis, these measures were slightly limited by the uneven time participation of individuals based on their random group assignments. Future Research The CQ framework is advantageous for Cru in that it puts forth a coherent model that seems to be lacking in the larger body of cultural competency research. Further, CQ theory asserts that those with higher Motivational CQ will move on to develop the other dimensions of CQ (k nowledge, strategy, and action) more easily ( Early & Ang, 2003; Ang & Van Dyne, 2008) . MCQ would seem to eventually have bearing on outward service to a diverse audience, as well as its internal conflicts related to culture and cognitive dissonance. In addition to addressing those limitations mentioned above, future research could focus on those specific aspects of Core Training that differ MCQ scores for Cru staff. Different treatments could also be tested according to the Solomon four group me thod outlined here, varying treatment on duration, delivery style, and content. While cumulative past immersion experience was found to increase MCQ, determining whether a day long, week long, or month long immersion experience is beneficial to developing MCQ was beyo nd the scope of this study. T he first interval of past immersion experience was

PAGE 27

Exploring MCQ at Cru 27 measured at just 6 months. Cru could conduct more research on these short term immersion experiences. While the Introduction to Mission course was not shown to inc rease MCQ in participants, it is noted that only 27 participants had completed the class. It is recommended that Cru conduct future research on this class specifically, as more participants are really needed to confirm the results stated here. Future research could explore questions about how the interaction or combination of several variables in this study that are shown to differ MCQ. For example, if staff with more than 5 years or past immersion experience are likely to have a high MCQ, will staff who also finished Core Training and are currently serving abroad have and even higher MCQ? It is not yet understood what variables act to negatively differ MCQ for Cru staff. Because MCQ measurements are self reported, this is certainly possible . Ex ploring this phenomenon could be fruitful future research for Cru. Similarly, Cru could conduct more research on its most experienced staff to determine if there is a of immersion experience after which MCQ is no longer likely to increase . Finally, future research could focus on what develops the other three dimensions of CQ (cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioral) for Cru staff. Recommendations Incorporate MCQ development means in the literature into future training. The literature suggesting means for developing MCQ appears reliable, as training that was based on it positively differed MCQ in participants. It i s recommended that Cru continue to leverage these means , beginning by finding ways to scale and the si x topics it introduced . Further, i t is recommended that Cru continue to use Core T raining as a means for developing

PAGE 28

Exploring MCQ at Cru 28 MCQ in staff . Cru would greatly benefit from a distinct research project on its Core Training to determine how to maximize its MCQ related b enefits. Regardless, i t is recommended that principles of MCQ development be deliberately added to Core T raining . Keep focus at Cru off of CQ language and explaining CQ theory. Because the Hawthorne effect can have such an impact on MCQ, it is recommended that Cru focus its future training on the treatments that are shown to increase MCQ, not on explaining the CQ model itself. The more specific references to CQ are made in training, the more likely they are to get false positives in future CQ assessm ents of staff. The effect extends beyo nd specific training references to the greater organizational culture . T he more Cru touts itself as a organization, the more they increase the chances of biasing their own results when they are actually assessed. It would benefit Cru greatly if their most culturally intelligent staff were also the humblest . Train through immersion experience that is domestic and cumulative. This study further reveals that creating immersion experiences for Cru staff is likely to increase their MCQ. Like MCQ, is measured by self report; this means these experiences will be difficult for Cru to design in practice. However, t hese exp eriences do n ot need to happen all at once. T his study suggests that there is benefit in cumulative experience, meaning six one moth experiences and one six month experience are equal in terms of their MCQ benefit. The wording in this study created the op portunity for immersion experience to be entirely domestic. While it is unlikely that all immersion experiences are created equal, Cru can further look into creating immersion experiences that are domestic, as participation would cost significantl y less. Encourage summer immersion experiences and how to leverage these as training opportunities. Since many staff at Cru have opportunities to travel abroad in the summer, it is

