Expatriation

Expatriation I – definitions

The literature indicates a growing array of different forms of international work experiences, and there

are only a few articles in the expatriation literature that demarcate the terms assigned expatriate, selfinitiated

expatriate and migrant. Hence there is a lack of exhaustive definitions and a research gap.

 The paper written by Andresen et al is a theoretical and qualitative study that defines and

demarcates terms assigned expatriate, self-initiated expatriate and migrant with the GOAL to create a

criteria-based and clear definitions and differentiation of terms, and to develop a framework of four

different types of expatriates: assigned expatriates, intra- and inter-self-initiated expatriates and

drawn expatriates. The paper is aimed at both researchers and practitioners.

Methodology

The sample consists of 136 articles defining one or several of the different groups of internationally

mobile employees. Articles were taken from sociological, psychological and economics literature.

Overall 246 definitions of the terms ‘expatriate’ (74), ‘self-initiated expatriate’ (88) and ‘migrant’ (84).

Furthermore certain criterion was used in order to find a relevant sample:

1. Only theoretical and empirical studies in the field of expatriation and migration

2. Systematic usage of certain databases (focus on period from 2005 to 2010)

3. Only articles with high accumulated impact factor from the ISI-index

4. Requiring that selected articles contain at least one primary keyword in their title or abstract

5. Only articles published in journals that included multiple articles about expatriation or migration or

journals that have the highest number of hits in a full-text search using the search terms ‘expatriate’

and ‘migrant’

 Due to the extensive usage of the terms ‘expatriate’ and ‘migrant’ in the literature, the database for

these terms was narrowed down to 10 peer-reviewed journals

 Exceptions were allowed concerning the definitions of term SIE as the field of research is still

emerging. For example the time period was expanded to cover the period from 1997 to 2011, and

non-listed journals (in the ISI-index) were also included to the sample.

Qualitative content analysis and the Rubicon model of action phases were used as research

methods. In the qualitative content analysis the data was first coded verbatim and divided to

meaningful groups. After that frequency analysis was used to evaluate to the most frequently

emerging characteristics of the terms, and finally a further systematic analysis was conducted to be

able to clearly distinguish between the three terms. The Rubicon model was used as a theoretical

framework in order to distinguish SIEs from AEs. In the model the actions of internationally mobile

employees were studied in phases (starting from pre-decisional and ending to post-actional).

Migrants, Assigned expatriates, Self-initiated expatriates and Drawn expatriates

As a result the researchers build on the qualitative content analysis to outline the differentiated

definitions of the terms assigned expatriate, Intra self-initiated expatriate, Inter self-initiated expatriate

and drawn expatriate. At first, the final criteria list was divided into four different aspects: Individual

level (criteria concerning the expatriate/migrant himself, e.g. initiative to go abroad), Organizational

level (criteria concerning the organization, e.g. decision of employment), Political/legal level (criteria

concerning state or political and legal facilities, e.g. visa status) and finally, criteria with respect to

mobility in general (e.g. destination country). However, the researchers narrow the investigation and

applied only criteria which the literature identified as clear-cut and unambiguous (distinct). That is to

say if it distinguishes at least two of the groups. By this means we found five distinct criteria which

were further underpinned by theoretical models such as the Rubicon model of action phases

(Heckhausen and Gollwitzer 1987). Due to the fact that the analyzed literature did not generate any

distinct criteria for the differentiation between migrants and non-migrants, two further distinct criteria

was derived from already existing official definitions (e.g. United Nations (1998) and OECD model tax

convention (2012)). The following discussion is solely built on these seven distinct criteria:

(1) Move from one geographical point to another via crossing national borders (yes/no)

(2) Change of dominant place of residence which is the center of a person’s life (yes/no)

(3) Execution of work in the form of dependent or independent employment (yes/no)

(4) Legality of employment (legal vs illegal)

(5) Initiator of key binding activity in job search (organization vs individual)

(6) Work contract partner (current vs new)

(7) Organizational mobility (internal vs external)

The first two criteria to distinguish migrants from non-migrants are (1) geographical relocation across

national borders and (2) change in dominant place of residence. A person is considered as a migrant

if he moves from one geographical point to another geographical point (Agozino 2000), crossing

national borders (Boyle et al. 1998) and changes his dominant place of residence which is the center

of a person’s life (United Nations 1998). According to the OECD model tax convention (Art. 4(2)), the

dominant place of residence can be defined in a four-step process called the ‘tie-breaker rule’ (Stuart

2010). If one criterion does not result in a plain demarcation of a person’s dominant place of

residence, the next criterion has to be considered. First, an individual’s center of life is usually (I)

where the person’s family (domestic partner or spouse, children) live. If this does not lead to a clear

result then (II) the person’s economic interests are considered (e.g. administration of property). Then,

(III) the person’s habitual abode is of interest, which is usually assumed to be where the person

spends more than 183 days of the year. The last criterion is (IV) the person’s nationality (e.g. as

indicated in the passport) (Stuart 2010).

In addition to the two criteria demarcating migrants from non-migrants, two further criteria serve to

identify expatriates as a subgroup of migrants. The third criterion is (3) ‘executing

...