Under the dual drivers of economic globalization and the internationalization of higher education, the cross-border mobility of faculty has become a key feature of global higher education development (Shen et al., 2022). This trend is part of a broader transformation of “global work” in a rapidly changing world, presenting new implications for both organizations and individuals (Lazarova et al., 2023). Particularly within the context of the “Belt and Road” Initiative (BRI), educational cooperation between China and Central Asian countries, especially Kazakhstan, has entered a new historical phase. From the establishment of Confucius Institutes to the construction of Luban Workshops and the rise of joint research laboratories, a large number of Chinese faculty have been dispatched to teach in Kazakhstan, while a considerable number of Kazakhstani academics have been employed by Chinese universities.

Teaching abroad is not merely a geographical relocation but a profound psychological and professional challenge, often involving what Choi (2025) terms “toxic transitions” if not managed properly. Expatriate faculty face not only “Culture Shock” from language barriers and different living habits but also a host of other motivations and challenges unique to academic expatriates (Yao and Yang, 2024). They must adapt to foreign academic systems, evaluation criteria, and compensation structures. According to the existing literature, expatriates commonly experience identity reconstruction, professional role transition, and a re-evaluation of incentive mechanisms during their cultural adaptation process. These factors collectively influence their job satisfaction and work performance, and unchecked maladjustment can even pose significant workplace health risks (Choi, 2025).

Existing research has largely focused on expatriate managers in multinational corporations, with a notable lack of empirical studies on academic expatriates. This theoretical void is particularly glaring and significant in the context of “South–South Mobility”—the flow of talent between developing nations, of which the China-Kazakhstan faculty exchange is a prime example. Unlike the extensively studied “North–South” expatriates (e.g., a Western professor in a developing country), academics in a South–South context often lack the buffer of significant economic advantages or a sense of cultural superiority. This crucial distinction suggests that their psychological dynamics of adaptation, their response to organizational incentives, and their overall professional experience may follow a fundamentally different logic. As knowledge-intensive workers, their job satisfaction is not just a theoretical puzzle but a practical imperative, as it directly impacts teaching quality, research output, and ultimately, the sustainability and in-depth development of China-Kazakhstan educational cooperation.

In a transnational context, what determines the retention and satisfaction of an expatriate faculty member? While relevant literature exists, prior studies have not sufficiently clarified how adaptation and incentives interact within the specific context of South–South mobility. A key theoretical tension lies in whether Western-centric models of motivation apply equally to faculty moving between developing nations. This study addresses this gap by contextualizing Psychological Contract Theory, examining whether the contribution represents a theory refinement for this specific demographic. To ensure conceptual clarity throughout this study, we standardize the terminology as “Cultural Adaptation” to refer to the broader process of cross-cultural adjustment, and “Perceived Incentives” to denote the individual’s subjective evaluation of organizational rewards.

Specifically, this study focuses on the following three core research questions:

Theoretical significance: This research makes several contributions to theory by bridging cross-cultural psychology and organizational behavior within the under-researched context of South–South mobility.

First, this study proposes and empirically tests an integrated “Adaptation-Incentive-Satisfaction” framework. By moving beyond separate analyses of cultural adaptation and job satisfaction, we investigate the mediating role of perceived incentives, thus illuminating a critical psychological pathway: effective adaptation is associated with an individual’s capacity to recognize and value organizational resources, which in turn is linked to satisfaction. This shifts the understanding of adaptation from a purely affective outcome to a cognitive resource-acquisition capability.

Second, and more importantly, this study contextualizes Psychological Contract Theory within the unique dynamics of South–South mobility. We hypothesize that the distinct institutional environments and motivations inherent in this context lead to different psychological contract orientations between national groups. Specifically, we will test whether Kazakhstani faculty in China tend towards a more transactional contract (emphasizing tangible, short-term exchanges), while Chinese faculty in Kazakhstan lean towards a relational contract (valuing long-term security and institutional mission). By examining how nationality moderates the impact of incentives on satisfaction, this research provides novel empirical evidence for the cultural contingency of psychological contracts and extends its applicability beyond traditional Western-centric, North–South expatriation models. This offers a nuanced theoretical lens for understanding why motivational logic may differ fundamentally in the Global South.