PAGE 29

Exploring MCQ at Cru 29 recommended that Cru look into intentional MCQ trainings for those who go on summer missions. While it was not tested in this study, it appears likely that combining intentional MCQ development in a pre and post test scenario for staff who are abroad for summer missions or one year assignments has potential to develop MCQ for s taff. Look to Cru staff with the most immersion experience. Cru appears to have a high number of staff (38 were identified in this study) with more than five years of past immersion experience. Since these staff had higher MCQ, Cru could look to these staf f to participate in organizational ventures where the outcomes of a higher MCQ are desirable. If Cru wanted to assess the MCQ of staff without gaining organization wide participation, Cru should begin with their staff who have the most experience abroad. Develop internal policy for collaborating with staff abroad. Cru ought to look to those who are currently serving abroad to capitalize on the benefits of its most culturally intelligent staff. Time zones and travel costs make it difficult to organize these people to work on the same organizational directives. However, many outreach programs and materials that Cru produces would benefit from going through the effort of working through these obstacles, since nearly all of them are aimed at a diverse citizenry . All such programs and materials will benefit from the influence of people with a high MCQ. Cru in the U.S. ought to consider developing organizational policy that encourages or even mandates collaboration with staff who are abroad on relevant projects. Give MCQ development appropriate time and boundaries. For Cru to seriously engage in developing a culturally intelligent workforce, they will need a culture that allows their staff this time. At Cru, the missional needs tend to overwhelm young staff and ma ke it difficult for them to set appropriate boundaries around their other responsibilities. This seemed to be a

PAGE 30

Exploring MCQ at Cru 30 major factor in the overall low participation and high attrition rates in this study. Therefore, it is all the more recommended that staff be he ld accountable to completing the training that develops their MCQ. It is important that staff give this process both the quantity of time and the quality of time that this process calls for. Differentiate mono cultural understanding and ethnic identity fro m high MCQ. Cru leadership should not assume that the ethnic minority staff (or more a ccurately, those staff who identify with an audience besides U.S. majority ethnic culture) will possess a higher MCQ than other staff. Ethnic minorities can often have deep understandings of their own culture. However, having a deep mono cultural understanding is not the same thing as having a high motivational cultural intelligence. It is recommended that leadership at Cru understand this, and demonstrate their understa nding. Conclusion Developing MCQ at Cru is not simple. However, this study presents very valuable information that can guide this process for staff for years to come. Many options for developing culturally intelligent staff at Cru that are more expensive and time consuming can be avoided by following the recommendations put forth here. Additionally, by sticking with a CQ construct in their training, Cru can be much more specific and confident about the outcomes of their staff training and development efforts. It ought to be remembered that MCQ is just one of four components that make up CQ. While MCQ has theoretical primacy in CQ development, the higher aspiration for Cru ought to be having culturally intelligent staff. The CQ literat ure suggests that a higher CQ effects work adjustment for expatriates ( Huff, Song, & Gresch, 2013; Guðmundsd ó ttir, 2015 ), cultural well being and peer perception of suitability for overseas work ( Peng, Van Dyne, & Oh, 2015, p.

PAGE 31

Exploring MCQ at Cru 31 572), decreasing psychologica l symptoms and cultural adaption issues (Ward, Wilson, & Fischer, 2011 , p. 138), and realistic previews of cross cultural adjustments (Templer, Tay, & Chandrasekar, 2006). Many of these outcomes would greatly benefit f aith based mission to all people s, even when the focus is only domestic. By following the recommendations set forth in this study, Cru can potentially set itself on a brilliant trajectory of greater missional effectiveness through its staff for many years to come. For an explanation of h ow this research relates to the MPA competencies at the School of Public Affairs for the University of Colorado Denver, see Appendix E.

PAGE 32

Exploring MCQ at Cru 32 References Ang, S. & Van Dyne, L. (2008) Conceptualization of Cultural Intelligence: Definition, Distinctiveness, and Nomological Network. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. 3 15. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Ang, S. & Van Dyne, L. (2008) Development and Validation of the CQS: The Cultural Intelligence Scale. Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. 16 39. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K.Y., Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar , N.A. (2007). Cultural Intelligence: Its Measurement and Effects on Cultural Judgment and Decision Making, Cultural Adaptation and Task Performance. Management and Organizational Review 3(3), 335 371. doi: 10.1111/j.1740 8784.2007.00082.x Bandura, A. (2002). Social C ognitive Theory in Cultural Context. Applied Psychology: An International Review 51(2) , 269 290. Barnes, K.J., Smith, G.E., & Hernandez Assess and Develop Student Cultural Intelligence. Organization Management Journal 14(1), 34 44. doi: 10.10 80/15416518.2017.1293425 Berry, J. W., & Ward, C. (2006). Commentary on interactions across cultures and Group & Organization Management 31(1) , 64 77. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75(3), 263 279. doi: 10.1111/1467 8500.12189

