friendship and relationships in virtual and intercultural ... · as a ‘participatory social...

Australian Journal of Adult Learning Volume 51, Number 2, July 2011

Friendship and relationships in virtual and intercultural learning: Internationalising the

business curriculum

Joanna CrossmanUniversity of South Australia

Sarbari BordiaAustralian National University

Graduates need to be prepared for working in global organisations that increasingly rely on virtual, culturally diverse teams. This paper reports on a qualitative research study concerned with the perceptions of university business students who collaborated on a virtual and international project to learn about intercultural communication. The findings indicated that participants capitalised on the opportunity the project presented to find friends and to negotiate and deepen relationships. In addition, the analysis revealed that social interaction also characterised and influenced the learning experience itself and had implications for engagement. The paper concludes that the subjectivities of social interaction are powerfully embedded in the learning process and may play a part

330 Joanna Crossman and Sarbari Bordia

in engagement. Second, the project was perceived as a valuable way of preparing students for workplaces where developing intercultural communication skills and online, culturally diverse team relationships are required. Keywords: Internationalisation, friendships and relationships, higher education, business education, social nexus, virtual communication

Contextualising the project

Evidencesuggeststhatstudiesininterculturalcommunicationhavegainedgreaterfocusgiventheethical,economicanddemographicimplicationsofglobalisation(Eblen,Mills&Britton2004:28).Itiswithinthisbroadcontextthatthispaperispresentedsinceitsharesthefindingsofaresearchstudyaboutanintercultural,onlinelearningprojectinvolvingstudentsenrolledinanAustralianuniversity.

Therationalefortheprojectwasmulti-faceted.First,Australianstudentswereenrolledinafirstyearbusinesscommunicationcourseandthedecisiontoincorporatetheprojectatthattimerespondedtoevidencethatpositiveandearlyexperiencesoflearninginculturallymixedgroupswouldinfluencestudentwillingnesstoengageinculturallymixeduniversitygroupworklaterintheiracademiccareers(Summers&Volet2008:368).Second,virtualgroupsworkingonsharedgoalsacrosscultures,space,timeandorganisations(Kirkmanetal.2002:67–77)haveakeyroleinthesuccessfulperformanceofcontemporaryorganisationsaswellasinuniversitylearning.Thefindingsofanumberofstudiesthatmulticulturalgroupshavethepotentialtoperformbetterthanhomogenousonesfurthersupportsthevalueofuniversitiesdevelopingstudentswiththeskillsandunderstandingstoworkinthisway(Summers&Volet2008:358).Giventhatsocialandculturalconflictsoftengiverisetoproject

Friendship and relationships in virtual and intercultural learning 331

failureratherthantechnologyinonlinecontexts,reflectionupontheapparentimpactoftheseinfluencesisimportantinpreparingbusinessgraduates(Chang2006:372,Cho&Lee2008:548).

Preparinggraduatesforculturallydiverseworkplacesisoneofthemajorgoalsofinternationalisation(Eblen,Mills&Britton2004:28,Volet&Ang1998:5)anditisofinteresttonotethatrecentcycletworeportsfromtheAustralianUniversitiesQualityAgencysuggestthattheissueofsocialandculturalinclusivityinsomeuniversitiesbetweendomesticandinternationalstudentsisamatterattractingsomeattention(AUQA2010),thoughJiang(2008:351)hassuggestedthatthesocialandculturalrationalesforinternationalisationseemtohavetakenabackseattopoliticalandeconomicdrivers.

Designingtheteachingandlearningnecessarytoaccommodatetheneedsfortheinternationalisationofbusiness,wheremanagersareincreasinglyleadingculturallyandgeographicallydiversevirtualgroups,isnotasimpletask(Blasco2009:174,Sidle2009:19).Theprocessisnotmadeeasierbytheapparentpaucityofempiricalresearchstudiesthatexaminetheinfluenceofinterculturalandsocialfactorsincomputer-mediatedcollaboration(Cho&Lee2008:549)andthelimitedstudiesexploringwaysthatcomputertechnologycanbeusedwithininterculturalcommunicationpedagogy(Eblen,Mills&Britton2004:28).

Awikisitewasconstructedwhereparticipantsinboth‘local’(physicallylocatedinAustralia)and‘international’(physicallylocatedineitherAustraliaortheNetherlands)groupscouldcommunicate.Asa‘participatorysocialnetworkingsoftware’,wikienabledgroupstoco-constructknowledgebyeditingtextinonlinedocuments(Caverly&Ward2008:36).Ourstudyaimedtodiscovermoreabouthowonlinelearningisexperiencedfromtheperspectiveofstudents,atopicthathasreportedlybeenneglecteddespitetwodecadesofongoingresearchintocomputermediatedcommunicationand


learninginuniversities(Ellis,Ginns&Piggot2009:303).Ramsden(2003)too,hasalsomoregenerallyexpressedconcernthatstudentperspectiveshavebeensubjugatedineducationalliterature.

Finally,anotherrationalefortheprojectwastointensifystudentengagementbytakinganexperientialapproachtothelearningandencouragingstudentstoconsidertheimplicationsofinterculturalcommunicationtheoryforthecasestudyandalsotheirownculturalperspectives,experiences,knowledgeandbackgroundsinwaysthatlegitimisedthosethingstheyalready‘knew’.Inthisrespect,theprojectresembledsomeofthecharacteristicsofChang’s‘wisdombank’,aconceptthatrespectfullyacknowledgedpersonalculturalheritageandexperiencesamongststudentsinwaysthatencouragedactivelearningandmotivatedstudentstolearnaboutculturesotherthantheirown(Chang2006:372).However,Chang’sassumptionthattheinherentculturaldiversityofclassroomsincontemporaryuniversitiesmakesanyeffortstoengineerlearningaboutculturaldiversityredundant,wouldseemtobesomewhatoptimistic.AsVoletandAng(1998:20–21)haveindicated,interculturallearningbetweenlocalandinternationalstudentsrequires‘carefulplanningandmonitoring’andwouldnotoccurspontaneouslyintheclassroom,butratherneedtobeembeddedaspartofafocusedapproachtointernationalisationinhighereducationattheinstitutionallevel.

Inbringingpersonalknowledge,experiencesandperspectivestothelearning,Changarguesthattheexperiencebecomesinternalisedinwaysthatdigdeepintoindividualconceptionsofidentity(Chang2006:375–376).Thesepersonalandsocialformsofengagedlearningthusprovideanauthenticandmeaningfulclimatewhererelationshipsandfriendshiparenotsimplyapositivebutunplannedoutcome.Theyare,infact,aninherentpartofthelearningexperienceandarationaleforengaginginitfromthestudent’sperspective.


