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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10. 10 Sample Scenario

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

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

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

14. 14 Model

15. 15 Configural Invariance  The model of configural invariance comprised 23 scenarios that measured the seven cultural orientations.  The model of configural invariance provided adequate fit (Chi 2 (418) = 603.45; RMSEA =.044; CFI =.94).

16. 16 Metric Invariance  The factor loadings were constrained to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples.  The model of full metric invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2 (434) = 628.26; RMSEA =.044; CFI =.93).

17. 17 Scalar Invariance  The item intercepts were restricted to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples.  The model of partial scalar invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2 (446) = 641.92; RMSEA =.044; CFI =.93).  Given metric and scalar invariance, the means of the seven cultural orientations can be meaningfully compared across both samples (Steenkamp & Baumgartner,1998).

18. 18 Factor Variance Invariance  The factor variances were constrained to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples.  The model of partial factor variance invariance provided adequate fit (Chi 2 (451) = 646.71; RMSEA =.044; CFI =.93).  Given metric and partial factor variance invariance, different covariances can be interpreted as different correlations for the remaining five cultural orientations (Marsh & Hocevar, 1985).

19. 19 Error Variance Invariance  The error variances were restricted to be equal across the Chinese and the German samples.  The model of partial error variance invariance achieved adequate fit (Chi 2 (463) = 664.85; RMSEA =.044; CFI =.93).  Given metric and factor variance invariance, this result implies that the Chinese sample showed a lower reliability in half of the scenarios.

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

21. Thank you very much for your attention.