下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
Abstract： There was never a time when people could travel， move or do business across the whole world as easily as today. We often seem to know about national mindsets on a general， cognitive level， but not on an emotional or empathetic level. The transition of cognitive learnings to everyday life therefore can be difficult. This paper utilizes storytelling for intercultural learning， through modifying the so called learning histories approach， developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology （MIT） . It shows that the latest findings from interpersonal neurobiology support the usefulness of storytelling for intercultural learning. The first application of the so called intercultural learning histories is presented. It deals with the interpersonal communication between Austrian and Chinese stakeholders in business contexts. First results from the narrative interviews were analyzed and alternative application areas are suggested. In order to support emotional learning this paper is illustrated with comics rather than process diagrams.
Empirical studies and consequent analysis by Hofstede， Trompenaars or the Globe Study provided us a valuable language to describe cultural differences and commonalities across cultures. Nevertheless， these results often meet our learning abilities only on a cognitive and not on an emotional or empathic level. The paper at hand presents a special narrative approach， developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technologies，named learning histories （Kleiner ＆ Roth， 1996； Reason ＆ Bradbury-Huan， 2007） and suggests its application for intercultural learning and development within and outside of organizations. The argumentation is based on latest insights in interpersonal neurobiology （ Siegel， 2012a ）， but also psychology （ Bruner， 2006 ） and storytelling（Gertsen ＆ S derderberg， 2011）. It follows the suggestion of more original research and creative thinking in intercultural communication （Yu， 2010）. The suggested use of stories in action research supports social emotional learning， enhances mindful， intercultural learning in a business context and suggests more empirical data.
This paper represents the first step in a larger research attempt. Overall goal is to find new ways to facilitate intercultural competences by more awareness of the ‘self’，awareness of the ’other’ and the ability to build bridges between the two. The attempts focus， but are not limited to， interpersonal communication between stakeholders from two different cultures and corporate development. The paper at hand presents the first step in the research and argues i） why learning histories are a suitable approach for raising awareness and consequently trigger collaborative intercultural learning and presents ii） how the original learning histories approach could be adapted to meet more generic needs.
Although， the paper will argue that learning histories seem to be a suitable approach in mindful intercultural communication research in general， first empirical data is collected specifically for two cultures. As an arena for collaborative intercultural learning， interpersonal communication within collaborations between Austria and China were chosen. Consequently， the first empirical data will analyze interpersonal interaction between Austrian and Chinese individuals. Following the intention to support social emotional learning， examples and citations from the interviews as well as metaphors will be used throughout the paper to illustrate the key ideas. Additionally， comics instead of diagrams were chosen to illustrate the basic concepts.
Section 2 presents the basics of the learning histories approach. The chapter already puts the process in an intercultural context， so that the following chapters can refer to the special context. Section 3 elaborates on the foundations of storytelling in psychology and interpersonal neurobiology as well as the specifics of intercultural storytelling. As a consequence， Section 4 continues in setting the context of intercultural learning. Section 5 presents the adapted approaches of learning histories for intercultural corporate development， argues why it is promising and gives first insight in the on-going empirical work. The paper ends with conclusions and a short outlook for different application fields.
The empirical part of the research at hand includes qualitative interviews. At the beginning of the interviews， the basic concept of intercultural learning histories is described to the interviewees. One of the Chinese interviewees summarized after this introduction intercultural learning histories as opening a window to the other culture in order to see deeper inside the people’s minds and hearts. This deeper understanding is exactly what the ideas presented in this paper are heading for.
Learning histories represent an action research approach， developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology （ MIT） end of the 20th century （ Kleiner ＆ Roth，1996）. One of their main goals was to learn from experience in organisations. Learning histories are based on Learning Theories （ Argyris ＆ Sch ¨ on， 1996； Freire， 1992；Kolb， 1983； Senge， 1994） and the process design relies on the hypothesis that conversations and dialog enable a better， collaborative thinking （ Bohm ＆ Nichol， 2003；Isaacs， 2008； Baker， Jensen，＆ Kolb， 1998； Ohio ＆ Ford， 1999； Roth， 2000；Nielsen， 1996； Schein， 1987； Carlile， 2002； Nonaka ＆ Takeuchi， 1995）. In 2007，learning histories were added to the Sage Handbook of Action Research （ Reason ＆Bradbury-Huan， 2007）. The approach is based on narrative interviews and stories，respectively experiences of people. Both， the storytelling and the learning from those stories are part of the research design.
2.1 Corporate Development and Action Research
This section introduces the connection between narratives and corporate development and questions the selected research paradigm.
One of the most cited authors with more than 120 journal articles， seventeen books and numerous conference contributions in the area of narrative methods， organization and communication research is David Boje. He invented the term antenarrative， which is “defined as a bet on the future pattern， in （ more or less） authentic scenario of event-space”（Boje， 2011， p. 1）. For job interviews， Green （2007） suggests to concentrate on concrete experience from the past in order to predict the future performance. Similarily， Boje suggests to use experience and stories on events in the past in order to learn， analyze and develop the organization of the future （Boje， 2008，2011）.
Going along with the original action research idea by （Lewin， Lippitt，＆ White，1939） to do research in the field rather than in the laboratory，（ Kleiner ＆ Roth，1996） developed a research approach for corporate learning and development， that rests upon the various perspectives of the people in the past in order to improve the future：
To really make sense of a learning effort， people throughout the organization need to see it through the various perspectives of people who have been involved with it firsthand so that they can come to terms with it based on actual data （not just on the gossip that reaches them）， and make sense of it in a way that is credible to them（Kleiner ＆Roth， 1996， p. 1-2）.