Practical significance: By precisely identifying the motivational pain points and adaptation barriers for faculty of different nationalities and experience levels, this study aims to provide data-driven support for Chinese and Kazakhstani universities to formulate more targeted talent recruitment policies, compensation systems, and support measures. The findings can be directly applied to: (1) optimize recruitment and selection standards for expatriate faculty (e.g., by adding cultural adaptation assessments); (2) design differentiated incentive packages (targeting the cultural sensitivities of different nationalities); (3) establish early-warning systems (to identify high-risk turnover groups); and (4) enhance cross-cultural training programs (to mitigate the negative impacts of culture shock).

Cultural adaptation refers to the psychological, behavioral, and cognitive adjustments an individual makes when encountering a different cultural environment. A review by Ward (2001) noted that poor cultural adaptation often leads to role ambiguity, burnout, and turnover intention. Indeed, organizational support is a key factor perceived by expatriate academics that directly relates to their job satisfaction (Duffy, 2023).

In the context of higher education, the challenges of cultural adaptation are particularly salient. The university work environment is highly dependent on communication skills, interpersonal networking, and an understanding of unwritten rules (e.g., criteria for promotion, logic of research funding allocation). For example, a study by Schartner et al. (2023) on internationally mobile academics working in Thailand confirmed that intercultural adjustment is a critical factor for their professional and personal well-being. Their findings indicate that difficulties in adaptation negatively predict job satisfaction and are associated with higher turnover intentions. This is also linked to internal psychological resources, as recent work suggests that psychological capital can act as a catalyst to unlock job satisfaction and embeddedness among international faculty (Dev et al., 2025).

However, existing research has two main limitations: first, most studies use a cross-sectional design, which can only establish correlation, not causation; second, mediating mechanisms are often overlooked, with few studies exploring how cultural adaptation affects satisfaction or long-term career success after the assignment (Mello et al., 2023).

Based on the above analysis, this study proposes:

Perceived Incentives refer to an individual’s subjective evaluation of the various rewards offered by an organization. In this study, to avoid conceptual ambiguity, we define “Perceived Incentives” as a composite construct reflecting the total value of organizational resources as perceived by the employee, encompassing both material elements (compensation, funding) and psychological elements (autonomy, recognition). While these originate from different traditions, they collectively form the “total reward” experience for the expatriate. According to Vroom’s (1964) Expectancy Theory, objective incentive measures can only be converted into psychological motivation when they are “perceived” and valued by the individual.

This study argues that cultural adaptation is a key antecedent of perceived incentives. This hypothesis is based on the following logic:

Cognitive schemas: Well-adapted faculty possess more accurate “cultural scripts,” enabling them to better interpret organizational signals. For example, a fully adapted faculty member can understand the promotion standards of the host university and interpret research funding support as a benevolent gesture from the organization to help them meet those standards.

Information access: Cultural adaptation includes language proficiency and the development of social networks, which are crucial for accessing information about organizational incentives. As Ma and Black (2025) argue, the development of social connections, or “ties,” is fundamental for expatriates. Without effective social networks, their lives can become “fragile,” limiting their ability to understand and access organizational support systems, thus lowering their perception of available incentives.

Affective transfer: According to Affective Events Theory (Weiss and Cropanzano, 1996), faculty mired in culture shock are often in a negative emotional state, which can color their evaluations of organizational behaviors.

When faculty perceive a high level of incentives, according to Social Exchange Theory, they feel an obligation to reciprocate, which in turn leads to a greater sense of achievement and satisfaction.

Therefore, this study proposes:

Although China and Kazakhstan are geographically close, significant differences exist in their higher education governance models, academic cultures, and social contracts. These differences may lead faculty from the two countries to exhibit different patterns in the “incentive-satisfaction” mechanism.

This study selected Kazakhstani faculty employed by Chinese universities and Chinese faculty employed by Kazakhstani universities as its survey population. Using a snowball sampling method, bilingual questionnaires (Chinese/Russian) were distributed via email and WeChat/WhatsApp work groups. Data was collected from January to March 2024. A total of 600 questionnaires were returned. To ensure data quality, an attention check question (“Please select the ‘disagree’ option”) was included. After removing 50 invalid questionnaires that failed the attention check or showed patterned responses, 550 valid samples were obtained (an effective rate of 91.7%). The demographic characteristics of the sample are shown in Table 1.

