Peer Reviewed Journal via three different mandatory reviewing processes, since 2006, and, from September 2020, a fourth mandatory peer-editing has been added.
Commensurate with the concept of Academic Globalization, coupled with the foray of Globalization, this paper underscores the cross-cultural, cross-disciplinary and cross-epistemological transformation from the first-generation Cultureactive to the second-generation InterCultural Edge [ICE]. The former is embedded in the experiential works of cross-cultural consultant. Richard Lewis and the latter is grounded in established theoretical frameworks. Both serve to underscore the impact of the Globalization Phenomenon, as manifested in and enabled by the acceleration of academic and practitioner cross-cultural activities.
The contribution of this paper is the celebration of the longawaited arrival of ICE [InterCultural Edge]. While previous research streams have underscored global similarities and
differences among cultures, a previous paper [19] established that cross-professional rather than cross-cultural differences are more paramount. Employing Cultureactive and the LMR
framework, it was noted that business versus non-business predisposition had a more direct impact on one’s individual cultural profile than did nationality. Regardless of culture, persons involved in business are characterized primarily by linear-active modes of communication, and persons involved in non-business activities typically employ more multiactive/hybrid and less linear modes of communication. The pivotal question is this: Now that we have a new and improved tool, are we in a better position to assess and predict leadership, negotiating styles, individual behaviors, etc., which are central to academic globalization and preparing global business leaders?