Even one century after the introduction of action research， it is criticised in various disciplines for， e. g. being not generalizable （Koshy， Koshy，＆Waterman， 2010），difficult to measure or develops poor theory （Parkin， 2009）. The critique helps in understanding what action research can do and what it can’ t. Bruner （2006） differentiates between two modes of cognitive functioning that are both needed to order experience and structure reality and are irreducible to one another： The paradigmatic mode that leads to good theory， tight analysis， logical proof， and empirical discovery and the the narrative mode， leading to good stories， gripping drama and believable historical accounts （Bruner， 2006）.
The idea of using intercultural learning histories as an approach in mindful intercultural communication research can be categorized as action research approach that takes advantage of the narrative mode of cognitive functioning to support intercultural development.
2.2 The Learning Histories Process
Learning histories are an approach to facilitate learning from projects， support change processes or investigate corporate culture （Kleiner ＆ Roth， 1996）. The process was not specifically designed to support intercultural learning， but does not exclude an intercultural focus， neither. The process description in Figure 1 shows a simplified application of the original learning histories approach by Kleiner ＆ Roth in an intercultural context： （1） company’ s stories： narrative interviews with stakeholders inside the company， e. g. project members， team leaders， workers . . . ，（2） supplier’ s stories：narrative interviews with suppliers， e. g. did the suppliers recognize changes caused by the project， （3） customer’s stories： narrative interviews with customers， e. g. did the customers recognize changes caused by the project， （4） analysis： analysis of the interviews， writing the learning history document and check with the interviewees for the inclusion of quotations， （5） workshops： discussion of the different viewpoints after everyone read the learning history and reflection of lessons learned， （6） lessons learned：application of the lessons learned， e. g. for new projects.
Here a short example to make the idea tangible （see Figure 1 as reference）： Company AUToCHN started a new project to enter the Chinese market. They already worked one year and the first products are already sold in China. They are hiring a team of learning historians to assess the project so far and learn from the experience. A learning historian， together with some key employees from AUToCHN builds the core learning history team and defines the goals of the assessment. Then they start with narrative interviews of the management， the workers at the company， the suppliers as well as first customers （1-3）. The diverse experiences of the stakeholders are collected， clustered and the learning history document is produced including quotations from the interviews（4）. The quotations are first cross-checked with the interviewees before they are included in the document. This learning history document is the basis for workshops with the interviewees （5）， where they reflect the results and develop lessons learned. Those lessons learned； act as a basis for corporate development and the following projects.
The two column format of the learning history document separates a collection of‘experiential’ quotations of the interviewees on the right column from relatively ‘objective’ by the core learning history team on the left. Consequently， the reader can see exactly how the stakeholders experienced issues in the project from the various viewpoints（right column） and the learning history team can raise reflective questions and add context information （ left column）（ examples of a learning history document can be found at （Kleiner ＆ Roth， 1996）.
More recent research frames the application of similar approaches in other contexts（Poulton， 2005）. Learning histories were recognized， supported and applied over the years by various experts （Schindler ＆ Eppler， 2003； Serrat， 2009，2011） and represent a central action research approach for organizational learning and development（Reason ＆ Bradbury-Huan， 2007）. Although the histories have been applied in diverse cultural settings， the question is， if it is an appropriate methodology for intercultural learning.
Is storytelling an universal way to learn？ Stories seem to be as old as mankind. Nevertheless， an increasing interest for their influence to individuals could be recognized since the 1960s （Hazel， 2008）. As shown by Hazel， cross-cultural studies， e. g. by L′evi-Strauss （1963）， showed that stories and narratives represent basic forms of expression. Barthes （1975） emphasizes in his structural analysis the infinity of narratives：“［. . . ］ it begins with the very history of mankind and there nowhere is nor has been a people without narrative”（p. 79）. Despite the seemingly universal appearance of stories， or even caused by this universal appearance， the exact definition of‘story’ is difficult. For the paper at hand the term‘story’ is defined as：［. . . ］ an oral or written performance involving two or more people interpreting past or anticipated experience （Boje， 1991， p. 111）
Although story and narrative have slightly different meanings， they are used interchangeable in the following. Boje concentrates on the interaction between human actors. Whether the interaction between two or more people excludes the inner dialog with the self， or not， should be taken aside for the moment. Further， Bojes‘ sense-making’ seems a suitable approach for the following elaboration on stories and their influence on the awareness of the ‘self’ and the ‘other’ within an intercultural organization. Hazel （2008） goes one step further and concludes stories to be at the heart of the learning process itself.
The following theoretical foundations demonstrate basics of intercultural storytelling， psychological foundations and findings on the influence of narratives in the new interdisciplinary field of interpersonal neurobiology.
3.1 Background
Starting again with mankind， Gansel and Vanderbeke （2012） show the importance of stories from an evolutionary point of view. They collected articles on the evolution of the cognitive， neurons， language and adaptation. Narrative approaches became more and more important at the end of last century （ Howard， 1991） and made their way from literature to other disciplines like anthropology， psychology and sociology （Davis，2002）. Recently they were recognized also in international business research （Gertsen＆ S⌀ derberg， 2011）. The latest forms incorporate new media like in digital storytelling （Yuksel， Robin，＆ McNeil， n. d. ）. One example is ethnographic research among African-American families who have children with serious illnesses or disabilities by Mattingly and Garro （2000）. Although the research findings are not concerned with business， their contribution was intended to act as a conceptual paper that addresses narrative as a research method. Although coming from social work environments，Saleebey （1994） shows a way how to transfer theory into practice by using narratives. He explains， that “practice is an intersection， where the meanings of the worker（theories）， the client （stories and narratives）， and the culture （myths， rituals， and themes） meet”（p. 40）.
