Intercultural competence (IC) is essential for fostering meaningful interactions and understanding in diverse environments, particularly in today's pluralistic societies. The impacts of both intercultural competence and incompetence are profound, shaping relationships and outcomes in various ways. Many definitions of IC emphasize being 'effective' and 'appropriate', with 'appropriateness' defined as "the ability to do so [communicate] in a manner that is acceptable to the other person" (Deardorff & Arasaratnam-Smith, 2017, p. 9). Despite this, the assessment of IC commonly relies on self-report surveys and portfolios (Griffith, Wolfeld, Armon, Rios, & Liu, 2016). While self-awareness and a critical evaluation of our own identities, cultures, and biases is an important aspect of the journey towards IC, it seems the most reliable and appropriate way to 'know' if we have been experienced as IC would be to ask the individuals we engage with. Over the years, scholars have called for the incorporation of the viewpoint of the 'other' into the assessment of IC (i.e., Chen & Starosta, 1996; Deardorff, 2006), yet to my knowledge, only one study incorporates this into the assessment of IC after engaging in a Collaborative Online International Learning Virtual Exchange (COIL VE) (Zheng, Westerhaus-Renfrow, Lin, & Yang, 2022). This three article-dissertation, informed by an exploratory case study research design, employed data from pre/post surveys, semi-structured interviews, and reflection artefacts to understand the experiences and sense making processes of students when asked to rate their own and their peers' IC after participating in a COIL VE. Study results suggest, first and foremost, that the inclusion of peer evaluation into the assessment of IC in a COIL VE is complex. Results in article one show that (1) students' self-assessment ratings typically improved from pre- to post-report, (2) that individuals can be experienced quite differently by different people within the same group setting, and (3) that if peer evaluation is utilized, specific IC assessment indicators should be context specific (i.e., in a COIL VE between US and Mexican students). Article two follows the sense-making journey of two participants through detailed analysis and provides a further nuanced view around the idea that the way in which we perceive ourselves may not align with the ways in which others experience us, and that this has important implications for development of IC in teaching and learning settings. Article three provides a conceptual argument for a rethinking of the conceptualization and evaluation of IC as something which is relational, co-constructed, and viewed as a situated achievement. By pushing the boundaries on how IC theorizing and practice are currently 'done', this research sheds light on how IC could be enhanced to be more effective in fostering inclusive societies, enhancing collaboration, and addressing pressing global challenges. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com.bibliotheek.ehb.be/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]