All scales used a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree). The questionnaire included the following three core scales (see Supplementary material for detailed items):

Cultural Adaptation Scale: Adapted from the Sociocultural Adaptation Scale (SCAS) developed by Ward and Kennedy (1999). This scale has demonstrated good reliability and validity in multinational samples (Cronbach’s α > 0.85). The items were slightly modified for the university context, and semantic equivalence for the Chinese and Russian versions was ensured through a back-translation procedure. In this study, Cronbach’s α = 0.83.

Perceived Incentives Scale: To assess the incentives provided by the university, we adapted items from established scales by Heneman and Schwab (1985) for pay satisfaction and Eisenberger et al. (1986) for perceived organizational support. Conceptually, this scale aims to measure the total package of “organizational value” perceived by the faculty. The scale comprises two dimensions: material incentives (four items, e.g., salary, research funding) and psychological incentives (four items, e.g., academic freedom, recognition of achievement). A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) showed a good fit for the two-factor model: χ²/df = 2.34, CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.049. In this study, the Cronbach’s α was 0.78 for material incentives, 0.79 for psychological incentives, and 0.80 for the total scale.

Job Satisfaction Scale: Core items were adopted from the short form of the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ-SF) (Weiss et al., 1967), covering intrinsic satisfaction (e.g., sense of achievement, use of abilities) and extrinsic satisfaction (e.g., compensation, working conditions). This scale typically demonstrates a Cronbach’s α between 0.85 and 0.92 globally. In this study, the Cronbach’s α for the total scale was 0.88.

To minimize the influence of confounding variables, the following were controlled for in the regression analysis:

Demographic variables: Gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), Age (continuous).

Professional variables: Education (1 = Bachelor’s, 2 = Master’s, 3 = PhD), Academic Rank (ordinal), Teaching Tenure (ordinal).

In line with previous expatriate research, these variables are known to be important demographic and professional predictors of job satisfaction and were therefore included as controls. Nationality was treated as a grouping variable for main effect analysis and a moderator for interaction analysis, not as a control variable.

This study used SPSS 26.0 for descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and reliability tests; AMOS 24.0 for Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA); and the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2017) to test for mediation (Model 4) and moderation (Model 1), with the bootstrap resampling set to 5,000 iterations.

Before hypothesis testing, the data quality was systematically evaluated, including tests for Common Method Bias (CMB), reliability, and validity.

The results of all hypothesis tests are summarized in Figure 2, which displays the complete path model with standardized coefficients and significance levels for the relationships among cultural adaptation, perceived incentives, job satisfaction, and the moderating role of nationality.

To address RQ3, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to examine the effects of academic rank and teaching tenure on job satisfaction. For this analysis, academic rank was collapsed into three categories (Lecturer/Assistant, Associate Professor, Professor and above), and tenure was collapsed into three categories (<1 year, 1–3 years, >3 years).

The ANOVA results (see Table 9) revealed:

A significant main effect for teaching tenure [F(2, 541) = 6.21, p = 0.002, η²_p = 0.022]. A post-hoc test (LSD) showed that the faculty group with 1–3 years of service (M = 3.48, SD = 0.65) had significantly lower job satisfaction than both the group with less than 1 year (M = 3.69, p = 0.011) and the group with more than 3 years (M = 3.65, p = 0.024). This confirms the existence of an “adaptation slump” or “satisfaction dip” in expatriate teaching careers.

A significant main effect for academic rank [F(2, 541) = 4.88, p = 0.008, η²_p = 0.018]. The post-hoc test showed that the Lecturer/Assistant group (M = 3.51, SD = 0.62) had significantly lower satisfaction than both the Associate Professor group (M = 3.67, p = 0.015) and the Professor group (M = 3.73, p = 0.005).