PAGE 33

Exploring MCQ at Cru 33 Blasco, M., Feldt, L.F., & Jakobsen, M. (2012). If only cultural chameleon s could fly too: A critical discussion of the concept of cultural intelligence. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 12(2), 229 245. doi: 10.1177/1470595812439872 Braver, M.C.W., & Braver, S. (1988). Statistical Treatment of the Solomon Four Group Design: A Meta Analytic Approach. Psychological Bulletin 104(1), 150 154. doi : 10.1037/0033 2909.104.1.150 Bücker, J.J.L.E. & Korzilius, H. (2015). Developing cultural intelligence: assessing the effect of the Ecotonos cultural simulation game for international business students. The International Journal of Human Resource Management 26(15), 1995 2014. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2015.1041759 Chen, X.P., Liu, D., & Portnoy, R. (2012). A Multilevel Investiga tion of Motivational Cultural Intelligence, Organizational Diversity Climate, and Cultural Sales: Evidence From U.S. Real Estate Firms. Journal of Applied Psychology 97(1), 93 106. doi: 10.1037/a0024697 CQ wheel (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.7cli ngo.com/cultural intelligence/assessment/ (2016). Cru Staff Demographics . Retrieved from Cru. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum. Early, P.C. & Ang, S. (2003) Cultural Intelligence: Individual Interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Early, P.C. & Peterson, R.S. (2004). The Elusive Cultural Chameleon: Cultural Intelligence as a New Approach to Intercultural Training for the Global Manager. Academy of Management Learning and Education 3(1), 100 115.

PAGE 34

Exploring MCQ at Cru 34 Elenkov, D.S. & Manev, I.M. (2009). Senior expatriate leadership s effects on innovation and the role of cultural intelligence. J ournal of World Business 44(2009), 357 369. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2008.11.001 Fischer, R. (2011). Cross cultural training effects on cultural essentialism beliefs and cultural intelligence . International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35(2011), 767 775 . doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.08.005 Frose, F.J., Kim, K., & Eng, A. (2016). Language, Cultural Intelligence, and Inpatriate Turnover Intentions: Leveraginf Values in Multinational Corporations through Inpatriates. Management International Review, 56, 283 301. doi: 10.1007/s11575 015 0272 5 Gabrenya, W.K., Moukarzel, R.G., Pomerance, M.H., Griffith, R.L., & Deaton, J. ( 2011 ). A Validation Study of the Defense Language Office Framework for Cultural Competance and an Evaluation of Available Assessment In struments. Retrieved from: http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:79xR0Ezl g8J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,36 Guðmundsd ó ttir , S. (2015). Nordic expatriates in the US: The relationship between cultural intelligence and adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 47(2015), 175 186. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.05.001 Huff, K.C., Song, P., & Gresch, E.B. (2013). Cultural intelligence, personality, and cross cultural adjustment: A study of expatriates in Japan. Int ernational Journal of Intercultural Relations 38(2014), 151 157. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2013.08.005 Livermore, D. (2015). Leading with Cultural Intelligence: The Real Secret to Success. New York, NY: American Management Association.

PAGE 35

Exploring MCQ at Cru 35 MacNab, B.R. & Wo rthley, R. (2010). Individual characteristics as predictors of cultural intelligence development: The relevance of self efficacy. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 36(2012), 62 71. doi: 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.12.001 Mosakowski, E., C alic, G., & Earley, P.C. (2013). Cultures as Learning Laboratories: What Makes Some More Effective Than Others? Academy of Management Learning & Education 12(3), 512 526. doi: 10.5465/amle.2013.0149 Ng, K.Y., & Early, P.C. (2006). Culture and Intellig ence: old constructs, new frontiers. Group and Organization Management, 31(1), 4 19. doi: 10.1177/1059601105275251 Ott, J.S., Parkes, S.J., and Simpson, R.B. (2003). (132 141) in Ott, J.S., Parkes, S.J., and Simpson, R.B. (eds.) Classic readings in Organizational Behavior, 3 rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Orcher, L.T. (2014). Conducting Research: Social and Behavioral Science Methods. CA: Pyrczak Publishing. Peng, A.C., Van Dyne, L., & Oh, K. (2015). The Influence of Motivational Cultural Intelligence on Cultural Effectiveness Based on Study Abroad: The Moderating Role of Participant Cultural Identity . Journal of Management Education 39(5), 572 596. doi: 10.1177/1052562914555717 Rehg, M.T. & Gundlach, M.J. (2012). Examining the influence of cross cultural training on cultural intelligence and specific self efficacy. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 19(2), 215 232. doi: 10.1108/13527601211219892 Reichard, R.J., Dollwet, M., & Louw Potgieter J. (2014). Development of Cross Cultural Psychological Capital and Its Relationship With Cultural Intelligence and Ethnocentrism.

