Teaching International Business in Europe and Latin America

1. Why is teaching international business in Europe and Latin America different

An important topic in IB education is to convey the importance of international differences in culture, institutions (economic, political, legal), language, and religion; and the business impact of these differences. Interestingly, the teaching pedagogy of IB must itself also adapt to such differences in culture, institutions (economic, political, legal), language, and religion. So, when teaching in a given country, IB teaching pedagogy must adapt to the local versions of culture, institutions (economic, political, legal), language, and religion (country characteristics, or CCs). Dunning commented that the world of international business is dominated by rapid and far-reaching changes in technology and by environmental turbulence (Dunning 1989). Such complexity certainly challenges the education of IB to no less a degree.

Thus, just like the strategies and practices of the international business itself, the strategies and practices of teaching international business need to be adapted to the different environments of various countries and markets. Within any given market, economic, social, technological, and legal environments shape the resources, constraints, and hence the effective strategies for businesses; it is no less true of the education of business. From the macro to micro levels, a country’s education infrastructure, a school’s degree of internationalization, the development of IB related programs and courses, and the student body’s characteristics, resources, and learning styles, along with many other country factors, fashion the pedagogy, format, and style of effective IB teaching in a region, country, school, program, and particular course. JTIB has long recognized the special country and regional nature of IB teaching in the form of many papers and special issues.

For example, in 2020, JTIB produced a special issue on IB education focusing on Mexico, the Americas, and Spain (MAS), guest-edited by Dr. Robert F. Scherer and Dr. Eugenio Dante Suarez. The issue brought attention to the importance of discussing IB teaching to the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking population of the continent of the Americas. In the first issue of 2021, we add to and expand the discussion on the regional customization of IB teaching to contrast and highlight methodologies found effective in the US, Europe, and Latin America.

As an example, IB education in Europe reflects the larger European role of governments, a larger welfare state, more civil rather than common law, increasing integration into the EU, higher tax rates, and lower levels of individualism as compared to the US. Latin American countries are generally at lower levels of development, with weaker legal, political, and economic institutions while culturally there is lower levels of individualism and higher power distances compared to the US. Consequently, IB teaching in Europe and Latin America should and is likely to reflect these institutional and institutional differences.

However, US and European business schools also share many commonalities. While many European business schools are uniquely European, many top European business schools are increasingly modeled after elite US business schools (Antunes and Thomas 2007); more and more European business schools are also seeking AACSB accreditation (AACSB 2020). Nevertheless, compared with US business and management education, European business schools tend to be smaller and more diverse, emphasizing corporate linkages and flexibility to local market needs (Antunes and Thomas 2007). This is partly because the major accreditation system in Europe, EQUIS, emphasizes the working relationship between academic institutions and the business environment (Porterfield et al., 2014). In their survey of US and European business schools, Kwok and Arpan (1994) find that faculty in European business schools tend to have more international knowledge and experience, with more involvement in teaching international business and doing international research and consulting. In addition, European schools are more likely to consider internationalization activities as a formal component in faculty performance evaluation and promotion decisions.

On the other end of the spectrum, the internationalization of Latin American campuses is relatively underdeveloped. Introduced to the US-style business schools in the 1950s, Latin American universities did not experience significant growth in the internationalization of business education until the late 1980s (Elahee and Norbis 2009). Elahee and Norbis (2009) noted that even though internationalization is encouraged by business schools in the process of pursuing AACSB accreditation, Latin American universities tend to face challenges in gaining flexibility and resources, attracting international faculty and students, and receiving support from the business community due to the lack of many international corporations.

From the learner’s perspective, developing a global mind-set is particularly important for IB education (Aggarwal 2011). Aside from the differences in the general learning styles of students of different cultures and regions, the opportunities to be exposed to and engage in international conversations and activities vary drastically due to factors such as the region’s demographics, economics, and social development. Both US and Europe are top destinations for international students and, at the same time, major regions for sending students abroad. Latin American campuses are less infused with diverse cultures. Cultural immersion approaches embraced by the US and Europe, such as study abroad and overseas internship, are less available for students in many Latin American countries. As a result, ensuring cultural exposure for the students becomes an important key challenge for Latin American business schools (Elahee and Norbis 2009).

While we have provided examples from Europe and Latin America here, they illustrate the principles that apply in any cross-border comparison of IB pedagogy including IB pedagogy used in Asian countries. Also, these are just some examples, far from a comprehensive list, of the environmental differences IB educators face across different countries, regions, and locations. Through this issue covering IB teaching in US, Europe, and Latin America, we want to call attention to the discussion and development of more generalizable insights for IB pedagogies, practices, and programs that are adaptive and reflect the national, regional, and local institutional and cultural conditions.