Intercultural learning and student relationships

Researchconcernedwithsubjectiveandsocialaspectsoflearninginhighereducationappearstohaveattractedgreaterattentionwithinthelastdecade(Montgomery&McDowell2009:455,Summers&Volet2008,Volet&Ang1998,Volet&Wosnitza2004).Researchersareexploringthewaysinwhichemotions(Cartney&Rouse2006,Crossman2007,Huyton2009,McQueen&Webber2009:244),spirituality(Crossman2008,Tisdell2001)andfriendshipsandrelationships(Gareis2000,Zhouetal.2008:63)playapartinlearningandassessment.Morespecifically,theexpansionofinternationaleducationhasalsogivenrisetodiscussionabouthowsomeofthesesubjective,psychologicalandsocio-culturalissuesrelatetothelearningexperiencesofinternationalstudentsinculturallydiverseuniversitycontexts(seeChang2006,Sawiretal.2008,Zhouetal.2008:63).EarlierstudiessuchasthosebyBochner,McLeodandLin(1977)inHawaiiandFurnhamandAlibhai(1985)intheUKwereconcernedwithexploringhowculturalprofilesinfluencedchoicesaboutfriendshipsandrelationships.Morerecently,theChoandLee(2008)study,concernedwithcollaborationinvirtualgroupsinvolvinganAmericanandtwoSingaporeanuniversitiesusingsocialnetworkanalysis,alsoconcludedthatsocialfactorswereimportantelementsinthelearningprocess.

Inaddition,thereisevidencetosuggestthatdespitethebestintentionsofthoseinvolvedintheintensificationofinternationalisationinouruniversities,lonelinessandisolationaretoooftenthehallmarksofa‘relationaldeficit’experiencedbyinternationalstudents(Sawiretal.2008:148–149).ThesefindingsmaybeconnectedtoAustralianresearchconductedoverthelastdecadethatreportsa‘disturbing’lackofmeaningfulinteractionbetweenlocalandinternationaluniversitystudents(e.g.Summers&Volet2008:357,Volet&Ang1998:5).Similarly,intheUKitwouldseemthatstudiesfromthemid-eightieshaveindicatedthat


fewinternationalstudentscouldlayclaimtoenjoyingfriendshipswiththeirBritishpeers(Furnham&Alibhai1985).Suchastateofaffairs,particularlyinthefirstyearofuniversity,presentsaparticularchallengeforinternationalstudentsexperiencingculturaltransitionandseparationfromtheirfamilieswhileatthesametimeseekingtoestablishsupportiverelationshipsaswellasasenseoftheirownidentity(Cartney&Rouse2006:84).Theneedforresearchtoguideuniversitiesindecision-makingaboutsocialaswellaseducationalobjectivesassociatedwithinternationalisationandmulticulturalgroupshasclearlybeenidentified(Summers&Volet2008:357,Volet&Ang1998:6).

Ifindeedculturalandsocialdiversitygiverisetoconflict(Foldy,Rivard&Buckley2009:28)and‘militateagainstintegration’(Cartney&Rouse2006:79)inwaysthatcouldleadtofeelingsofisolation,thenplanningforlearninginculturallydiverseclassroomsrepresentssomethingofachallenge.Althoughtheneedtodevelopclosepersonalrelationshipsamongststudentsapparentlyvariesfromculturetoculture,thecreationof‘friendlyclassrooms’wouldseemtobeanobviousstartingpointfornurturingfriendshipandmeaningfulpersonalrelationships(Sawiretal.2008:154–170).

Theuniversityclassroomneedstobeaplacewherevariedperspectivesarewelcomeandwherepersonal,racialidentitynotonlyholdsnoriskbutisalsonotdownplayedasacherishedandcentralpartofwhoindividualsare(Foldy,Rivard&Buckley2009:26–36).Withoutthefosteringofappropriatemeta-skills,reflectionandthechallengingofexistingculturalassumptions,manystudentsmaywellfeelanythingbutsecurecomparedwiththosewhoaremembersofhomogenousgroups(Foldy,Rivard&Buckley2009:36).Inaddition,theliteraturesuggeststhevalueoflinkingassessmenttolearningaboutculturebycapitalisingonstudentdiversity(Summers&Volet2008:358)andthisadvicewasindeedincorporatedintoourownproject.


Withinanorganisationalcontext,anumberofstudieshaveconsideredthedevelopmentofrelationshipsandfriendshipsincomputer-mediated,groupcontexts(e.g.Irmer,Chang&Bordia2000,Kayworth&Leidner2001:7,Stefanone&Gay2008,Yoo&Alavi2001:371).Itnowseemsclearthatstronginterpersonalrelationshipscandevelopincomputer-mediatedenvironmentsastheyareinface-to-facesettings(Kahai&Cooper2003:263,Whitty&Gavin2001:623),andthesameassumptionsmightbemadewithregardtoonlinelearningcontextsinuniversitybusinessandmanagementprograms.

Wikismayprovideonewaytorespondtotheneedforsocialinteractionandinclusionamonguniversitystudents.GenerationYstudentsbornafterabout1980areapparentlywell-disposedtoidentifywiththisformoftechnologythatrepresentsadeparturefromtransmissivelearningcontextsandhasthepotentialtobeconducivetoengaging,inclusiveandcollaborativeenvironmentsthatinvolvesocialinteraction(Johnston,Duff&Quinn2009:27–28,Workman2008:23).However,despitetheundoubtedpotentialforenhancinginternationalisationviaonlinelearning,fewstudiesappeartohaveexploredtheareainanydepth.NotedexceptionsincludeVoletandWosnitza’s(2004)workinvolvingGermanandAustralianstudentsandGareis’(2000)qualitativecasestudyresearchfocusingonculturalandlinguisticvariationsinhowindividualsinterpretfriendshipamongGermaninternationalstudentsstudyingintheUSA.Unfortunately,Gareis’(2000)literaturereviewoninterculturalstudentfriendshipslargelyreliesonsourcespublishedbetweenthe1950sand1980sandmayasaresultfailtocapturethechanginglandscapeofuniversitylife,especiallyinbusinessprograms.Moregenerally,theintensificationofglobalisationsincethatperiodwillalmostcertainlyhavealteredhowmuchexposureuniversitystudentsfromvariedcultureshavetooneanother,howtheyinteractandtheunderstandingsindividualsbringtothoseinterculturalrelationships.