PAGE 36

Exploring MCQ at Cru 36 Journal of Leadership and Organizational Stu dies 21(2), 150 164. doi: 10.1177/1548051813515517 Templer, K.J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N.A. (2006). Motivational Cultural Intelligence, Realistic Job Preview, Realistic Living Conditions Preview, and Cross Cultural Adjustment. Group and Organizational Management 31(1), 154 173. doi: 10.1177/1059601105275293 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics, 2015 (NCES 2016 014), Chapter 3 . Retrieved from: https://n ces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98 Van Dyne, L., Ang S, Ng K.Y., Rockstuhl, T., Tan M.L., & Koh C. (2012). Sub Dimensions of the Four Factor Model of Cultural Intelligence: Expanding the Conceptualization and Measurement of Cultural Intelligence. S ocial and Personality Psychology Compass 6(4), 295 313. doi: 10.1111/j.1751 9004.2012.00429.x Ward, C., Fischer, R., Lam, F.S.Z., & Hall, L. (2009). The Convergent, Discriminant, and Incremental Validity of Scores on a Self Report Measure of Cultural I ntelligence. Education and Psychological Measurement 69(1), 85 105. doi: 10.1177/0013164408322001 Ward, C., Wilson, J., & Fischer, R. (2011). Assessing the predictive validity of cultural intelligence over time. Personality and Individual Differences 51(2011), 138 142. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.032 Wood, E.D. & St. Peters, H.Y.Z. (2014). Short term cross cultural study tours: impact on cultural intelligence . The International Journal of Human Resource Manageme nt 25(4), 558 570. doi: 10.1080/09585192.2013.796315

PAGE 37

Exploring MCQ at Cru 37 Woodman, J.V. (2017). Research Diagram. Denver, CO. Yunlu, D.G. & Clapp Smith, R. (2014). Metacognition, cultural psychological capital and motivational cultural intelligence. Cross Cultural Manageme nt 21(4), 386 399. doi: 10.1108/CCM 07 2012 0055

PAGE 38

Exploring MCQ at Cru 38 Appendix A Survey Questions The following table organizes the survey questions that will be asked of research participants: Survey type Question Answer Type Related Variable Initial Survey 1. Name Fill in the blank [back up in case email address fails] Initial Survey 2. Email address Fill in the blank [used to deliver training] Initial Survey 3. I currently serve as a full time, part time, or affiliate staff with Cru Yes/No (checkbox) [used for ensuring eligibility] Initial Survey 4 . Thinking about my ethnic ide ntity, I identify most strongly A) U.S. majority ethnic culture B) one or more U.S. minority ethnic culture(s) C) Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority ethnic culture(s) D) I do not identify with any of the above Ethnic I dentity (IV) Initial Survey 5. I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country A) Yes B) No C) I can fairly call more than one country my home, including the one I serve in now. Current Immersion Experience (IV) Initial Survey 6 . Thinking about all of my experience being immersed in a foreign culture, both domestically and internationally, my total experience adds up to: A) None B) 0 6 months C) 6 12 months K) 4.5 5 years L) More than 5 year s Past Immersion experience (IV) Initial Survey I have completed Core Training (issued after August, 2016) Yes/No (checkbox) Core Training (IV) Initial Survey I have completed Introduction to Missions Course (available through IBS, the institute of Biblical Studies). Yes/No (checkbox) Introduction to Missions (IV)

PAGE 39

Exploring MCQ at Cru 39 Survey type Question Answer Type Related Variable Pre and post test 1. I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures. seven point Likert scale MCQ (DV) Pre and post test 2. I am confident that I can socialize with locals in a culture that is unfamiliar to me. seven point Likert scale MCQ (DV) Pre and post test 3. I am sure that I can deal with the stresses of adjusting to a culture that is new to me. seven point Likert scale MCQ (DV) Pre and post test 4. I enjoy living in cultures that are unfamiliar to me. seven point Likert scale MCQ (DV) Pre and post test 5. I am confident that I can get accustomed to the shopping conditions in a different culture. seven point Likert scale MCQ (DV) [Post test only] B. I completed the electronic training I received as part of this study Yes/No (checkbox) CQ specific training