A quick look at the history of storytelling research should show how this work fits in. Already in 1981， storytelling was recognised as a research methodology for intercultural understanding. Scollon and Scollon （1981） showed the difficulties in intercultural understanding， even when the two cultures speak the same language. Later， Rosen（1999） discussed the power of narrative in intercultural education and stated that we underestimate the power of stories in learning and teaching. Trahar （2009） recently published field reports on auto ethnography in intercultural research in higher education and Gertsen and S⌀ derberg （2011） showed how narrative methods provide useful tools for international business research.
Taking the example of China again， there has been at least some work on stories as well. He （2002） used stories in Chinese contexts for cross-cultural learning. Zhu，McKenna， and Sun （2007） mentioned that very little has been done about how business executives establish ‘ guanxi’ 1 by the use of storytelling. Nevertheless， Yunxia Zhu and Zhang （2007） think that “stories are important vehicles in communication to indicate how people construct reality， and they can also illustrate concepts with specific scenarios”（p. 385）.
3.2 Interpersonal Neurobiology
Behaviourism and psychology banned for a long while， both， mind and purpose from their armamentarium of explanatory concepts （Bruner， 2006）. Whereas psychology was concerned with experience and behaviour， newer insights in neurobiology research brain systems， synapses and molecules， as the building blocks of our brains. The apparent possibility of measuring what is going on in the brain needs to be watched under a critical scientific lens. The complexity of the human brain and its connection with the body， the interaction with the social environment and other influencing factors make it impossible to draw final conclusions from brain scans only. Neurobiology helps us to add another view on the construction of reality， but it would be disproportionate to analyse mankind based on a couple of brain scans. Consequently， overly euphoric as well as condemnatory publications on neurobiology （e. g. Hasler （2012） should be seen critical and noncommittal.
In the last years， a new discipline emerged， named interpersonal neurobiology（Siegel， 2012a）. It started with the attempt to find an interdisciplinary definition of the mind and in consequence researches what is a healthy mind. The very interdisciplinary group of researchers agreed， that a “core aspect of the mind is defined as an embodied and relational process that regulates the flow of energy and information”（ Siegel，2012a， p. 2 ）. This definition stresses both， the importance of the embodied part，e. g. the brain， but also our relational processes in interacting with each other.
The linkage of differentiated elements， named integration seems to be a“ fundamental aspect of interpersonal experience， health， and the developing mind”（Siegel，2012a， p. 336）. Siegel describes narrative integration as one way to make sense of our lives. His interpersonal neurobiology view of stories stresses， e. g. linguistic translations and interpretations of the left hemisphere or autonoetic consciousness giving the possibility to perform’mental time travel’. Stories seem to help to connect the left and right hemisphere of our brains. Although many issues are still under investigation， integrating minds and the interpersonal processes in， e. g. telling autobiographic narratives could help to reveal integration or incoherence.
In Section 3， the term‘story’ was defined in a rather general sense. In business and marketing， the emotional part of storytelling is utilised and added to the performance， mainly to make the message stick in ones mind. For example， Maxwell and Dickman （2007） define a story as“a fact， wrapped in an emotion that compels us to take an action”（p. 5）. If we consider the stories or experiences of learning histories，we find all three key elements there as well. The stories base on a real interaction or experience from real life – at least in a subjective， individual consciousness， the interviewees are asked for their feelings in a particular situation and the learning history document is used to compel action and find lessons learned in the subsequent workshops.
Emotions seem to have a big impact on learning as well. From an interpersonal neurobiology point of view， it can be seen as“ a shift that enhances integration”（ Siegel， 2012b， p. 4-3） and consequently helps in developing our mind. Not all emotions support that development， but all of them have an impact on our cortical processes by combining input from the body with signals from the brainstem and the limbic area. In brief： emotions are a non rational， but important way of knowing （ Siegel， 2012 a）. If we go back to the relation between stories and emotion， stories open a window-again-but this time to the emotional themes of our implicit memory； for us as storyteller and for those who listen. Garland， Gaylord， and Fredrickson （2011） emphasize especially the power of positive emotions for achieving psychological growth and to achieve improved well-being over time. Let us pave the way to the section on intercultural learning and sum up the importance of emotion and social relationships for communication with the words of Sroufe （1997）：“Shared emotion is the fabric of social relationships. It provides the rhythm or punctuation in human interaction and communication”（p. 17）.
Similar to the term‘ story’， the term‘ culture’ is ambiguously used within and between languages. It occupied philosophers and thinkers， e. g. Leibnitz， Voltaire，Herder， Wilhelm von Humboldt， Kant， Freud， Jung， Adorno， Marcuse and Luhmann（Maletzke， 1996）. Heringer （2004） highlights the concept of ‘culture’ as a dynamic process. Fuchs defines culture as a‘metaphor for difference’（ p. 158）. As presented so far， there seem to be-at least some – commonalities of mankind. For the paper at hand， culture is therefore defined as a metaphor for commonalities and differences.
