In summary, skill gaps, skill requirements of subsidiaries and employee expectations are three major reasons for MNCs to invest in T&D.

1. MNCs frequently experience recruitment shortages in many areas and cannot find the right people with the required work experience and skills. For example, MNCs operating in Africa often face problems arising from shortages of skilled individuals and therefore have to find more cost effective and productive ways of training and developing local talent.

2. MNCs routinely have to make investments in their subsidiaries and major business operations. Such investments in T&D have been identified in many different host countries, for example, a study of large MNCs in Brunei Darussalam found HR directors in these organisations placed higher importance than did domestic organisations on the HRM practices of recruitment and selection, training and internal career opportunities (Mohamed et al., 2013). Through T&D, MNCs can invest in human capital where one key strategic objective is to gain a return on their HR investment and achieve their corporate strategy. T&D can assist MNCs strategic goals by increasing employees’ capacity to meet global standards and adjust to the practices of the corporation and demands of its local markets.

3. Some country and industry contexts are highly favourable to organisations making T&D investments. For example, education and T&D are highly valued by many employees in Singapore (Reiche, 2009).

Task-based approaches to selection, development and performance management are fraught with difficulties in situations where the work environment and hence tasks are changing regularly. A global leader may engage in a wide range of activities but tend to use an identifiable set of key behaviourally-linked competencies to undertake these activities. These competencies may be displayed in a wide variety of settings. Thus, the identification and development of these generic and distinctive competencies is seen by many to be a more effective HRM approach than a task-based approach which is focused on a rapidly changing set of job-related activities.

Global leadership development programs should be designed to encourage participants to challenge their assumptions about themselves, other people they work with, and the cultures in which they work. Participants should be helped to value the diversity of people and activities in different cultures. The program should help participants to accept ambiguity, work flexibly and to avoid the strict application of ‘tried and tested’ methods of dealing with people encountered in other settings.

Some international organisations appear to take the view that managerial effectiveness is cross-culturally transferable, that is, managers who are effective in their home countries are likely to be effective when working in other national settings so cross-cultural training is not essential. There is another view which simply questions the value and effectiveness of cross-cultural training. Both of these views have been challenged by researchers working in the field (for example, see Osman-Gani, 2000).

First, cross-cultural training may involve formal education programs which usually involve elements of both in-house and off-site seminars and lectures. In recent years, some of these formal education programs have also involved the use of distance-learning teaching material. Second, cross-cultural training may involve bespoke or tailored programs that are designed to meet the specific needs of individual assignees. These bespoke programs may involve one-to-one coaching and mentoring. Third, cross-cultural training may involve an ‘immersion’ element, that is, an element which is designed to immerse the participants in the relevant national cultures. Immersion programs often include international visits which are intended to expose the participants to various aspects of the host country.