The interaction effect between rank and tenure was not significant [F(4, 541) = 1.09, p = 0.361]. This suggests that the “U-shaped” effect of tenure on satisfaction is consistent across different academic ranks, and the satisfaction differences attributable to rank do not significantly change with increasing tenure.

The results of the two-way ANOVA are presented more intuitively through a heat map, as shown in Figure 4.

The main effect of teaching years on job satisfaction follows a distinct U-shaped curve, as illustrated in Figure 5.

Through an empirical survey of 550 Chinese and Kazakhstani expatriate faculty, this study systematically investigated the complex relationships between cultural adaptation, perceived incentives, and job satisfaction. Four core findings emerged:

Direct effects: Both cultural adaptation and perceived incentives are significant positive predictors of job satisfaction (supporting H1 and H2), with perceived incentives having a slightly stronger predictive power (β = 0.46) than cultural adaptation (β = 0.31, after controlling for the mediator).

Mediation mechanism: Perceived incentives play a significant partial mediating role in the relationship between cultural adaptation and job satisfaction (supporting H3), with the indirect effect accounting for 42.7% of the total effect. This reveals a key psychological mechanism through which cultural adaptation influences satisfaction: adaptation is not just a psychological state but also a “resource perception capability.”

Moderation effect: Nationality significantly moderates the relationship between perceived incentives and job satisfaction (supporting H4). Kazakhstani faculty are more sensitive to incentive measures than their Chinese counterparts, exhibiting stronger “instrumental rationality.”

Identification of vulnerable groups: The two-way ANOVA confirmed the profile of “vulnerable groups” among expatriate faculty. Both teaching tenure and academic rank have significant main effects on job satisfaction, with no interaction between them. Specifically, faculty in their first to third year of service and those with the rank of Lecturer represent clear “satisfaction troughs,” providing a precise target for management interventions.

This study aims to bridge the gap between cross-cultural psychology and organizational behavior within the emerging context of “South–South mobility.” By integrating empirical evidence with theoretical dialogue, this research makes three distinct contributions that challenge and extend existing paradigms.

First, this study establishes a “cognitive-instrumental” explanatory pathway for acculturation theory, supplementing the traditional affective perspective. While mainstream acculturation research (e.g., Ward, 2001) predominantly outlines an “adapt well → feel good → be satisfied” emotional pathway, our findings regarding the mediating role of perceived incentives suggest a parallel “adapt → acquire resources → be satisfied” cognitive mechanism. We propose that cultural adaptation possesses significant instrumental value. Adaptation is not merely a state of psychological comfort but may function as a form of capital that is linked to an individual’s capability to decode organizational scripts and acquire scarce resources (e.g., funding, promotion opportunities). This finding shifts the theoretical focus of adaptation from a passive adjustment process to an active resource-acquisition strategy.

Second, this study provides theoretical contextualization for Psychological Contract Theory within the specific realm of “South–South Mobility.” Since transactional and relational contracts were not directly measured, we interpret the observed divergence in incentive sensitivity through this theoretical lens. Specifically, the results for Kazakhstani faculty are consistent with a transactional contract orientation (emphasizing tangible, short-term exchanges), whereas the patterns observed among Chinese faculty align more closely with relational contract expectations (valuing long-term security and institutional mission). This interpretation offers a nuanced framework for understanding expatriate motivation beyond the classic Western-centric models.

Third, this study offers a critical re-examination of the “satisfaction” construct through the lens of Cross-Cultural Equivalence. A counter-intuitive yet profound finding of this research is the lack of a significant quantitative difference in overall job satisfaction between Chinese and Kazakhstani faculty (a “null difference”), despite vast disparities in their institutional environments. We argue that this statistical similarity likely masks a qualitative divergence in the meaning of satisfaction, raising questions about the assumption of construct equivalence. For Chinese faculty embedded in a high-context culture, the self-reporting of “satisfaction” might be moderated by a cultural ethos of content. Conversely, for Kazakhstani faculty, “satisfaction” is likely interpreted more individualistically. Thus, while statistical measurements are similar, the underlying psychological reality may differ.