Intercultural research and empirical work by Hofstede or the Globe Study have shown in which way commonalities and differences have been found between and across national or ethical boarders. They gave us a language to better describe in which ways we can be similar or different. For years， Gudykunst and Kim （2003） is concerned with collecting theories in the area of interpersonal communication in cross-cultural and intercultural environments and therefore serve as a good starting point for understanding theory. Underpinned by empirical studies， e. g. by House， Hanges， Javidan， Dorfman，and Gupta （2004） and Chhokar， Brodbeck， and House （2007）， theories on intercultural communication are constantly discussed （Oetzel， 2005）. Monaghan， Goodman，and Robinson （2012） points out， that interpersonal communication practices are culturally variable and there is no’right’ way to communicate. In turn it will be difficult to extract guidelines for a context dependent and very broad field like interpersonal， intercultural communication.
Others， like Milton J. Bennett elaborated on how our intercultural development could be understood as a step by step process over time. His Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity （DMIS）， describes， that intercultural sensitivity or competence is not some innate characteristic， but a learned ability （Bennett， 2004）. It bases on the assumption， that people gain experience from intercultural situations， but need to reflect those in order to gain a more complex understanding of culture. Mitchell R. Hammer provided with the Intercultural Development Inventory （IDI） even a tool to measure and supervise the development of intercultural sensitivity over time （Hammer，2009，2011）. In the latest versions of the IDI， exercises are suggested in the assessment， that are explained by the certified administrators in order to develop an awareness of the self， the other and to learn to bridge cultural differences.
What can be concluded so far？ There is a language to express intercultural commonalities and differences， we have models to describe the intercultural development，models and theories to describe national tendencies， we have tools to measure our intercultural sensitivity and although， there is plenty of space for original research and empirical proof， there is already more written on‘ culture’ as one can read in a lifetime. So， what is the need to add one more approach to intercultural learning？ Because the world is diverse， learning styles are diverse and so are our pop lotions. There is another reason， summarised in the first rule of all learning：“The learner learns what the learner wants to learn”（Kim ＆ Senge， 1994， p. 277）.
Here a true story from the ‘ birthday’ of the idea on intercultural learning histories： Last year， after working ten years in international research， I was teaching the first time a course named ’ Intercultural Communication’ at the University of Applied Sciences in Salzburg， Austria. I used a variety of teaching methods to make the subject attractive and to serve different learning styles. I have to admit， that non-technical subjects were not their favorite topic at all. At the end of the semester I asked for feedback from the students in a very open and collaborative setting. The answers to the question， what seemed most valuable for them and made them think， puzzled me. I put a lot of effort into the reparation and teaching， but it was not what they had the feeling；they have taken the most out of it. The parts that caught their attention and from what they tried to make sense for their intercultural interactions were the stories I told them. Sometimes， between the exercises， I was telling them experiences from the projects I was coordinating and from the issues in those settings. We reflected them briefly and went on with the ‘main’ topics. That was the starting point for me to take a closer look at storytelling and intercultural learning and the birthday of the idea， presented in the paper at hand.
There are four basic ways how our neuronal network changes over time： synaptogenesis， myelinogenesis， neurogenesis， epigenesis （ Siegel， 2012b， p. 8-4ff）. Some of them are changing us faster than others， but if we believe what interpersonal neurobiology tells us， attention is the driving force for change and growth （Siegel， 2012b） and it seems that stories are one way to catch this attention.
The following section argues， how and why learning histories seem to be a suitable approach for enhancing mindful intercultural communication research and how they can help in learning more about the ‘self’， the ‘ other’ as well as how to bridge the diverse sides of cultural understanding. The argumentation is supported mainly by findings from storytelling and interpersonal neurobiology. The original argumentation by Kleiner and Roth （1996） for learning histories as a suitable approach for the learning organization is not repeated here， but underpinned by more recent findings. As mentioned in the introduction， the first application area of this work is the interpersonal communication in collaborations between Austria and China in a business context and therefore the examples in this section are taken from this first case.
5.1 Extending the Approach
Section 2.2 already presented the application of learning histories in an intercultural corporate setting. Besides some publications on learning histories in internationally acting companies （Roth， 2000； Kleiner ＆ Roth， 2000）， the learning history approach was adapted and applied in the German speaking area by Narrata2， namely by Karin Thier and Christine Erlach. Again， publications showed the adaptation of learning histories （Thier， 2010） and the application in international companies （Erlach ＆ Thier，2012）， but the emphasis was， e. g. on the application of learning histories for small and medium sized companies and the capturing， editing and distribution of implicit knowledge within companies and not on intercultural learning. Though， other authors suggest using storytelling for intercultural learning. Gertsen and S derberg （2011） presented a study of stories in the collaboration of Danish expatriate managers and Chinese CEOs in Shanghai. Similar to learning histories， narrative interviews were used to extract the different viewpoints on a chain of events.
The paper at hand does not only argue to add the traditional learning histories approach to the tool chain for intercultural learning and development. It suggests learning from stories across companies or groups of people for a better intercultural understanding. Figure 2 shows the first steps of such an intercultural learning history on the example of an Austrian-Chinese learning history. Goal is to learn more about the interpersonal interaction between Austrian and Chinese stakeholders in a business context. For that case， the following process is suggested：
1. Companies’ stories： narrative interviews with stakeholders from different companies in Austria， e. g. CEOs， sales manager， marketing manager， but also employees from lower hierarchical levels；
2. Interfacing stories： narrative interviews with people from local trade offices and diplomats；
3. Consultants stories： narrative interviews with consultants and intercultural trainers；
4. Literature： analysis of literature on the cultures at hand；
5. Analysis： analysis of the interviews， writing the learning history document and check with the interviewees for the inclusion of quotations；
6. Workshop： discussion of the different viewpoints collected in Austria and reflection of the results with experts on Chinese culture and stakeholders from Chinese companies；