Methodology

Thebroadaimofthisrich,qualitative,interpretiveresearchstudywastodiscoverhowstudentsasparticipantsexperiencedanonline,experientialformoflearningconcernedwithinterculturalcommunication.Groundedtheory,firstconceivedinthe1967seminaltext,The discovery of grounded theorybyGlaserandStraussandnowarguablythe‘mostcommonlyusedqualitativeresearchmethod’(Morse2008:13),wasselectedasanappropriatemethodtoachievetheresearchaim.Groundedtheorywaschosensinceitenablestheresearchertoprobetheintentionsandresponsesofparticipantsinrelationtothecircumstancespresentedbytheonline,interculturalprojectandexplorethemeaningstheybringstothatexperience(Glesne&Peshkin1992).Inotherwords,groundedtheoryhasthecapacitytoexplorethe‘behaviours,emotionsandfeelings’ofparticipants,aswellasthe‘socialmomentsandculturalphenomena’(Strauss&Corbin1998:10).Aconstructionistperspectiveongroundedtheorywasadoptedinthisstudy.Simplyput,constructionistgroundedtheoristspositthatconceptsandtheoriesareconstructedbyparticipantsandresearchersratherthanemergingfromthedatathatisconstruedassomesortofobjectivetruthwaitingtobediscovered(Casselletal.2009:516,Charmaz2008b:401).

Asiscommoningroundedtheory,purposivesamplingwaschosenbecausethesetting,theparticipants,eventsandpurposesoftheresearchwerealignedwiththekeyareasofinterestinthestudy(Johnson&Christensen2000,Punch2000).Specifically,weasresearcherswereinterestedintheperceptionsofstudentsenrolledinanundergraduate,businesscommunicationcourseinanAustralianuniversity.Studentswhoparticipatedwereorganisedintostudygroupsaspartofaninterculturalonlinelearningprojectthatinvolvedcollaboratingontheanalysisofacasestudy.Althoughthecasestudywasarequiredassessmentforallstudentsonthecourse,participating


intheonline,collaborativelearningprojectandtheresearchstudywasentirelyvoluntary.

WhilestudentsfromauniversityintheNetherlandsalsoparticipatedintheonlineproject,thedatadiscussedinthispaperweregatheredfromstudentsenrolledintheAustralianuniversityonly.Atotalof27studentsinAustraliaparticipatedintheproject.Participatingstudentsweredividedintotwostudygroups.Group1,referredtointhispaperasthe‘internationalgroup’(n=19),collaboratedonlinewithstudentsfromtheNetherlands.Group2,referredtointhispaperasthe‘local’group(n=8),comprisedculturallydiverseindividualswhowereeitherAustraliancitizensorinternationalstudentsfromBotswana,China,Korea,India,MalaysiaandSingapore.Therationaleforsplittingthetwogroupswasthatsome‘local’studentsexpressedaninterestintheprojecttoolatetobeincludedinthe‘international’groupbutneverthelesssawthevalueofinterculturalcollaborationamongculturallydiversestudentsintheuniversity.Theyalsohadtheadditionalopportunitytoarrangeface-to-faceinteractioniftheywished.

Boththe‘local’andthe‘international’groupscollaboratedonthecasestudyaboutinterculturalcommunicationbetweenanAustralianfranchisorandtwofranchiseesbasedintheNetherlandsandHongKongrespectively.Thecasestudyrequiredstudentstointerpretandcriticallyapplyinterculturalcommunicationresearchtothepracticalcontextofthecasestudy,buttheywerealsoencouragedtodrawupontheirownculturalandheritageexperienceindiscussingthecasestudyonlinewithotherstudents.Participantswereprovidedwithongoinginformationandsupportbyaresearchassistantwithregardtotheresearchprocess,theinterculturalcasestudyprojectandthetechnologicalfeaturesofthewiki.

Theethicalmanagementoftheresearchwasapprovedbytheappropriateuniversitycommittee.Studentswerealertedtothefactthatparticipationwasentirelyvoluntaryandthatiftheydecided


nottobeinvolvedintheresearchstudytherewouldbenonegativeimplicationsintermsoftheircoursegrades.Sincetheresearcherswerealsoco-ordinatorsinthecourseinwhichtheprojectwasembeddedandwouldhavearoleinstudentassessment,aresearchassistantcollectedthedataandcoordinatedtheresearchstudy.Theresearchersdidnotreceivethedatauntilafterthefinalgradesforthecoursehadbeenreleasedasafurtherprotectionagainstanybiasintrudingontheassessmentprocess.Participatingstudentsweremadeawareofthisfeatureinthedesignoftheresearch.

Datawerecollectedfromquestionnairesandinterviews.Open-ended,longitudinalquestionnaireswereadministeredatthreepoints;thebeginning,middleandendoftheonline,collaborativeproject.Open-endedquestionnaireswereusedbecauseinkeepingwithaninterpretivetradition,theyweremorelikelytoreflectparticipantviewsratherthanbeingundulyinfluencedbytheresearcher(Foddy1999).Anonymitywaspreservedbyusingasix-digit,participant-generatedcode.Theprimaryobjectiveofquestionnaires1and2wastoascertainwhatparticipantsexpectedtogainfromtheirinvolvementintheproject,theirrationaleforparticipatingandwhattheyexpectedtoachievebytheendofit.Questionnaire3exploredtheonlineinterculturallearningexperiencefromtheparticipant’sperspectiveandhowtheprojectinfluencedtheirunderstandingofinterculturalcommunication.

Semi-structuredinterviewswereconductedattheendoftheprojectinordertoprovideparticipantsafurtheropportunitytoexpresstheirthoughtsabouttheprojectthathadnototherwisebeencapturedinthesurveyquestions.Somesamplequestionsaredetailedbelow.Thequestionaskingabouthowthegroupinteractedwasnotinitiallyincludedbut,consistentwiththeoreticalsamplingingroundedtheory(Suddaby2006),wasaddedwhenanalysisofinitialdatasuggestedthatinterpersonalrelationshipswereanimportantaspectoftheexperience.


• Pleasedescribeyourexperienceoftheproject.

• Pleasegiveabriefaccountofhowyouthinkthemembersofthegroupsworkedtogethertolearninpreparationfortheassessment.

• Pleasegiveabriefaccountofhowyouthinkthemembersofthegroupinteractedinterpersonally.

• Whatdoyoubelievechallengedcommunicationinthegroupsandwhatworkedwell?