PAGE 40

Exploring MCQ at Cru 40 Appendix B Independent Research Variables The f ollowing table organizes the independent variables according to their measurements and hypotheses: Hypothesis Independent Variable Measurement Level of Measurement H1: Identification with an ethnic minority group in the U.S. increases MCQ. Ethnic Identity Survey Question #4 Nominal H2: A current immersion experience increases MCQ. Current Immersion Experience Survey Question #5 Nominal H3: Past immersion experiences increase MCQ. Past Immersion Experience Survey Question #6 Interval H4: Completing core training does not increase MCQ. Core training Survey Question #8 Nominal H5: Completing introduction to mission course does not increase MCQ. Introduction to Missions Survey Question #9 Nominal H6: Completing increase s MCQ. Random Group assignment 1 4 Avg. of post test survey questions (lower scores=higher CQ) Interval

PAGE 41

Exploring MCQ at Cru 41 Appendix C Descriptive Statistics Frequency Percent Valid * U.S. majority ethnic culture 81 73.6% One or more U.S. minority culture(s) 12 10.9% Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture(s) 10 9.1% I do not identify with any of the above 6 5.5% Total 109 99.1% Missing System 1 .9% Total 110 100.0% Figure 4 : Ethnic Identity Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance = .769 Frequency Percent Valid I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country 18 16.4 % * I am not currently serving abroad, outside my home country 87 79.1 % I can fairly call more than one country my home, including the one I serve in now 4 3.6 % Total 109 99.1 % Missing System 1 .9 % Total 110 100.0 % Figure 5 : Current Immersion Experience Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance = .187

PAGE 42

Exploring MCQ at Cru 42 Frequency Percent Valid None / no experience 3 2.7 % 0 6 months 25 22.7 % 7 12 months 12 10.9 % 1 1.5 years 2 1.8 % 1.5 2 years 8 7.3 % 2 2.5 years 10 9.1 % 2.5 3 years 8 7.3 % 3 3.5 years 2 1.8 % 4 4.5 years 1 .9 % * More than 5 years 38 34.5 % Total 109 99.1 % Missing System 1 .9 % Total 110 100.0 % Figure 6 : Past Immersion Experience Data Frequency Distribution. Mode = * | variance = 17.95 Frequency Percent Valid Yes 30 27.3 % * No 79 71.8 % Total 109 99.1 % Missing System 1 .9 % Total 110 100.0 % Figure 7 : Completed Cru's Core Training data. Frequency Percent Valid Yes 34 30.9 No 75 68.2 Total 109 99.1 Missing System 1 .9 Total 110 100.0 Figure 8 : Completed Cru's Intro to Missi on Course

PAGE 43

Exploring MCQ at Cru 43 The proceeding tables show MCQ test data. The range is 1 7, with the theoretically highest MCQ score being 7. The table below represents the mean MCQ pre test data: Pre test MCQ Average Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 3.20 1 .9 % 1.5 % 1.5 % 3.60 2 1.8 % 3.0 % 4.5 % 3.80 2 1.8 % 3.0 % 7.5 % 4.40 2 1.8 % 3.0 % 10.4 % 4.60 1 .9 % 1.5 % 11.9 % 5.20 3 2.7 % 4.5 % 16.4 % 5.40 3 2.7 % 4.5 % 20.9 % 5.60 7 6.4 % 10.4 % 31.3 % 5.80 6 5.5 % 9.0 % 40.3 % 6.00 8 7.3 % 11.9 % 52.2 % * 6.20 12 10.9 % 17.9 % 70.1 % 6.40 3 2.7 % 4.5 % 74.6 % 6.60 2 1.8 % 3.0 % 77.6 % 6.80 7 6.4 % 10.4 % 88.1 % 7.00 8 7.3 % 11.9 % 100.0 % Total 67 60.9 % 100.0 % Missing System 43 39.1 % Total 110 100.0 % Figure 9 : Pre test MCQ averages. Mode = * | variance = .829