7. Lessons learned： extension of the Austrian-Chinese learning history with the outcomes of the workshop reflection.
First， the main stakeholders for the intercultural learning histories need to be identified. In this case， the classification of narrative interview partners （Figure 2 （1-3）） was chosen specifically for this context and needs to be modified for other contexts. Additionally， it is suggested to consult literature on the cultural specifics （Figure 2 （4））. The goal for this specific example is to write a learning history from the Austrian viewpoint （Figure 2 （5）） and reflect it from the Chinese perspective （Figure 2 （6））. Though， an additional learning history from the Chinese viewpoint – combined with the Austrian or separately-would be interesting but for the example case at hand it is currently out of scope. Main outcome from this process is a reflected， intercultural learning history document. Additionally， it is suggested to illustrate the main lessons learned in the form of visuals or comics in order to make it more accessible and sticky to the mind （Figure 2 （7））. After the learning history document is produced， it is recommended to do an reflection workshop with the interviewees to present the results and facilitate a further learning process for the interviewees. Where can the outcomes of these intercultural learning histories be used？ On one hand side， they can be utilized in intercultural trainings， e. g. for new staff members in order to learn about communication and interaction between Austrian and Chinese stakeholders in a business context. On the other hand side， these intercultural learning histories across companies，could be fed in company specific workshops （see Figure 1，（5））， in order to see not only what happened in a project within the company， but also see how others dealt with similar issues.
Why it Makes Sense to Make Sense
“Narrative integration is about making sense of our lives， and the research is clear that it makes sense to make sense .”（Siegel， 2012a， p. 383）. In learning histories and in intercultural learning histories， there are three key parts， where stories play a major role： in the narrative interviews， the learning history document itself and in the workshops. In the following， research is presented， that supports the usage of stories in each of those steps.
First， the narrative interviews （ Figure 1 （1-3） and Figure 2 （1-3）） are a central point for i） information retrieval， but also ii） self reflection and learning. Siegel（2012a） emphasizes the importance of the communication of stories for the sense making and for communicating implicit knowledge. The linguistic transfer of knowledge in form of a story helps to understand not only the facts， but provides a deeper insight in motivations and emotions .“Autobiographical narratives can reveal integration or incoherence”（Siegel， 2012a， p. 377）. The one-to-one setting in the interview situation makes it easier for the learning historian to concentrate on one person and he or she can help to support integration and guide the narrative reflection process. If the learning historian achieves to build trust， the privacy of the interview situation and the anonymisation of the stories， give the interviewee the freedom to speak openly about facts， emotions and actions. Open questions send the interviewees on a travel back in time， the interviewees are not only revealing explicit and implicit knowledge， but the reflection on the self and the other and consequently an intercultural development starts already in the interview situation.
The second key is the story itself （Figure 1 （4） and Figure 2 （7））. As presented in Section 4， attention is a driving force for change. In physics the resonance frequency of an object allows large amplitude by small periodic driving forces， e. g. oscillations of a bridge， when people march in lock-step over the bridge in its resonance frequency. This frequency is different for each object and so is the reaction of people to different stories. The variety of stories collected in a learning history allows a wider range of resonance by its readers. Once a certain story attracts the mind， the attention for the other viewpoints might rise as well. According to Bruner （1957）， a lack of perceptional readiness can be a reason for not being able to process knowledge. If we lack categories for new knowledge we cannot process it properly. The variety of stories in the right column of a learning history document and the additional remarks and questions in the left column， help to create new categories， see different viewpoints and pave the way for change. The suggested comics and key lessons learned help as anchor points for remembering the stories： a picture leads to a story， that leads further to a lesson learned and that leads to alternative actions in the next， similar situation. That is also similar to how our brain works and indexes knowledge. According to the indexing theory （Rudy，2008）， a subset of a particular input pattern can activate the full memory of a situation or experience.
Third， the workshops offer the opportunity to discuss the learning history and take action （Figure 1 （5）. The facilitation of intercultural groups adds， beside interpersonal and intergroup communication a third， intercultural dimension to the system （Baldwin＆ Hecht， 2009 ）. Oetzel （1995 ） introduced the so-called ‘ effective intercultural workshop communication theory’， Zubizarreta （2006） presented the ‘ practical dialogue’ as a collection of open-ended， nonlinear， non directive methods and Kurz（2012） combined two methodologies， namely the Reteaming and Team Centred Interaction to a set of flexible facilitation steps and applied it successfully to a variety of intercultural settings. Which facilitation methodology is chosen， depends on the context and goal of the workshop. Nevertheless， the centerpiece of the learning history workshops is the joint reflection of the learning history， the identification of core issues and the development of lessons learned and action plans for organizational development. The anonymity of the individual stories in the learning history holds several advantages：
－ Issues are identified before the workshop and the facilitators can prepare；
－ The group consists of different stakeholder-groups who contributed actively in the interviews and therefore have an increased attention；
－ Anonymous quotations from the learning history help to discuss issues openly without the need to criticize personally；
－ Intercultural learning histories across companies help to identify alternative solutions， include lessons learned from other companies and avoid short sighted decisions.
As mentioned above， the diversity of stories in the learning history is intended to start a chain reaction， if the resonance frequency of individuals is met by at least one of the stories. Resonance and active participation in the interviews should lead to higher attention， which leads to facilitated discussion and change. Especially for the workshops it is suggested to be aware of the seven supporting factors for neuroplasticity by Siegel（2012b）. Beside basic factors like i） aerobic exercise， ii） good sleep and iii） nutrition， he emphasizes the importance of iv） relationships， v） novelty of，e. g. information， vi） the close paying attention and vii） time-in， which is time for self-reflection. Additionally， he mentions the importance of humour and laughing.