• Pleaseindicatehowrelevanttheprojecthasbeenintermsofpreparingyoufortheworkplace.

• Pleasesuggestanywaysinwhichyoufeeltheprojectcouldbeimproved.

Constantcomparativeanalysis,asagroundedtheorytechnique,wasusedtoanalysethedataandoccurredsimultaneouslywithdatacollection.Datawereinitiallyopencodedbycomparingunits of meaning(expressedorcouchedinsentences,phrasesorparagraphs,forexample)asnewinformationwasreceived.Theprocesswasoneofcontinualrefinementwherecategoriesweremergedordismantledasnewcategories(orthemes)weregeneratedanddifferentrelationshipsdiscovered(Maykut&Morehouse1994).Asthisprocesscontinued,corecategorieswereidentifiedthatseemedtoresonatedeeplywiththedataindefiningways.Thesecorecategoriesformthebasisofsubheadingsinthediscussionoffindingssectionthatfollowsandgiverisetothetheorythatsocialrelationshipsarepowerfullyembeddedinvirtualandinterculturalcollaborativeprojectsinmanagementlearning.

Discussion of findings

Analysisofdatacollectedfromboththequestionnairesandinterviewsaswellasfromthe‘local’and‘international’participantgroupshasbeenpresentedcollectivelygivenahighlevelofconsistencyinthefindingsacrossthesedatasources.Invivodatahavebeenusedto


illustratefindingsinordertokeeptheconcernsoftheparticipantstotheforeandattractgreaterconfidenceinthefindingsthemselves(Strauss&Corbin1994).

Insummary,participantsperceivedtheneedtocreateafriendlyatmospherethatwouldfacilitatelearning.Doingsowasnotalwayseasy,asresponsesindicatedthatattainingalevelandmanneroffriendlinessthatwasculturallyappropriateappearedtobelargelyamatteroftrialanderror.Mostparticipantsstatedtheirrationaleforjoiningtheprojectwastogetmoreexperiencewithinterculturalcommunication.However,limitedexperienceofinterculturalcommunicationmayhavegivenrisetoatendencytostereotypeinsomecases.Participantsalsoexpressedfrustrationwhenothersdidnotseemtobeparticipatinginacommittedfashionanddevelopedstrategiesforstimulatingengagementamongteammembers.Thus,thekeyfindingsofthestudywerethatparticipatingstudentscapitalisedupontheopportunitytheprojectpresentedtofindfriendsandtonegotiateanddeepenrelationships.Also,theanalysisrevealedthatsocialinteractionalsocharacterisedthelearningexperienceitselfandhadimplicationsforengagement.

Friendships and relationships are an important aspect of learning

Dataanalysedfrombothlocalandinternationalgroupssuggestedthatmaking‘new’,‘more’or‘different’friendsand‘gettingtoknoweachother’wascentraltorationalesforparticipationintheproject.Inotherwords,learningwasperceivedasbeingsociallyconstituted.

Fledglinglearningrelationshipsandfriendships,however,werenotentirelyperceivedasauthenticexperiences.Forexample,whenonestudentcommented,‘Sheisverynice,likefriends’,thereistheimplicationthatbeinglikeafriendisnotquitethesamethingasactuallybeingafriend.Giventhecontextsinwhichassociationsanddistinctionsweremade,friendshipappearedtobeviewedasastateofarrivalandfriendlinessandbeingfriendlyaspleasant,indicativeof


friendshipandindeedsimulatingfriendshipbutnotquitefriendshipitself.

Certainly,ifparticipantsdidnotmakedeepfriendships,friendliness wasneverthelessimportantanddetermineddecision-makingabouthowpeoplewouldproceedintheirsocialnetworksonline.Referencestoanindividualbeingfriendlyornot,oftenprecededaccountsandrationalesforpursuingsomerelationshipsandwithdrawingfromothers.Oneparticipantcommented,‘Ididn’treallylikeX;shewasnotreallyfriendlyatall.SoIcontactedonefriendlyperson...’.Thus,individualswereconsideredexpendableandcouldbeeasilyabandonedforotherswhowereperceivedas‘nice’or‘friendly’teammembersevenintermsoftheemoticonstheyused.

Friendlinesswasalsoawayofoperatingwiththosewhowereyetunknown,toovercomeinitialuncertaintiesinemergingrelationshipsandcultivateaclimatewhereindividualscouldfeelcomfortable.Theliteraturesuggeststhatinterculturalfriendshipsandrelationshipsaremoredifficulttoinitiatethanmono-culturalones(Gareis2000:72)andcertainlymuchcareandsensitivityincultivatingtheserelationshipswasevident.Forexample,oneparticipantfeltthatshe‘always’had‘tobefriendly’sothatpeoplewouldfeel‘easyasmuchaspossible’.Suchcarewasalsoevidentincraftingemailmessagestoavoidpotential‘misunderstandings’,‘confusion’orappearinginadvertently‘rude’.Ithasbeenarguedthatgoodinterpersonalskillsinvirtualteamsareatleastasimportantastheyareonaface-to-facebasis(Kirkmanetal.2002:69,74)andanalysisofdatainthisstudywouldappeartobesupportive.

Developinganappropriategenreforcollaborativecommunicationinlearningandestablishinglevelsoffriendlinesswiththosewhoarelargelyunknownwasnotalwayseasyforparticipants.Oneparticipant,forexample,discoveredthatshehadannoyedgroupmembersbysendingemailsthatwere‘veryfriendly’,usinggreetingssuchas‘heybaby’andfindingthather‘moreopencommunication’


andnon‘work-orientedstyle’seemedtogiveriserathermoretoirritabilitythanintimacyamongstprojectmembers.Gauginghowfriendlytobewasdifficultinotherways,asoneparticipantinthelocalprojectimplied,‘...whenIorganisedthemeetingwithXonFridayinitially,Iwantedtotellhertomeeteachotheratmyhome.ButIwasembarrassedbecauseIdidn’tknowhowshewouldreacttome’.Thisparticulardescriptioncanbeunderstoodbetterwheninformedbyresearchfindingsthataninvitationtoastudent’shomewillbeassociatedwithvariedassumptionsabouttheimplicationsfordevelopingintimacy,dependingonthecultureofthoseextendingorreceivingsuchinvitations(Gareis2000:71).