2. Introducing this issue

This issue of JTIB features four articles that focus on teaching IB in Europe and Latin America. The first two articles center on IB teaching for US and European students; the last two papers focus on IB education in Latin America.

The first article, titled “International Double Degree Programs as Accelerators for Internationalization: Lessons from the Trans-Atlantic Business School Alliance” by Jeffrey Steagall of Weber State University, Peter Falk of Hochschule Bremen, Andres Gallo of University of North Florida, and Thomas Porter of University of North Carolina at Wilmington, provides a model for creating international undergraduate double degree programs in business, highlighting the main challenges and offering successful proven solutions employed by a group of American and European business schools that other institutions can adapt to accelerate internationalization and deepen students’ international experiences in American business schools.

The second article, titled “Improving Cultural Intelligence, Psychological Empowerment, and Task Performance in the Classroom: Global Game Challenge” by Ross Curran of Heriot-Watt University Dubai Campus, Nuno Arroteia of De Montfort University, Andreu Blesa of Jaume I University, Martina Musteen of San Diego State University, and María Ripollés Meliá of Jaume I University, explores the role of Cultural Intelligence and Psychological Empowerment in enhancing Task Performance among students engaged in an international experiential game-based learning project: The Global Game Challenge (GGC). Data collected from the delivery of the project in the USA and Spain identifies empirical support for a relationship between Cultural Intelligence and Psychological Empowerment for the first time. The results suggest that CQ and Empowerment are important factors impacting task-related performance. They also suggest that it is the motivational dimension of CQ that is the most important in virtual educational settings.

The third article, titled “Factors Affecting Business Students’ Willingness to Study Abroad: Evidence from the Caribbean” by Arleen Hernández-Díaz, Leticia M. Fernández-Morales, and Jose C. Vega-Vilca of University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras Campus, and Mario Córdova-Claudio of The University of Puerto Rico-Mayagüez Campus, aims to contribute to the research on business students’ attitudes toward studying abroad, specifically for students in public institutions in the Caribbean. The research shows that positive perceptions of students toward studying or internships do not necessarily depend on demographic or personal characteristics. Desire to live abroad, benefits from study/internship abroad, and self-confidence are determinant factors to participate in study/internship programs abroad. Even though each group of participants has its own set of peculiarities, the results are consistent with the findings from other studies.

The last article, titled “Fostering global competence in international business students on a Latin American campus” by Kathleen Anne Corrales, Jahir Enrique Lombana-Coy, and Lourdes Aracelly Rey-Paba of Universidad del Norte, discusses the development of global competence through the integration of a series of international-intercultural in-class activities in a Latin American international business course. A pre- and post-survey were applied and analyzed using a non-parametric Wilcoxon test to identify changes in student perceptions of their global competence development. Results showed development of all competences included in the survey. Intercultural effectiveness was the factor that showed the most statistically significant improvement, while willingness to learn from and adapt to other cultures, openness to other cultures, and awareness of diversity developed to a lesser extent. In addition, the dimensions of attitude and knowledge showed improvement while skills demonstrated only slight change. Therefore, IB teaching can be improved by including well-planned iinternational-interculturalclassroom activities to promote not only discipline-related knowledge but also global competence development without relying on student mobility.

As in the past, we hope you enjoy reading this issue and that you find it thought-provoking – perhaps even giving you ideas to improve your own teaching. We would appreciate hearing your comments on this issue.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Raj Aggarwal

Raj Aggarwal,PhD, is Member of the Board of the Kent State University Foundation and the Sullivan Professor of International Business and Finance Emeritus and the former Business Dean at the University of Akron, USA. He is a Fellow and a former VP and program chair of the Academy of International Business. He has won many awards for outstanding teaching and scholarship. He is or has been also a Board Member of corporations, mutual funds, and nonprofit organizations. He is a past editor of Financial Practice and Education, a Finance and Accounting area editor of the Journal of International Business Studies, and the current Editor of the Journal of Teaching in International Business. Raj Aggarwal is the author of numerous scholarly publications and is in the top one-third of a percent among SSRN authors ranked by downloads and has over 8,500 Google Scholar citations with an h-index of 47, and an I-10 index of over 100. He is included in the Nature/Stanford University List of the Top 2% of the Worlds Scientists.

Yinglu Wu

Yinglu Wu,PhD, is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the Boler College of Business, John Carroll University, USA. Her recent publications include articles in Journal of Interactive Marketing, Decision Support Systems, and Journal of Teaching in International Business. She is the Assistant Editor of the Journal of Teaching in International Business.