As business schools race to add global curriculum, dozens of new alumni-education programs and executive education courses suggest that there is a market waiting to be served – expensively and immediately.

One of the more interesting new programs stems from a firm that has been evangelizing the discipline of global leadership for years, the Center for Creative Leadership, a non-profit executive education group. CCL, as it is known, is launching a program in October called Advancing Global Leadership.

“What makes this program unique is a business simulation,” says Mike Kossler, CCL Senior Enterprise Associate. He says the US$3,500 program will run simultaneously in Brussels, Greensboro, N.C. and Singapore. The three sites will collaborate to “simulate what it’s like to work in a global environment and lead a dispersed team.”

This won’t be just another day at the MNC office. The simulated company will be in a crisis and the teams will have to respond in real-time – distributing the workload as needed.

As CCL’s own research illustrates, global business might better be called undomesticated for the stresses it places on participants. I don’t think organizations prepare their managers and leaders to be effective global leaders,” asserts Kossler, who consults on global leadership issues, often for MNCs. “A lot of people learn their global roles by trial and error.”

Of course, as we have reported, there are other intriguing global executive programs available. The Global Leaders Program: Growing and Innovating in a Flat World is a global executive leadership program launching this summer in India and the U.S. Produced by two of the world’s top business schools, Global Leaders is staffed by professors from the Indian Institute of Management – (IIM-A) and Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business. Students will spend eight days in Ahmedabad, India, followed by eight days in North Carolina.

Sounds cool but the price tag is a lofty US$19,000. Do you have that much headroom on your AmEx?

For more information about global careers, check out our free Global Ready? skills assessment test, and Global Virtual Management, a free, self-guided Careers Primer that identifies best practices in globally-distributed enterprise.

While company officials hastened to downplay fears of further cuts into Chrysler’s 80,000 mostly unionized workforce, additional layoffs seem inevitable beyond the 13,000 announced in February.

Should we add globalization to the burgeoning list of possible career hazards? Consider this: Daimler-Chrysler management and investors may have overreached but as multinational stories go, it is the exception rather than the rule.

In a way, this failed marriage obscures the fact that many other American giants such as Pepsi, GE, General Motors, Citi and IBM have done an effective job of globalizing their corporate operations and recruiting talent around the globe.

Still, this was no merger of equals, contrary to the popular spin of the time. To what extent is the breakup and sale a byproduct of multi-cultural management challenges? I suspect that we will read a lot of stories about how German management never really ‘got’ Chrysler or connected to its American customers.

Another case in point is SAP AG, the German enterprise software giant, which according to a report in a recent Wall Street Journal ran into trouble attempting to tone down its Germanic culture while globalizing its identity. It’s not a stretch to compare Daimler and SAP, both large German employers with global operations, both recently seen stumbling in America.

More often than not companies globalize operations without having a plan to unify the corporate culture. “As the world has flattened out people are noticing huge differences in the same institution,” explains Robert Gunn, co-founder of Accompli, a change leadership advisory firm. After a few years of global activity, the multinational company management realizes, “We’re one company but not operating with the same philosophy,” he adds.

Ultimately, however, Daimler-Chrysler’s downfall might have just been a bad business deal, rife with miscalculations and bad luck such as higher gas prices coupled by a lack of cultural understanding among senior management. “We obviously overestimated the potential of synergies,” Daimler Chief Dieter Zetsche said of the merger at a press conference. “I don’t know if any amount of due diligence could have given us a better estimate in that regard.”

In retrospect, were there red flags – such as a whopping $1.6 billion loss and heavy layoffs – that employees should have seen coming? Will workers be better off without Daimler? Cerberus Capital Management may have deep pockets, but I doubt that Chrysler will find it any easier to compete on the global stage without Daimler in tow.

Cerberus Chairman John Snow said the right things about making a long-term investment in Chrysler and its workers. Next, it’s up to Chrysler Holding LLC employees to buy into Cerberus’ plans or head for the nearest highway.

Revlon executives tapped 43 trainers and other personnel to fly to Mumbai and New Delhi to brief the new team on corporate culture and processes. Can you guess how many of these 43 Revlon workers owned a passport?

• None
• One
• Seven
• Thirty-three

Let’s just say that after Revlon’s request, there was a very long line at the local post office.

No doubt this came as a bit of a surprise to company officials. In my view, this ill-preparedness isn’t alarming, but it is telling. Could you find 43 EU citizens without a passport? Sadly, the typical American lacks both global travel experience and exposure to global business. A web search on the number of Americans with passports proved inconclusive – recent estimates are about one in four.

I wouldn’t equate obtaining a passport with becoming bilingual or studying international business, but it is an easy first step for anyone planning to participate in the global economy.

Undoubtedly, some Halliburton shareholders and at least some of its supporters may endorse the much-maligned government contractor and oil drilling firm’s plans to swap Houston for Dubai. But, amid mounting criticism by Democrats among others, the controversial move may spark a Congressional probe.

“My office will be in Dubai, and I will run our entire worldwide operations from that office,” Halliburton’s Chief Executive David Lesar declared at an energy conference in Bahrain on Sunday. “Dubai is a great business center.”

In the early reaction, the national media has overlooked an important angle, in my view: what about Halliburton’s 106,000 employees? On the bright side, there is air-conditioning in Dubai. But I don’t suppose that the United Arab Emirates affords the same protections and freedoms that American workers, especially women, enjoy now. According to Wikipedia, in the United Arab Emirates, “Salary structures and treatment based on nationality, sex, age, and race rather than on qualification are common.”

Repatriating corporate headquarters is a fairly uncommon move. Yet, in many ways, Halliburton, ranked No. 122 on the My Global Career 500, is an anomaly, given its recent transgressions against American taxpayers. Halliburton faces a major sandstorm, and not just from politicians, in pursuing this goal.

For that reason among others, it’s hard to see how repatriating corporate headquarters is likely to become a trend. Yet, what if some countries offer tax breaks, not just for establishing “captive” company-owned operations (as they do now), but for senior corporate executives to relocate both themselves and corporate headquarters? If Halliburton pulls this move off, it raises the stakes for all countries to retain large employers. But it also puts pressure on lawmakers to enact rules designed to prevent companies from expatriating themselves in the interests of a tax holiday or to avoid regulatory scrutiny.

And what does the future hold for Halliburton workers?