Formalityincommunicationwasassociatedwiththeneed‘togetsomethingdone’andbeingtask-orientatedandinformalitywithdevelopingfriendshipand‘soft’skills.Distinctionsbetweenformalityandinformalitywereevidentindecision-makingaboutwhethertoconductthecommunicationusingauniversityorapersonalemailaddress,forexample,orgaugingwhetheritwasappropriatetouseMSN,consideredamoreintimatewayofcommunicating.NotingthatoneoftheparticipantsfromtheNetherlandsdidnotgiveheranMSNaddress,oneparticipantcommented,‘Ineverpushedit,sheonlycommunicate[d]withmethroughe-mail.Ineverpush[ed]it,aslongasshecommunicate[d]withme’.Relationshipsconductedonlineintheprojectthatsubsequentlyledtoface-to-facemeetingsinvolvedsomeadjustmentsbeingmadetoinitialimpressions.Someonewhoseemed‘organised’and‘goal-directed’onlineappearedmoredependentface-to-face.Thusinterpersonalrelationshipsrequiredconstantre-adjustmentasswitchingchannelsofcommunicationallowedforadditionalperspectivesofanindividual’sidentitytocometothefore.

Consistentwithotherresearchfindings,humourwasassociatedinthedatawithsocial,culturalandemotionalconnectednessinthelearning(Garrison,Anderson&Archer2000:100,Volet&Ang1998:10).As


astrategy,humourwasusedincultivatingaclimateofinformalityinordertopromotecloserrelationshipsandcollaboration.Oneparticipantwrote,‘Itriedtousehumouralot...That’s…howwegottotalk’.Theremark,‘Shecanjoke’,wasclearlypositiveinthecontextofdescribingastudentfromtheNetherlandsandtherelationshipenjoyedbetweenthem.Humourwasalsoadoptedasastrategyforrepairingrelationshipsundersomestrain,forexample,‘Shewasupsetwithme.Isaid,“[Y]oucanslapme!”.Afterthat,shewashappytohelpme’.

Clearly,findingwaystobecomemoreexperiencedinterculturalcommunicatorsanddevelopingfriendshipsintheprocesswasattractivetomany,andmaysuggestthatnotallparticipantneedsweremetinthisregard,asinternationalstudentsinAustralia.Certainly,oneinternationalstudent,alludingtoherface-to-facetutorialsinAustralia,commentedsomewhatwistfully,‘Ididn’tknowotherpeople,Iwouldloveto’andanotherreflectedthatshecommunicatedlargelywithAsianinternationalstudentsratherthan‘Australians’.

Although‘local’groupshadanopportunitytomeetfacetofacewhereas‘international’groupsdidnot,fewlocalparticipantsappearedtotakeadvantageofthefact.Thisfindingisparticularlycuriousgiventhatface-to-facecommunicationwasviewedpositivelybyparticipantsasa‘secure’meansofcommunicationthathadimplicationsfordevelopingtrustandintimacy,whereasInternetwasperceivedbysomeas‘veryscary’.Onefemaleparticipantcommented,‘[y]ouneverknowwhathappens.ItmightbedifferentwhenyouactuallymeetthepersonwhoyoucontactovertheInternet’.Inface-to-facesituations,oneparticipantdeclaredhe‘wouldbemorefriendly’andtakerelationships‘tothenextlevel’,becausehefeltmoresecurethanwhenheinteractedwithothersusingtheInternet.

However,whilesomeweremorecautiousintermsofdevelopingonlinerelationships,othersviewedthemediumasliberating,


describingthemselvesas‘moretalkative’and‘morefriendly’,wheretheyfelt‘morefreetotalk’.Correspondingly,face-to-facemeetingsdidnotresultinautomatictrust,asismadeclearinthestatement,‘shedidn’trealisethatIdon’twanttotelleverythingthatIhavedonetoher.Sheexpectedtowriteeverythingatthemeeting…butshecan’tdothat’.Inotherwords,trustbuildingwasalsoassociatedwithafairtradeofinformationandeffort.

Intercultural communication

‘Meeting’,‘making’,‘interacting’,‘studyingwith’‘newfriendsfromdifferentcountries’and‘cultures’‘aroundtheworld’inordertoknowmoreaboutthosecultureswasacommonrationale.Thisdesirewasparticularlyimportantforsomeinternationalstudentsincaseswherefewopportunitiesexistedintheirhomelandtointeractwithpeoplefromculturesotherthantheirown.Thetaken-for-grantednessofmulticulturalAustraliaandothercountries,wherethereisatleastthepotentialforforminginterpersonalandinterculturalrelationshipsmaymeanthatacademicsoverlooktheunfamiliarityofculturallydiverselearninggroupsforsomeindividuals.

Intheprocessofidentifyingtheinfluenceofcultureoncommunication,therewasatendencyforstereotypingtooccur.AccordingtoEblen,MillsandBritton(2004:29),theliteraturesuggeststhatstereotypingmaybemorecommonincomputer-mediatedcommunicationthaninface-to-facesituationsbecausethesekindsofmessagesareshorterandprovidelessinterpersonalinformation,resultingintheimportanceofanyinformationreceivedbecominginflated.Dutchprojectparticipantswerecastas‘strict’,‘efficient’,‘organised’,‘goal-orientated’,‘verydriven’,‘strongwilled’,‘hardworkers’whowere‘moreinterestedingettingthejobdone...thanmakingfriends’.Theywereperceivedaspeoplewhowanted‘tofinisheverythingontime’,approachthings‘stepbystep’andprovide‘instruction’ontasks.


ParticipantscommentedthattheirpeersintheNetherlandsdidnot‘communicatepersonalbackgrounds’.OnestudentinAustralianoted,‘Wedidn’treallytalkaboutpersonalthing[s].[We]talkedabouttheproject’.TheseobservationsandotherslikethemappearedtoindicateaparticipantperceptionthatstudentsfromtheNetherlandstendedtobegoal-focusedratherthanfriendship-focused.AstudybyEblen,MillsandBritton(2004:43),concernedwithonlineinterculturallearningbetweenstudentsintheUSandNewZealand,suggestedthatpersonalrelationshipstendedtobedevelopedfollowingcommunicationaboutthetaskinhand.Itispossiblethatthestudentsinourstudy,manyofwhomwereinternationalAsianstudentsinAustralia,wouldhaveexpectedthedevelopmentofpersonalrelationshipstoprecedediscussionsaboutthetask,giventheemphasisuponrelationshipbuildinginthatregion.