First Results
In the introduction， the paper at hand was mentioned as one of the first steps in the researchattempt for intercultural learning histories. A pretest with 12 narrative interviews was already carried out. Focus was to test the presented concept of intercultural learning histories for Austrian-Chinese collaborations in a business context. According to the process depicted in Figure 2 （1-4）， first interviews were carried out with stakeholders from companies， interfacing offices and consultants as well as literature analysis. The interviewees were chosen randomly from a collected list of contacts in Austria and China of about 100 stakeholders， being involved in Austrian-Chinese collaborations.
According to the Austrian chamber of commerce3， the total number of companies in Austria， with business interest in China ranges currently around 500. A qualitative，open ended interview guideline was developed to ask for experiences of the Austrian interviewees with Chinese stakeholders and vice versa. The intention was to validate the interview guideline and find out， if the concept works as intended. In the following some first insights in the interviewing process are presented.
The interviews started with questions on the motivation and history of the Austrian－ Chinese experiences. Only few interviewees seemed to be motivated by interest in the other culture， but rather by the need of the company. Interesting was， that no participant visited special intercultural trainings or preparation seminars before the first contact. Few had some general intercultural trainings at university， but no special preparation for China or Austria. It is also important to state， that all participants emphasized the positive aspects of the collaborations although they admitted that they faced challenging situations.
In terms of the interview guideline， some anecdotes and experiences popped up already at the beginning， without asking explicitly for them， but it was difficult for the interviewees to recall details of certain events. Especially experiences， which happened a long time ago， seemed to be summarized in memory and conclusions were drawn without being able to recall the exact circumstances. To a large extend the individual stories were generalized and anonymised， when interviewees told them.
Although the focus of the questions was on business stories， most of the stories were private anecdotes on strange， humorous or surprising events. People recalled exact details on emotional experiences， which in turn supports the hypothesis on the importance of emotion for memory. Especially difficult was the extraction of critical or negative memories， connected to intercultural misunderstandings. Whether the interviewees stressed again the overall positive side of the collaboration， or they mentioned that critical situations were not related to intercultural， but overall universal issues.
For the further empirical study， the following learnings could have been identified：A preparation of the interviews could help in giving the interviewees the chance to prepare and think longer about their experiences. The drawback of a preparation could be the loss of spontaneous answers， implicit memories and a rather cognitive processing of the answers as well as social desirability. Questions for stories during the last interaction could be added to get more details. Further， the questioning should ask deeper on sequences of events， facts and the associated emotions. Asking for concrete examples could help to avoid accumulated and generalized answers and could help the interviewees to reflect more on mental patterns. This could enhance the learning and reflection effect in the interview situation.
According to the empirical work with the previously mentioned intercultural development inventory （IDI）， the majority of people could be classified in the ‘minimization’ stage of Bennetts development model （Bennett， 2004）. That typically results in a‘we are all the same’ attitude. For a better evaluation of the interview answers， an additional questioning of interviewees with the IDI would be helpful.
Summarizing the first results of the empirical study， the interviews gave deep insight in the motivations， emotions and actions of people working in Austrian-Chinese collaborations. It seems harder to extract concrete experiences and incidents for intercultural communication in an intercultural context as it seems in a project based or company focuses context. Nevertheless， concrete examples and lessons learned could have been extracted already in this pretest， which will be useful for the further research.
Doumont （2009） stresses the inaccessibility of research. The paper at hand combined anecdotes， examples and comics with a wide range of highly scientific research and drew conclusions for further action research in intercultural communication. It suggested to use learning histories for intercultural development in companies and suggested an intercultural learning histories approach. As an example case， the communication between Austrian and Chinese stakeholders in a business context was chosen. Although this is only a first small attempt in the utilisation of storytelling for intercultural learning and development， it was shown that recent research in interpersonal neurobiology supports the research at hand in many ways.
Three key parts of learning histories were identified and it was shown how recent research supports the argumentation for their importance for intercultural learning. First，the interviewing processes as a trigger for individual reflection. Second， the two column story， presenting diverse viewpoints and facilitates an anonymous discussion. Third， the workshops， supported by professional facilitators who help to integrate the findings，draw conclusions and define actions for learning.
The combination of storytelling and intercultural learning seems promising and the application field is broad. Besides the application for project assessments， organizational development and interpersonal communication， the combination could also be utilized for the ongoing discussion on migration and integration of foreigners in the society. The debate on the motivation of non European citizens， e. g. from Africa or from countries with civil wars could benefit from more insight in the motivation of both， the incoming and the regional citizens. Storytelling could enforce a better understanding of each other on a non-violent， but emotional basis-but that is another story.
It is far too early to draw final conclusions from the work， presented in this paper. It was intended to sketch the idea and suggest a process for further research and empirical work. From the theoretical conclusions， it makes sense to utilize storytelling for intercultural learning and there are already examples for the success in this field. One may question the value of action research and the scientific nature of comics，but it is believed that this novelty helps in remembering the facts， stories and actions and acts as one more anchor for intercultural learning.
Action researchers constantly stand on the edge. The next moment is unknown. They commit to the risk of creating a new future. This is a different mental set from traditional assumptions that knowledge is given （ McNiff ＆ Whitehead， 2011，p. 36）.
1 Guanxi is a Chinese term for ones personal network connection. It is considered as one of the most important issues for successful business in China.
2 http://narrata.de
3 http://www.advantageaustria.org
Argyris， C. ，＆ Sch¨on， D. A. （1996）. Organizational Learning II Theory Method and Practice . AddisonWesley.