Based on our findings, we offer the following specific recommendations for Chinese and Kazakhstani universities to enhance their management of expatriate faculty:

This study has several limitations that also point to directions for future research:

Cross-sectional design: The use of cross-sectional data limits our ability to make causal inferences. The relationships identified as “predicting” or “enhancing” should be understood as associational. Future research should employ longitudinal designs to better establish temporal ordering.

Measurement equivalence: While we compared means and tested moderation, strict measurement invariance testing across national groups was not the primary focus of this study. Therefore, findings related to national differences should be interpreted with caution. Future research should conduct rigorous multi-group analysis (MGCFA) to establish full metric and scalar invariance.

Common method bias: Despite procedural and statistical controls, self-report questionnaires may still be subject to social desirability bias. Future studies could incorporate multi-source data (e.g., peer or dean evaluations) or objective metrics (e.g., turnover rates, publication counts).

Sample representativeness: The sample was primarily drawn from universities in central and western China and had an uneven distribution across disciplines. Future research could broaden the sample scope and compare differences across disciplines (e.g., humanities vs. STEM).

Variable limitations: This model did not include other important variables such as family factors (spousal adaptation, children’s education) or personality traits (the Big Five). Future research could build more comprehensive, integrated models.

This study systematically examined the relationships among cultural adaptation, perceived incentives, and job satisfaction for expatriate faculty exchanged between China and Kazakhstan, leading to the following core conclusions:

First, cultural adaptation is a crucial foundation for job satisfaction, and its effect is partially realized by its association with enhancing the perception of incentives. Well-adapted faculty are more likely to perceive organizational incentives and support, thereby achieving higher satisfaction. This reveals the key mediating chain of “Adaptation → Perceived Incentives → Satisfaction.”

Second, the effectiveness of incentive measures appears to be culturally contingent. Kazakhstani faculty are more sensitive to material incentives, consistent with a transactional psychological contract, while the satisfaction of Chinese faculty is less affected by fluctuations in external incentives, consistent with the theoretical profile of a relational psychological contract. This demonstrates that a “one-size-fits-all” incentive policy is likely to be suboptimal.

Third, this study scientifically identified “vulnerable groups” in expatriate faculty management through variance analysis. Regardless of nationality or cultural background, faculty in their first to third year of service and those with the rank of Lecturer both reported significantly lower job satisfaction. This indicates the existence of a universal “adaptation bottleneck” and a “rank-related pressure period” in expatriate academic careers, representing the phase with the highest turnover risk and the greatest need for organizational support.

In an era where globalization and de-globalization forces intertwine, expatriate university faculty serve as envoys of knowledge and bridges for cultural exchange. Their professional well-being is not just a personal matter but is integral to the depth and sustainability of educational cooperation between nations. The findings of this study demonstrate that cultural adaptation is not a spontaneous, natural process, nor do incentives follow a simple logic of “just pay them enough.” Only by deeply understanding the psychological needs of faculty from different cultural backgrounds, precisely identifying the pain points at various career stages, and systematically building a full-cycle support system can the strategic goal to “attract, retain, and effectively utilize talent” be truly achieved. As the Kazakh poet Abai Qunanbaiuly said, “Knowledge is like a light that illuminates the path forward.” May the educational envoys of China and Kazakhstan, on their cross-cultural journey, not only adapt to the foreign land but also feel the warmth of their organizations, ultimately reaping professional fulfillment and life meaning.

This study was conducted in strict compliance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and China’s relevant ethical policies for academic research (including the exemption provisions for non-invasive and anonymous social science surveys in the Measures for the Ethical Review of Biomedical Research Involving Humans). As a non-invasive and anonymous educational survey that does not involve sensitive or private content, formal approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) was not required in accordance with the academic practices of the applicant’s affiliated institution—Continuing Education College, Chang’an University—and the requirements of China’s relevant policies.

All participants volunteered to participate in the study. Prior to completing the questionnaire, they were required to review a bilingual (Chinese/Russian) informed consent statement, which clearly outlined the study’s purpose, data usage, and their rights (including the right to withdraw at any time without adverse consequences). Participants could only access the questionnaire after checking the consent box. Research data were collected and stored anonymously, used exclusively for academic analysis, and strictly complied with China’s relevant regulations on data privacy protection to effectively safeguard participants’ privacy.