PAGE 44

Exploring MCQ at Cru 44 The table below represents the mean MCQ post test data : Post test MCQ Average Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 3.20 1 .9 % 1.1 % 1.1 % 3.80 1 .9 % 1.1 % 2.3 % 4.00 1 .9 % 1.1 % 3.4 % 4.60 1 .9 % 1.1 % 4.5 % 4.80 2 1.8 % 2.3 % 6.8 % 5.00 1 .9 % 1.1 % 8.0 % 5.20 4 3.6 % 4.5 % 12.5 % 5.40 6 5.5 % 6.8 % 19.3 % 5.60 13 11.8 % 14.8 % 34.1 % 5.80 8 7.3 % 9.1 % 43.2 % * 6.00 14 12.7 % 15.9 % 59.1 % 6.20 13 11.8 % 14.8 % 73.9 % 6.40 9 8.2 % 10.2 % 84.1 % 6.60 3 2.7 % 3.4 % 87.5 % 6.80 4 3.6 % 4.5 % 92.0 % 7.00 7 6.4 % 8.0 % 100.0 % Total 88 80.0 % 100.0 % Missing System 22 20.0 % Total 110 100.0 % Figure 10 : Post test MCQ averages. Mode = * | variance = .479

PAGE 45

Exploring MCQ at Cru 45 The following charts show the mean MCQ post test scores for the randomly assigned groups. The first group is those who took no MCQ pre test and listene d to a (n=20): The second group is those who took no MCQ pre test and listened to (n=23):

PAGE 46

Exploring MCQ at Cru 46 The third gr oup is those who took a MCQ pre test and listene d to a (n=25): The fourth group is those who took a MCQ pre test and listened to (n=20):

PAGE 47

Exploring MCQ at Cru 47 Appendix D Correlational and Inferential Statistics The following tables are the comprehensive sets of the appropriate correlational and inferential statistical print outs for each hypothesis. H1: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by identification with U.S. ethnic culture Descriptives Pre test MCQ Average N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper Bound U.S. majority ethnic culture 52 5.7577 .93165 .12920 5.4983 6.0171 3.20 7.00 One or more U.S. minority culture(s) 5 6.0800 .54037 .24166 5.4090 6.7510 5.60 7.00 Both U.S. majority and one or more U.S. minority culture(s) 6 6.4667 .67725 .27649 5.7559 7.1774 5.60 7.00 I do not identify with any of the above 4 6.7500 .30000 .15000 6.2726 7.2274 6.40 7.00 Total 67 5.9045 .90477 .11054 5.6838 6.1252 3.20 7.00 ANOVA Pre test MCQ Average Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 6.030 3 2.010 2.638 .057 Within Groups 47.998 63 .762 Total 54.029 66

PAGE 48

Exploring MCQ at Cru 4 8 H2: MCQ of Cru staff differs by their current immersion experience. Group Statistics Currently Immersed N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pre test MCQ Average I am currently serving abroad, outside my home country 11 6.5091 .41341 .12465 I am not currently serving abroad, outside my home country 52 5.7500 .95126 .13192 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2 tailed) Mean Differen ce Std. Error Differen ce 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pre test MCQ Average Equal variances assumed 2.993 .089 2.58 2 61 .012 .75909 .29396 .17128 1.34690 Equal variances not assumed 4.18 3 36.0 72 .000 .75909 .18149 .39103 1.12715 H3: MCQ of Cru staff correlates to their past immersion experience. Correlations Pre test MCQ Average Immersion Experience Spearman's rho Pre test MCQ Average Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .611 ** Sig. (2 tailed) . .000 N 67 67 Immersion Experience Correlation Coefficient .611 ** 1.000 Sig. (2 tailed) .000 . N 67 67 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 tailed).

PAGE 49

Exploring MCQ at Cru 49 H4: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Core Training. Group Statistics Completed Cru's Core Training N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pre test MCQ Average Yes 18 6.2667 .48990 .11547 No 49 5.7714 .98658 .14094 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2 tailed) Mean Differen ce Std. Error Differen ce 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pre test MCQ Average Equal variances assumed 5.450 .023 2.033 65 .046 .49524 .24366 .00862 .98185 Equal variances not assumed 2.718 59.00 4 .009 .49524 .18220 .13065 .85982 H5: MCQ of Cru staff does not differ by their completion of Introduction to Mission. Group Statistics Completed Cru's Intro to Mission Class N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Pre test MCQ Average Yes 27 6.0000 1.01375 .19510 No 40 5.8400 .83045 .13131 Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t test for Equality of Means F Sig. t df Sig. (2 tailed) Mean Differen ce Std. Error Differen ce 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Pre test MCQ Average Equal variances assumed .610 .438 .707 65 .482 .16000 .22621 .29178 .61178 Equal variances not assumed .680 48.2 84 .500 .16000 .23517 .31276 .63276

