This qualitative study examines how self-initiated expatriates redefine success in Germany, indicating dynamic adaptation processes.
This study examines how student migrants engaged in self-initiated expatriation (SIE) in Germany form, evaluate, and define success over the course of their expatriation journey. Employing a qualitative design, nine semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore how motivations, lived experiences, barriers, and facilitators shape evolving perceptions of success. We propose an integrated conceptual framework grounded in Expectation–Confirmation Theory and further informed by Push–Pull Theory and Theory of Planned Behavior. The results show that SIE motivations arise from a combination of external structural factors and internal psychological drivers, which together shape pre-migration expectations regarding academic, social, and professional outcomes. Upon arrival in Germany, participants continuously evaluated these expectations against actual lived experiences, leading to confirmation, adjustment, or reinterpretation of their initial benchmark for success. Language barriers, bureaucratic complexity, and cultural adjustment were identified as significant barriers to perceived success, while social networks, educational structures, integration-oriented policies, and digital resources functioned as key facilitators of adaptation. Overall, the study demonstrates that SIEs’ success is not a fixed or binary outcome but emerges as a subjective, perception-driven, and evolving process shaped by expectation-experience alignment and the interplay of individual agency, expectation-experience alignment, and home- and host-country conditions. The study contributes to expatriation and migration scholarship by advancing a dynamic understanding of success and offering useful insights for institutions and policymakers supporting student migrants’ integration and long-term outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abosi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: