Perspektif Multikultural dalam Memahami Niat Berwirausaha
Kata Kunci:
kewirausahaan, niat, budaya, sikap, efikasi diriAbstrak
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menginvestigasi dampak budaya terhadap perkembangan tujuan profesional. Penelitian ini berdasarkan pada Teori Perilaku Terencana. (TPB; Ajzen), yang biasa digunakan untuk memperkirakan niat, Sebagaimana keinginan untuk menjadi pengusaha. Namun, penelitian sebelumnya terutama difokuskan pada negara-negara yang termasuk dalam kategori "Barat". Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji apakah terdapat korelasi antara faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi keinginan untuk berkarir seperti pengusaha., dan apakah perkiraan faktor-faktor tersebut tetap sama di berbagai budaya. Penelitian ini menyelidiki enam negara (Jerman, India, Iran, Polandia, Spanyol, dan Belanda) dengan memiliki tingkat variasi yang signifikan. Data ini dianalisis dari sekelompok 1.074 siswa dan pendapat mereka tentang keinginan mereka untuk mengejar karir dalam kewirausahaan. Penelitian menunjukkan bahwa sikap dan pengendalian perilaku yang dirasakan (keefektifan diri) memiliki pengaruh yang seimbang pada keinginan untuk berkarir sebagai pengusaha dalam berbagai konteks budaya. However, the impact of subjective norms varies between cultures.
Unduhan
Referensi
Behrend, T. S., Thompson, L. F., Meade, A. W., Newton, D. A., & Grayson, M. S. (2008). Measurement invariance in careers research: Using IRT to study gender differences in medical students’ specialization decisions. Journal of Career Development, 35, 60-83. doi: 10.1177/0894845308317936.
Bosma, N., Acs, Z. J., Autio, E., Coduras, A., & Levie, J. (2008). Global entrepreneurship monitor. 2008 Executive Report. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/
Gorgievski, M. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2010). Work engagement and workaholism: Comparing the self-employed and salaried employees. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 83-96. doi: 10.1080/17439760903509606.
Taras V, Kirkman BL, Steel P. 2010. Examining the impact of culture’s consequences: a three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede’s cultural value dimensions. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:405–39
Taras V, Steel P, Kirkman BL. 2016. Does country equate with culture? Beyond geography in the search for cultural boundaries. Manag. Int. Rev. 56:455–87
Thomas DC, Liao Y, Aycan Z, Cerdin J-L, Pekerti AA, et al. 2015. Cultural intelligence: a theory-based, short form measure. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46:1099–118
Tinsley CH, Taylor MS, Adair WL. 2012. Culture and international negotiation failure. In Saving Negotiations from Failure, ed. GO Faure, F Cede, pp. 185–200. Vienna: Int. Inst. Appl. Syst. Anal. Press
Tung RL, Verbeke A. 2010. Beyond Hofstede and GLOBE: improving the quality of cross-cultural research. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 41:1259–74
Van Bakel M, Gerritsen M, van Oudenhoven JP. 2011. Impact of a local host on the success of an international assignment. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 53:391–402
Van Bakel M, Gerritsen M, van Oudenhoven JP. 2014. Impact of a local host on the intercultural competence of expatriates. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 25:2050–67
Van Bakel M, van Oudenhoven JP, Gerritsen M. 2015. Developing a high quality intercultural relationship: expatriates and their local host. J. Glob. Mobil. Home Expatr. Manag. Res. 3:25–45
Van Bakel M, van Oudenhoven JP, Gerritsen M. 2017. Expatriate contact with a local host: an intervention to increase social support. Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 20:215–35 Varma A, Aycan Z, Budhwar P, Pichler S, Uygur U, Paluch R. 2016. Host country nationals’ support to expatriates: an investigation in Turkey. Eur. J. Int. Manag. 10:605–23
Venaik S, Midgley DF. 2015. Mindscapes across landscapes: archetypes of transnational and subnational culture. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 46:1051–79
Vromans P, van Engen M, Mol S. 2013. Presumed cultural similarity paradox. J. Glob. Mobil. Home Expatr. Manag. Res. 1:219–38
Zellmer-Bruhn ME, Gibson C. 2014. How does culture matter? A contextual view of intercultural interaction in groups. In Culture and Group Processes, ed. M Yuki, M Brewer, pp. 342–402. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
Kessler K, Rutherford H. 2010 The two forms ofvisuo-spatial perspective taking are differentlyembodied and subserve different spatialprepositions.Front. Psychol.1, 213. (doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00213)
essler K, Thomson LA. 2010 The embodied natureof spatial perspective taking: embodiedtransformation versus sensorimotor interference.Cognition114, 72–88. (doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.015)
