A central question in cross-cultural research: Do employees of different cultures interpret work-related measures in an equivalent manner?

TLDR

The paper proposes an approach that provides valuable insights into the appropriateness of comparative cross‑cultural studies. The study uses covariance‑structure analysis to test the stability and transferability of organizational measures and to calculate and interpret latent‑mean differences across cultural groups. The findings demonstrate that without confirming measurement equivalence, culturally diverse groups may use different conceptual frames or calibrate scores differently, and that identifying and correcting such calibration differences is essential before comparing means, illustrating the value of the proposed approach.

Abstract

Within the present research, a covariance structure analytic procedure is applied to test the stability and transferability of organizational measures between groups in cross-cultural research. Findings support the need to establish the equivalency of constructs and measures prior to interpreting differences in means of self-report variables between culturally diverse groups. Indeed, for two measures, the cultural groups were using different conceptual frames of reference when responding to the items. For a third measure, the groups were calibrating the true scores differently. However, the source of the calibration difference was identified and subsequently accounted for in later analyses. Thus, differences between latent means for the culturally diverse groups were calculated and interpreted. The approach outlined in this paper is proffered as yielding valuable insights regarding the appropriateness of comparative cross-cultural studies.