PAGE 50

Exploring MCQ at Cru 50 H6: MCQ of Cru staff differs after completing Florecer. Tests of Between Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: MCQ Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Corrected Model .256 a 1 .256 .390 .536 Intercept 1420.864 1 1420.864 2163.174 .000 prepost .256 1 .256 .390 .536 Florecer .000 0 . . . prepost * Florecer .000 0 . . . Error 24.960 38 .657 Total 1446.080 40 Corrected Total 25.216 39 a. R Squared = .010 (Adjusted R Squared = .016) Descriptive Statistics Dependent Variable: Post test MCQ Average Group ID Mean Std. Deviation N Control, Pre test, and Post test (Group 3) 5.8560 .74949 25 Florecer, Pre test, and Post test (Group 4) 6.0400 .73870 20 Total 5.9378 .74201 45 Tests of Between Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: post_cq_avg Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta Squared Corrected Model 19.710 a 2 9.855 91.653 .000 .814 Intercept 1.757 1 1.757 16.345 .000 .280 mean MCQ pre test 19.334 1 19.334 179.807 .000 .811 Florecer .543 1 .543 5.046 .030 .107 Error 4.516 42 .108 Total 1610.800 45 Corrected Total 24.226 44 a. R Squared = .814 (Adjusted R Squared = .805)

PAGE 51

Exploring MCQ at Cru 51 Appendix E MPA Competencies The competencies I gained during my time at the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado Denver were incorporated into this project. The most apt competencies demonstrated are in: 1. t he area of leading and managing in publi c governance, 2. t he area of analyzing, synthesizing, thinking critically, solving problems, and making decisions, and 3. t he area of communicating and interacting productively with a diverse and changing workfo rce and citizenry. In the area of leading and managing in public governance, this project specifically draws out the competency of applying organizational theory and behavior to organizational improvement. The Organizational Management and Behavior class PUAD 500 2 was especially helpful for expressing domestic cultural issues that drove the r esearch questions as cognitive dissonance in a nonprofit organization. In understanding the nonprofit sector to be a personnel heavy organizational environment, the p olitical and human resource frames of understanding were necessary underpinnings for the successful design and data collection of this research. Further, the results themselves point to diverse leadership models that echo those presented in Public Service Leadership PUAD 5006. The models and theories for leadership among different cultures presented in that class helped pushed the research in the direction of CQ. In the area of analyzing, synthesizing, thinking critically, solving problems, and making deci sions, this project relies on the competencies gained in Research and Analytic Methods PUAD 5003 to select and use appropriate research methods to find, collect, synthesize, and analyze data. The opportunity to test a hypothesis with a Solomon four group r esearch design

PAGE 52

Exploring MCQ at Cru 52 was s eeded in this class, and the statistical analyses required by the project would have been unapproachable without this primer. In the area of communicating and interacting productively with a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry , two additional competencies are demonstrated. The first was an understanding and appreciation of the values of diverse backgrounds and viewpoints in a democracy, as well as an application of tools to engage and manage them. Many equity issues that are being addressed by nonprofits of various types were explored in Economic Development, PUAD 6600. Managing Diversity, PUAD 5260, was also invaluable in this regard. The assignment to write a value proposition for a diversi ty init iative drove a desire in this project to go a step beyond empathy and positively engage longstanding issues of equity and cultural tension in the U.S. The second competency in this area was to communicate effectively in writing to diverse audiences. Findi ng language to operationalize ethnic and cultural issues for Cru, an organization that is not only growing in its diverse workforce but that serves an even more diverse c itizenry, was challenging. Communicating results exasperated that challenge. But pract ice for doing this was gained in papers written for Introduction to Public Administration, PUAD 5001, and in the Seminar for Nonprofit Management, PUAD 5110. Both classes returned written and verbal feedback from professors and students on the quality and clarity of my writing that influenced the style and presentation of this project, aiming it more specifically at the diverse workforce that Cru hopes to grow.