Participantsalsoconceptualisedbehaviourintermsofpolitenessandrudeness.DespitesomereferencestostudentsfromtheNetherlandsbeing‘morepolite’,‘positive’,‘fantastic’and‘quitenicepeople’,forexample,tensionsclearlyarosefrominterculturalandinterpersonalcommunication.OneAsianstudentintheAustraliangroupremarkedthatin:

‘Asianculture’peoplehave‘tobepolite’tooneanother.Wedon’tgetusedtoit[Westernculture].Asianstudentshavetolearnaboutthis.However,Istronglyrecommend,Asianstudentsshouldkeepourtraditionalculture,beingpolite.

Oneparticipantstruggledwithassumptionsaboutfranknessandrudeness,andsoughthelpfromatutorinordertomakesenseoftheexperience.Despiteeffortstoexploreethnocentricassumptions,theparticipantremainedsomewhataffronted:

Shesaid,‘Ifyoudon’thelpme,youcanleavethegroup’.Iwastakenabackabit.Shewasveryfrank…Mytutortoldmetoday,‘PeopleinTheNetherlandsaremorefrankandstraightforward.Youshouldnotbeoffended.That’sjustculture’.


Thus,asTing-ToomeyandOetzel(2001)argued,whileeffectivemanagementofculturalconflictcanpromotegrowthwithinindividualsandintheirrelationshipswithothers,mismanagedexpectationscanleadtobiasedintergroupperceptions,emotionalfrustrationsandethnocentrismwherethewaysinwhichanin-groupdothingsisconsideredsuperiorandthewaysinwhichanout-groupconducttheiraffairsisconsideredbackward.

Participationontheprojectalsogaverisetootherpainfulandsensitivememoriesinforminginterculturalrelationshipsthatinvolvedfeelingsaboutidentity,assimilation,intenseandrepressedemotions,racism,andagain,politenessandrudeness:

YouneedtobesameorsimilarwithAustralianpeople.WhenIwenttothehighschool,Itriedtolearnmoreaboutdifferentthings.Althoughthey[Australianstudents]arerude,theydidn’tmeanthat.Don’tbesensitive[shethoughttoherself].Initially,Ithought,‘theydon’tlikeAsians’...itisjustaremark,letitgo.TheytendtothinkthatAsianstudentscan’tspeakEnglish.Theymadenegativeremarks.Justwalkaway[shethoughttoherself].Otherwise,youwillbeveryangry’.

Therewasaclearindicationinthedatathatstudentslearnedtovaluethevariedperspectivesthatinterculturalcommunicationinteamscouldofferinthelearningexperience.Participantsfrequentlyexpressedappreciationinlearningto‘understanddifferencesand...toaccept[other]viewspeople[held]inthisproject’or‘gainingabetterunderstandingoftheissuesinthereportthrough[other]perspectives’,andbecomingawareofhow‘differentopinions’helpedwiththe‘experience’.Oneparticipantcommented,‘peoplelookedatitwithdifferentperspectivesandthatishowthisprojecthasassistedme’.Anotherfoundthat‘otherpeoplehavecuriosities...otherstudentshavedifferentexperiences,insightsandopinionsthanIdo’.Thus,theselearningrelationshipsfacilitatedalooking out and looking inwardsinameaning-makingprocessofconstructing


understandingsaboutinterculturalcommunicationandtheinterpersonalimplications.

Issues concerned with engagement

Thedatayieldedmanypositivereferencestothehighlevelofsupportparticipantsreceivedfrombothpeersandacademicstaff.However,inpursuingnegativecases,someevidencerevealedincidencesofpoorengagementintheprojectthathadconsequencesfordevelopingrelationships,friendshipsand,indeed,ultimatelylearning.

Apersistentscenariowouldbewhereanindividualinitiatedcommunicationonlineandreceivednoresponse,whichgaverisetofeelingsof‘frustration’,‘disappointment’and‘confusion’aboutapparentlackofcommitment.Oneparticipantcommented,‘Idon’treallyunderstand.Peoplewantedtodothisprojectatthebeginning,signingon...Afterthat,theydidn’twanttoparticipate’.Despondencyandirritationintensifiedwhenindividualsfailedtomeetworkloadexpectationsorwherethereweremismatchesinthedegreeofsocialinteractionsought—afindingdiscussedelsewhereintheliterature(seeKirkmanetal.2002:73).Eblen,MillsandBritton(2004)havealsoindicatedthat,whenstudentsdelayinrespondingtoemails,inanonlineinterculturalprojecttheresultisdiscouragementandsetbacksinmotivationthatplacedtheprojectatrisk.

Participantsontheprojectadoptedvariousstrategiestoencourageengagementamongotherteammembersandtheformationofrelationships.Suchstrategiesincludedpersistence,personalisation,threatsandswitchingcommunicationchannels.Personalisationwouldbeachievedbysendingindividualemailstogroupmembersandathreatmightcome,forexample,intheformofseekingchangesingroupmembership(inotherwords,expulsionofagroupmember).Threatsofthisnaturecouldproveeffective.Oneparticipantrespondedbyapologisingandadding,‘IamenjoyingthisandIamback’.Finally,participantsswitchedcommunicationchannelsfrom


thewikitoemail,forexample,althoughparticipantsnotedthatemailmadeit‘easynottorespond’,sinceindividualscouldsimplydeletemessagesiftheywere‘toohardtoreply’.

Participantsconjecturedthatsomeindividualsatleast‘didn’tcare’aboutignoringemailsbecauseonlyfacetofacemadetherelationship‘real’andthereforeemail-basedrelationshipswouldnotattractthesamelevelofcommitment.Illustrativedataincluded:

Ifweseeeachother,peopledon’twanttobeimpolite...theywillcareaboutthatperson.Idon’tfeel[any]connection...[to]sendemail.IfImetonepersonevenjustonce,Iwouldhavemoresenseofmyresponsibilityethicallyandrelativelytothatperson.AlthoughIamverybusy,Iwouldthinkaboutthat.

Thus,whenapersonbecomes‘real’asopposedtomerelyvirtual(andbyextension,hypothetical),expectations,obligationsandcommitmentsinherentinthoserelationshipsbecomemorepressing.Researchindicatingthatitisvitalforindividualstoprojectthemselvesas‘realpeople’andtoestablishasocialpresenceonline(seeGarrison,Anderson&Archer2000:89)wouldappeartobeconsistentwiththisanalysis.