urtees ADR, Butterfill SA, Apperly IA. 2012 Directand indirect measures of level-2 perspective-takingin children and adults.Br. J. Dev. Psychol.30,75–86. (doi:10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02063.x)
Surtees A, Apperly I, Samson D. 2013 The use ofembodied self-rotation for visual and spatialperspective-taking.Front. Hum. Neurosci.7, 698.(doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00698)
essler K, Wang HF. 2012 Spatial perspective takingis an embodied process, but not for everyone in thesame way: differences predicted by sex and socialskills score.Spat. Cogn. Comput.12, 133–158.(doi:10.1080/13875868.2011.634533)
Braithwaite JJ, James K, Dewe H, Medford N,Takahashi C, Kessler K. 2013 Fractionating therspb.royalsocietypublishing.orgProc. R. Soc. B281: 201403888unitary notion of dissociation: disembodied but notembodied dissociative experiences are associatedwith exocentric perspective-taking.Front. Hum.Neurosci.7, 719. (doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00719)
arnum MEW, Grossmann I, Kitayama S, Nisbett RE.2010 The origin of cultural differences in cognition:the social orientation hypothesis.Curr. Dir.Psychol. Sci.19, 9–13. (doi:10.1177/0963721409359301)
arr DJ, Wu S, Gann TM, Keysar B. 2013 Universaland culture-specific aspects of conversationalperspective taking: common interference withdifferential correction.Front. Hum. Neurosci.7, 822.(doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00822
May M, Wendt M. 2013 Visual perspective takingand laterality decisions: problems and possiblesolutions.Front. Hum. Neurosci.7, 549. (doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00549)
Byram, M. (2011). Intercultural citizenship from an international perspective. Journal of the NUS Teaching Academy, 1(1), 10–20.
Byram, M. (2008). From foreign language education to education for intercultural citizenship: Essays and reflections. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters
Gulliver, T. (2010). Immigrant success stories in ESL textbooks. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 725–745. doi:10.5054/tq.2010.235994
Kress, G. R. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London, England: Routledge.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2008). Cultural globalization and language education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Maslak, M. A. (2008). School as a site of Tibetan ethnic identity construction in India? Results from a content analysis of textbooks and Delphi study of teachers. Educational Review, 60(1), 85–106. doi:10.1080/00131910701794671
Risager, K. (2011). The cultural dimensions of language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 44, 485–499. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000280
Shin, J., Eslami, Z. R., & Chen, W.-C. (2011). Presentation of local and international culture in current international English-language teaching textbooks. Language, Culture & Curriculum, 24, 253–268. doi:10.1080/07908318.2011.614694
Wu, J. (2010). A content analysis of the cultural content in the EFL textbooks. Canadian Social Science, 6(5), 137–144.
Young, T. J., Sachdev, I., & Seedhouse, P. (2009). Teaching and learning culture on English language programmes: A critical review of the recent empirical literature. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 149–169. doi:10.1080/17501220802283178
Yuen, K.-M. (2011). The representation of foreign cultures in English textbooks. ELT Journal, 65, 458–466. doi:10.1093/elt/ccq089
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Artikel ini berlisensiCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Lisensi
Lisensi Creative Commons
Jurnal di publikasi oleh English Language Education, English Language Science and Applied English berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
Anda bebas untuk:
Bagikan — menyalin dan mendistribusikan ulang materi dalam media atau format apa pun
Beradaptasi — remix, ubah, dan kembangkan materi untuk tujuan apa pun, bahkan secara komersial
Di bawah ketentuan berikut:
Atribusi — Anda harus memberikan kredit yang sesuai, memberikan tautan ke lisensi, dan menunjukkan jika ada perubahan. Anda dapat melakukannya dengan cara apa pun yang wajar, tetapi tidak dengan cara apa pun yang menunjukkan bahwa pemberi lisensi mendukung Anda atau penggunaan Anda.
Berbagi Serupa — Jika Anda mencampur, mengubah, atau membuat berdasarkan materi, Anda harus mendistribusikan kontribusi Anda di bawah lisensi yang sama seperti aslinya
Tidak ada batasan tambahan — Anda tidak boleh menerapkan ketentuan hukum atau tindakan teknologi yang secara hukum membatasi orang lain untuk melakukan apa pun yang diizinkan oleh lisensi