PAGE 53

Form Name: capstone repository permission Submission Time: December 8, 2017 9:40 am Browser: Chrome 62.0.3202.94 / Windows 7 IP Address: 8.10.140.190 Unique ID: 370067469 Location: 37.750999450684, -97.821998596191 Description Area SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS ELECTRONIC CAPSTONE REPOSITORY Description Area Dear Capstone Author and Capstone Client:The Auraria Library Digital Library Program is a nonprofit center responsible for the collection and preservation of digital resources for education.The capstone project, protected by your copyright, and/or created under the supervision of the client has been identified as important to the educational mission of the University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library.The University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library respectfully requests non-exclusive rights to digitize the capstone project for Internet distribution in image and text formats for an unlimited term. Digitized versions will be made available via the Internet, for onand off-line educational use, with a statement identifying your rights as copyright holder and the terms of the grant of permissions.Please review, sign and return the follow Grant of Permissions. Please do not hesitate to call me or email your questions.Sincerely,Matthew C. MarinerAuraria LibraryDigital Collections ManagerMatthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303.556.5817 Grant of Permissions Description Area In reference to the following title(s): Author (Student Name) Jason Woodman Title (Capstone Project Title) Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru Publication Date December 2017 I am the: Client Description Area As client of the copyright holder affirm that the content submitted is identical to that which was originally supervised and that the content is suitable for publication in the Auraria Library Digital Collections.

PAGE 54

Description Area This is a non-exclusive grant of permissions for on-line and off-line use for an indefinite term. Off-line uses shall be consistent either for educational uses, with the terms of U.S. copyright legislation's "fair use" provisions or, by the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library, with the maintenance and preservation of an archival copy. Digitization allows the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library to generate imageand text-based versions as appropriate and to provide and enhance access using search software. This grant of permissions prohibits use of the digitized versions for commercial use or profit. Signature Your Name Scott Crocker Date 12/8/17 Email Address ATTENTION Description Area Grant of Permissions is provided to: Auraria Digital Library Program / Matthew C. MarinerAuraria Library1100 Lawrence | Denver, CO 80204matthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303-556-5817

PAGE 55

Form Name: capstone repository permission Submission Time: December 7, 2017 7:32 pm Browser: Mobile Safari 11.0 / iOS IP Address: 24.8.154.67 Unique ID: 369951177 Location: 39.92850112915, -104.95590209961 Description Area SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS ELECTRONIC CAPSTONE REPOSITORY Description Area Dear Capstone Author and Capstone Client:The Auraria Library Digital Library Program is a nonprofit center responsible for the collection and preservation of digital resources for education.The capstone project, protected by your copyright, and/or created under the supervision of the client has been identified as important to the educational mission of the University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library.The University of Colorado Denver and Auraria Library respectfully requests non-exclusive rights to digitize the capstone project for Internet distribution in image and text formats for an unlimited term. Digitized versions will be made available via the Internet, for onand off-line educational use, with a statement identifying your rights as copyright holder and the terms of the grant of permissions.Please review, sign and return the follow Grant of Permissions. Please do not hesitate to call me or email your questions.Sincerely,Matthew C. MarinerAuraria LibraryDigital Collections ManagerMatthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303.556.5817 Grant of Permissions Description Area In reference to the following title(s): Author (Student Name) Jason Woodman Title (Capstone Project Title) Exploring the Development of Motivational Cultural Intelligence at Cru Publication Date December 6th, 2017 I am the: Author (student) Description Area As copyright holder or licensee with the authority to grant copyright permissions for the aforementioned title(s), I hereby authorize Auraria Library and University of Colorado Denver to digitize, distribute, and archive the title(s) for nonprofit, educational purposes via the Internet or successive technologies.

PAGE 56

Description Area This is a non-exclusive grant of permissions for on-line and off-line use for an indefinite term. Off-line uses shall be consistent either for educational uses, with the terms of U.S. copyright legislation's "fair use" provisions or, by the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library, with the maintenance and preservation of an archival copy. Digitization allows the University of Colorado Denver and/or Auraria Library to generate imageand text-based versions as appropriate and to provide and enhance access using search software. This grant of permissions prohibits use of the digitized versions for commercial use or profit. Signature Your Name Jason Woodman Date December 7th, 2017 Email Address ATTENTION Description Area Grant of Permissions is provided to: Auraria Digital Library Program / Matthew C. MarinerAuraria Library1100 Lawrence | Denver, CO 80204matthew.mariner@ucdenver.edu303-556-5817