Someparticipantsfeltthey‘didn’thaveenoughtimetogettoknoweachother’muchbeyondthesuperficialitiesofintroductionsuntiltheveryendoftheproject,whenassessmentwasimminentandtheybegantogiveitgreaterattentionamongcompetingassessmentresponsibilities.Givenstudiesfindingthatdevelopingdeeperculturalunderstandingsarelesslikelywhenstudentshavenothadachancetodeveloptheirrelationships(Volet&Ang1998:10),andthatstudentsworkinginculturallymixedgroupsneedlongerperiodsoftimetoovercomeinitialsocialchallengesanddeveloppositivefeelingsabouttheinteractionandlearning(Summers&Volet2008:359),encouragingengagementandinteractionfromthebeginningofaprojectlikethisiscrucial.


Conclusion

Thisstudyhashighlightedtheimportanceofthepotentialforfriendshipinattractingstudentstointerculturallearningprojects.Althoughfriendlinesswasmoreoftenperceivedasanadequatesubstituteforfriendshipitself,expressingfriendlinessinappropriatewaysinterculturallypresentedsomethingofachallengeandwasinfluencedbywhetheraparticipantwasperceivedasmoretask/goal-focusedorrelationship-focused.Onoccasions,suchculturalorientationscouldgiverisetosomelevelofconflictwhenperceivedbreachesof‘polite’behaviouroccurredbasedonethnocentricevaluations.Someparticipantsattemptedtomanagethepoorengagementofteammembersbyadoptingparticularstrategies,includingthreats.Onlinecommunicationmayhavecompoundedbothengagementinthelearningaswellasthedevelopmentoffriendshipsinthatapartymaybeperceivedasless‘real’,morevirtualandthus,ultimately,hypothetical.Thesuccessfulestablishmentofbothfriendshipandstudentengagementwasalsoclearlyassociatedwiththetimespentonthetask,aswellasthedurationoftheproject.

Thefindingsofthestudy,therefore,appeartosupporttheliteraturesuggestingthatacademicsneedtoattendtoemotionalandsocialfactorsinvolvedinlearningaswellastothelearningtasksper se(Cartney&Rouse2006:80–85).Thatstudentsappeartoviewsomekindsoflearningasameanstoforgefriendshipsandbroadentheirsocialnetworkssuggeststhatdesigningthesekindsofactivitieshaspotentialfordeepeningacademic,socialandculturalengagement.Providingstudentswiththeopportunitytoreflectuponthewaythatculturemayimpactuponinterculturalcommunicationandonlinegrouprelationshipswhileworkingontasks,mayalsoprovetobeusefulinpreparinggraduatesforworkinginglobalised,culturallydiverseworkforcecontexts.However,whiletheprojectdesignmightaspiretopreparinggraduatestothisend,wehavenoevidencetosupportsuchaclaim.Furtherstudiesinvolvingemployedgraduates


andemployers,forexample,couldwellexploretheimplicationsofprojectslikethisoneintermsoftheirperceivedimpactuponemployabilityandperformanceinculturallydiverseworkforces.

References

AustralianUniversitiesQualityAgency(AUQA)(2010).AUQAaudits,http://www.auqa.edu.au/qualityaudit/universities/.

Blasco,M.(2009).‘Culturalpragmatists?Studentperspectivesonlearningcultureatabusinessschool’,Academy of Management Learning and Education, 8: 174–187.

Bochner,S.,McLeod,B.&Lin,A.(1977).‘Friendshippatternsofoverseasstudents:Afunctionalmodel’,International Journal of Psychology,12:277–294.

Cartney,P.&Rouse,A.(2006).‘Theemotionalimpactoflearninginsmallgroups:Highlightingtheimpactonstudentprogressionandretention’,Teaching in Higher Education,11:79–91.

Cassell,C.,Bishop,V.,Johnson,P.&Buehring,A.(2009).‘Learningtobeaqualitativemanagementresearcher’,Management Learning,40:513–533.

Caverly,D.C.&Ward,A.(2008).‘Techtalk:Wikisandcollaborativeknowledgeconstruction’,Journal of Development Education,32:36–37.

Chang,J.(2006).‘Atransculturalwisdombankintheclassroom:Makingculturaldiversityakeyresourceinteachingandlearning’,Journal of Studies in International Education,10:369–376.

Charmaz,K.(2008a).‘Groundedtheoryinthe21stcentury:Applicationsforadvancingsocialjusticestudies’,inDenzin,N.&Lincoln,Y.(eds.),Strategies of qualitative inquiry,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Charmaz,K.(2008b).‘Constructionismandthegroundedtheorymethod’,inHolstein,J.&Gubrun,J.(eds.),Handbook of constructionist research,GillfordPress,NewYork:397–412.

Cho,H.&Lee,J.(2008).‘Collaborativeinformationseekingininterculturalcomputer-mediatedcommunicationgroups.Testingtheinfluenceofsocialcontextusingsocialnetworkanalysis’,Communication Research,35:548–573.

Crossman,J.(2008).‘Breakingthesilence:ExploringspiritualityinsecularprofessionaleducationinAustralia’,inWillis,P.McKenzie,S.&Harris,R.(eds.),Rethinking work and learning: Adult and vocational education for social sustainability,Dordrecht,TheNetherlands:Springer:237–248.


Crossman,J.(2007).‘Theroleofrelationshipsandemotionsinstudentperceptionsoflearningandassessment’,Higher Education and Research Development,26:313–327.

Eblem,A.,Mills,C.&Britton,P.(2004).‘Walkingthetalk:Teachinginterculturalcommunicationexperientially’,Communication Journal of New Zealand, 5:27–46.

Ellis,R.,Ginns,P.&Piggot,L.(2009).‘E-learninginhighereducation:Somekeyaspectsandtheirrelationshipstoapproachestostudy’,Higher Education Research and Development,28:303–318.

Foddy,W.(1999).Constructing questions for interviews and questionnaires, theory and practice in social research,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Foldy,E.G.,Rivard,P.&Buckley,T.(2009).‘Power,safety,andlearninginraciallydiversegroups’,Academy of Management Learning and Education,8:25–42.

Furnham,A.&Alibhai,N.(1985).‘Thefriendshipnetworksofforeignstudents:Areplicationandextensionofthefunctionalmodel’,International Journal of Psychology,20:709–722.

Glaser,B.G.&Strauss,A.(1967).The discovery of grounded theory,Chicago:Aldine.

Glesne,C.&Peshkin,A.(1992).Becoming a qualitative researcher,NewYork:Longman.

Gareis,E.(2000).‘Interculturalfriendship:FivecasestudiesofGermanstudentsintheUSA’,Journal of Intercultural Studies,21:67–91.