Baker， A. C. ， Jensen， P. J. ，＆ Kolb， D. A. （1998）. Conversation as Experiential Learning . Cleveland， OH.
Baldwin， J. R. ，＆ Hecht， M. L. （2009）. Intercultural communication： A reader.In L. A. Samovar， R. E. Porter，＆ E. R. McDaniel （Eds. ），（chap. Understand ）. Belmont： Wadsworth.
Barthes， R. （1975）. An Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative. New Literary History ， 6（2），237 –272.
Bennett， M. （2004 ）. Becoming interculturally competent. In J. Wurzel （ Ed. ）， Towards multiculturalism ： A reader in multicultural education . Intercultural Resource Corporation.
Bohm， D. ，＆ Nichol， L. （2003）. On Dialogue （Kindle ed. ）. Routledge.
Boje， D. M. （1991， March）. The Storytelling Organization： A Study of Story Performance in an Office-Supply Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly ， 36（1），106.
Boje， D. M. （2008）. Storytelling Organizations . Sage Publications.
Boje， D. M. （Ed. ）. （2011）. Storytelling and the Future of Organizations ： An An tenarrative Handbook （1st ed. ）. Routledge.
Bruner， J. S. （1957 ）. On perceptual readiness. Psychological Review ， 64 （2 ），123 –152.
Bruner， J. S. （2006）. In Search of Pedagogy ， Volumes II ： The SelectedWorks of Jerome S . Bruner （1979-2006）. Routledge.
Carlile， P. R. （2002）. A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries： Boundary Objects in New Product Development. ，13（4），442 –455.
Chhokar， J. S. ， Brodbeck， F. C. ，＆ House， R. J. （2007）. Culture and leader ship across the world the GLOBE book of in － depth studies of 25 societies . Mahwah，N. J. ： Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis， J. E. （2002）. Stories of Change： Narrative and Social Movements . SUNY Press.
Doumont， J .－ L. （2009）. Trees ， maps and theorems . Principiae.
Erlach， C. ，＆ Thier， K. （2012 ）. Aus Geschichten lernen Erfahrungswissen sichern mit Storytelling. Personal Manager （6），42 –44.
Freire， P. （1992）. Pedagogy of the Oppressed （M. B. Ramos， Trans. ）. Continuum Publishing Company.
Gansel， C. ，＆ Vanderbeke， D. （2012）. Telling Stories /Geschichten erz ¨ ahlen ： Literature and Evolution /Literatur und Evolution . Walter de Gruyter.
Garland， E. L. ， Gaylord， S. a. ，＆ Fredrickson， B. L. （2011， February ）. Positive Reappraisal Mediates the Stress-Reductive Effects of Mindfulness： An Upward Spiral Process. Mindfulness， 2（1），59 –67.
Gertsen， M. C. ，＆ S derberg， A .－ M. （2011， April）. Intercultural collaboration stories： On narrative inquiry and analysis as tools for research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies ， 42（6），787 –804.
Green， P. C. （2007）. Get Talent ： Interview For Actions ， Select For Results . SkilFast， Inc.
Gudykunst， W. B. ，＆ Kim， Y. Y. （2003）. Communicating with strangers ： an ap proach to intercultural communication （Vol. 3rd）. McGraw- Hill.
Hammer， M. R. （2009）. The Intercultural Development Inventory： An Approach for assessing and building intercultural competence. In M. A. Moodian （Ed. ）， Contem porary leadership and intercultural competence ： Exploring the cross － cultural dynamics within organizations （pp. 203 –217）. Thousand Oaks.
Hammer， M. R. （2011， July） . Additional cross-cultural validity testing of the Intercultural Development Inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations ， 35（4），474 –487.
Hasler， F. （2012）. Neuromythologie ： Eine Streitschrift gegen die Deutungsmacht der Hirnforschung . Transcript.
Hazel， P. （2008）. Toward a narrative pedagogy for interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments ， 16（3），199 –213.
Heringer， H. J. （2004）. Interkulturelle Kommunikation . Grundlagen und Konzepte . T¨ubingen und Basel： A. Francke Verlag.
House， R. J. ， Hanges， P. J. ， Javidan， M. ， Dorfman， P. W. ，＆ Gupta， V.（2004）. Culture ， leadership ， and organizations ： the GLOBE study of 62 societies . Sage Publications.
Howard， G. S. （1991）. Culture tales： A narrative approach to thinking， cross-cultural psychology， and
psychotherapypsychotherapy. American Psychologist ， 46（3），187 –197.
Isaacs， W. （2008）. Dialogue ： The Art Of Thinking Together （Kindle ed. ）. Crown Business.
Kim， D. H. ，＆ Senge， P. M. （1994）. Putting systems thinking into practice. Sys tem Dynamics Review ， 10（2-3），277 –290.
Kleiner， A. ，＆ Roth， G. （1996）. Field Manual for a Learning Historian . MIT-COL and Reflection Learning Associates， Inc. .
Kleiner， A. ，＆ Roth， G. （2000）. Oil change ： perspectives on corporate transfor mation . New York： Oxford University Press.
Kolb， D. A. （1983）. Experiential Learning ： Experience as the Source of Learning and Development （1st ed. ）. Prentice Hall.
Koshy， E. ， Koshy， V. ，＆ Waterman， H. （2010 ）. Action Research in Healthcare . SAGE.
Kurz， T. （2012）. The JOIN Principle： An Approach for Facilitating Intercultural ， Interdisciplinary Meetings . GRIN Verlag.
L′evi-Strauss， C. （1963）. Structural Anthropology . ［New York］： Basic Books.
Lewin， K. ， Lippitt， R. ，＆ White， R. K. （1939）. Patterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created Social Climates. The Journal of Social Psychology ， 10（2），269 –299.
Maletzke， G. （1996 ）. Interkulturelle Kommunikation . Opladen： Westdeutscher Verlag.
Mattingly， C. ，＆ Garro， L. C. （2000）. Narrative and the Cultural Construction of Illness and Healing . University of California Press.
Maxwell， R. ，＆ Dickman， R. （2007）. The elements of persuasion ： use storytelling to pitch better ， sell faster ＆ win more business . New York， NY： Collins.
McNiff， J. ，＆ Whitehead， J. （2011）. All You Need to Know About Action Re search . SAGE.
Monaghan， L. ， Goodman， J. E. ，＆ Robinson， J. M. （2012）. A Cultural Ap proach to Interpersonal Communication ： Essential Readings . John Wiley ＆ Sons.
Nielsen， R. P. （1996）. The Politics of Ethics . Oxford University Press.
Nonaka， I. ，＆ Takeuchi， H. （1995）. The Knowledge - Creating Company ： How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation （Kindle ed. ）. Oxford University Press.
Oetzel， J. G. （1995 ）. Intercultural Communication Theory. In R. L. Wiseman（Ed. ），（pp. 247 –270）. Thousand Oaks： Sage.
Oetzel，J. G .（2005 ）. Theorizing About Intercultural Communication. In W. B. Gudykunst （Ed. ），（pp. 351 –371）. Thousand Oaks： Sage Publications.
Ohio， T. ，＆ Ford， J. D. （1999）. Organizational change as shifting conversations. Journal of Organizational Change Management ， 12（6）.
Parkin， P .（2009 ）. Managing Change in Healthcare ： Using Action Research . SAGE.
Poulton， B. M. S. （2005）. Organizational Storytelling， Ethics and Morality ： How Stories Frame Limits of Behavior in Organizations. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies ， 10（2）.
Reason， P. ，＆ Bradbury-Huan， H. （2007）. The Sage Handbook of Action Re search ： Participative Inquiry and Practice （Updated. ed. ）. Sage Pubn Inc.
Rosen， H. （1999）. Narrative in Intercultural Education. European Journal of In tercultural studies ， 10（3），343 –353.
Roth， G. （2000）. Constructing conversations： lessons from learning from experience. Organizational Development Journal ， 18（4），69 –78.
Rudy， J. W. （2008）. The Neurobiology of Learning and Memory （1st ed. ）. Sinauer Associates.
Saleebey， D. （1994， July）. Culture， Theory， and Narrative： The Intersection of Meanings in Practice. Social Work ， 39（4），351 –359.
Schein， E. H. （1987）. The Clinical Perspective in Fieldwork （1st ed. ）. Sage Publications， Inc.
Schindler， M. ，＆ Eppler， M. J. （2003， April）. Harvesting project knowledge： a review of project learning methods and success factors. International Journal of Project Management ， 21（3），219 –228.
Scollon， R. ，＆ Scollon， S. B. （1981）. Narrative ， literacy ， and face in interethnic communication . Ablex Pub. Corp.
Senge， P. M. （1994）. The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook ： Strategies and Tools for Building a Learning Organisation . Crown Business.
Serrat， O. （2009）. Building a Learning Organization （Tech. Rep. ）. Asian Development Bank.
Serrat， O. （2011）. Learning Histories （ Tech. Rep. No. November）. Cornell University ILR School.
Siegel， D. J. （2012a）. The Developing Mind ， Second Edition ： How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are . The Guilford Press.
Siegel， D. J. （2012b）. Pocket Guide to Interpersonal Neurobiology ： An Integrative Handbook of the Mind （First Edit ed. ）. W. W. Norton ＆ Company.
Sroufe， L. A. （1997）. Emotional Development ： The Organization of Emotional Life in the Early Years . Cambridge University Press.
Thier， K. （2010）. Storytelling . Eine Methode fur das Change⁃ ， Marken⁃ ， Qualitats⁃und Wissensmanagement （ German Edition ）： Eine narrative Managementmethode . Springer.
Trahar， S. （2009）. Beyond the Story Itself ： Narrative Inquiry and Autoethnography in Intercultural Research in Higher Education 1 . What Is Narrative Inquiry？ Fo rum ： Qualitative Social Research ， 10（1）.
Yu， T. （2010）. Being a Mindful Intercultural Communicator-An Interview with Prof . HU Wenzhong. China Media Research ， 6（3），44 –46.
Yuksel， P. ， Robin， B. ，＆ McNeil， S. （ n. d. ）. Educational Uses of Digital Storytelling all around the World. Society for Information Technology ＆ Teacher Educa tion International Conference 2011，2011（1），1264 –1271.
Yunxia Zhu，＆ Zhang， A. M. （2007， January）. Understanding“Guanxi”（Connections） from Business Leaders’ Perspectives. Business Communication Quarterly ， 70（3），385 –389.
Zhu， Y. ， McKenna， B. ，＆ Sun， Z. （2007）. Negotiating with Chinese： success of initial meetings is the key. Cross Cultural Management ： An International Journal ， 14（4），354 –364.
Zubizarreta， R. （2006 ）. Creating a Culture of Collaboration. In S. Schuman（Ed. ），（pp. 257 –278）. San Francisco： Jossey-Bass.
About the author： Thomas Kurz， lecturer， Salzburg University of Applied Sciences， Austria； thomas. kurz＠ fh-salzburg. ac. at