Garrison,R.D.,Anderson,T.&Archer,W.(2000).‘Criticalinquiryinatext-basedenvironment:Computerconferencinginhighereducation’,The Internet and Higher Education,2:87–105.

Huyton,J.(2009).‘Significantpersonaldisclosure:ExploringthesupportanddevelopmentneedsofHEtutorsengagedintheemotionworkassociatedwithsupportingstudents’,Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education,1:1–18.

Irmer,B.,Chang,A.&Bordia,P.(2000).‘Thedevelopmentofsocialandtaskcohesionincomputermediatedandfacetofacetaskgroups’,BestpaperpresentedattheAcademyofManagementConference:A1–A6.

Jiang,X.(2010).‘Towardstheinternationalisationofhighereducationfromacriticalperspective’,Journal of Further and Higher Education,32:347–58.

Johnson,B.&Christensen,L.B.(2000).Educational research. Quantitative and qualitative approaches,Boston:AllynandBacon.


Johnston,H.,Duff,A.&Quinn,D.(2009).‘Cuttingtheclothtofitnewneedsandcommunicationpreferences’,ERGO,1:27–38.

Kahai,S.S.&Cooper,R.B.(2003).‘Exploringthecoreconceptsofmediarichnesstheory:Theimpactofcuemultiplicityandfeedbackimmediacyondecisionquality’,Journal of Management Information Systems,20:263–299.

Kayworth,T.R.&Leidner,D.E.(2001).‘Leadershipeffectivenessinglobalvirtualteams’,Journal of Management Information Systems,18:7–40.

Kirkman,B.L.,Rosen,B.,Gibson,C.,Tesluk,P.E.&McPherson,S.O.(2002).‘Fivechallengestovirtualteamsuccess:LessonsfromSabre,Inc.’,The Academy of Management Executive,16:67–79.

Maykut,P.&Morehouse,R.(1994).Beginning qualitative research. A philosophical guide.London:TheFalmerPress.

McQueen,H.&Webber,J.(2009).‘Whatisveryimportanttolearning?Astudentperspectiveonamodelofteachingandlearning’,Journal of Further and Higher Education,33:241–253.

Montgomery,C.&McDowell,L.(2009).‘Socialnetworksandtheinternationalstudentexperience.Aninternationalcommunityofpractice?’,Journal of Studies in International Education,13:455–466.

Morse,J.(2008).‘Tussles,tensionsandresolutions’,inJ.Morse,P.Stern,J.Corbin,B.Bowers,K.Charmaz&A.Clarke(eds.),Developing grounded theory. The second generation,WalnutCreek,CA:LeftCoastPress.

Patton,M.(2002).Qualitative evaluation methods,London:SagePublications.

Punch,K.F.(2000).Introduction to social research. Quantitative and qualitative approaches,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Ramsden,P.(2003).Learning to teach in higher education,Oxford:Routledge.

Sawir,E.,Marginson,S.,Deumert,A.,Nyland,C.&Ramia,G.(2008).‘Lonelinessandinternationalstudents:AnAustraliastudy’,Journal of Studies in International Education,12:148–180.

Sidle,S.D.(2009).‘Buildingacommittedglobalworkforce:Doeswhatemployeeswantdependonculture?’,Academy of Management Perspectives,23:79–81.

Stefanone,M.A.&Gay,G.K.(2008).‘Structuralreproductionofsocialnetworksincomputer-mediatedforums’,Behaviour and Informational Technology,27:97–106.

Suddaby,R.(2006).‘Fromtheeditors.Whatgroundedtheoryisnot’,Academy of Management Journal,49:633–642.


Summers,M.&Volet,S.(2008).‘Students’attitudestowardsculturallymixedgroupsoninternationalcampuses:Impactofparticipationindiverseandnon-diversegroups’,Studies in Higher Education,33:357–370.

Strauss,A.L.&Corbin,J.M.(1994).‘Groundedtheoryandmethodology’inDenzin,N.&Lincoln,Y.(eds.),Handbook for qualitative research,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications:273–285.

Strauss,A.L.&Corbin,J.M.(1998).Basics of qualitative research,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Ting-Toomey,S.&Oetzel,J.G.(2001).Managing intercultural conflict effectively,ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Tisdell,E.J.(2001).Exploring spirituality and culture in adult and higher education,SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Volet,S.&Ang,G.(1998).‘Culturallymixedgroupsoninternationalcampuses:Anopportunityforinterculturallearning’,Higher Education Research and Development,17:5–23.

Volet,S.&Wosnitza,M.(2004).‘Socialaffordancesandstudents’engagementincross-nationalonlinelearning’,Journal of Research in International Education,3:5–29.

Whitty,M.&Gavin,J.(2001).‘Age/sex/location:Uncoveringthesocialcuesinthedevelopmentofonlinerelationships’,CyberPsychology,4:623–630.

Workman,J.P.Jr.(2008).‘Wikisintheclassroom:Opportunitiesandchallenges’,Marketing Education Review,18:19–24.

Yoo,Y.&Alavi,M.(2001).‘Mediaandgroupcohesion:Relativeinfluenceonsocialpresence,taskparticipationandgroupconsensus’,MIS Quarterly,25:371–390.

Zhou,Y.,Jindal-Snape,D.,Topping,K.&Todman,J.(2008).‘Theoreticalmodelsofcultureshockandadaptionininternationalstudentsinhighereducation’,Studies in Higher Education,33:63–75.


About the authors

Dr Joanna Crossman is a senior lecturer in the School of Management at the University of South Australia. Her research interests include international education in business contexts, intercultural communication and spiritual leadership in secular organisations and higher education. She is a co-editor of the Journal of International Education in Business, published by Emerald. Joanna teaches conflict, negotiation and communication at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels and supervises a number of Management PhD candidates in areas related to her research interests. She has worked in academic and management positions in Australia, the UK, Malaysia, Norway and the UAE.

Dr Sarbari Bordia is a senior lecturer at the Australian National University. She conducts research on internationalisation of management education, linguistic issues in corporate communication and the management of psychological contracts. She is the co-editor of the Journal of International Education in Business. She teaches cross-cultural management in undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

Contact details

Joanna Crossman, EM4–32, Campus West, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia 5000Tel: +61 8 8302 9114 Fax: +61 8 8302 0512Email: [email protected]

Sarbari Bordia, School of Management, Marketing and International Business, Australian National University, LF Crisp Building 26, Canberra, ACT 0200Tel: 02 6125 7338 Fax: 02 6125 8796

friendship and relationships in virtual and intercultural ... · as a ‘participatory social...

Documents