Upload
wahid-d-zaman
View
427
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
LEADERSHIP IN THE INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
The specific objectives of this chapter are:
the specific objectives of this chapter are:
1. EXAMINE the attitudes of European managers toward leadership practices
2. COMPARE and CONTRAST leadership styles in Japan with those in the United States
3. REVIEW leadership approaches in the Middle East, and developing countries
4. EXAMINE recent, research and findings regarding leadership across cultures
Foundation for Leadership
Philosophical Background: Theories X, Y, and Z
A manager who believes that people are basically lazy and that coercion and threats of punishment often are necessary to get them to work.
Theory X Manager
Foundation for Leadership
Philosophical Background: Theories X, Y, and Z
A manager who believes that under the right conditions people not only will work hard but will seek increased responsibility and challenge.
Theory Y Manager
Theory X Manager
Foundation for Leadership
Philosophical Background: Theories X, Y, and Z
A manager who believes that workers seek opportunities to participate in management and are motivated by teamwork and responsibility sharing.
Theory Z Manager
Theory Y Manager
Theory X Manager
Foundation for Leadership
Leadership Behaviors and Styles
Participative
Leadership
Authoritarian
Leadership
Paternalistic
Leadership
The use of work-centered behavior designed to ensure task accomplishment.
The use of work-centered behavior coupled with a protective employee centered concern.
The use of both work- or task-centered and people centered approaches to leading subordinates.
Leader–Subordinate Interactions
Authoritarian Leader
Subordinate Subordinate Subordinate
One-way downward flow of information
and influence from authoritarian leader
to subordinates.
Leader–Subordinate Interactions
Paternalistic Leader
Subordinate Subordinate Subordinate
Continual interaction and exchange of
information and influence between
leader and subordinates.
Leader–Subordinate Interactions
Participative Leader
Subordinate Subordinate Subordinate
Continual interaction and exchange of
information and influence between
leader and subordinates.
Leadership in the International Context
How do leaders in other countries attempt to direct or influence their subordinates?
Are their approaches similar to those used in the United States?
Research shows that there are both similarities and
differences – most international research on leadership
has focused on Europe, East Asia, the Middle East,
and developing countries such as India, Peru, Chile,
and Argentina.
Attitudes of European Managers Toward Leadership
Practices
Leadership in the International Context
Does the leader believe that employees prefer to be directed and have little ambition? (Theory X)
OR
Does the leader believe that characteristics such as initiative can be acquired by most people regardless of their inborn traits and abilities? (Theory Y)
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
Capacity for Leadership
and Initiative
European managers tend to use a
participative approach. Researchers
investigated four areas relevant to
leadership.
Leadership in the International Context
Does the leader believe that detailed, complete instructions should be given to subordinates and that subordinates need only this information to do their jobs?
OR
Does the leader believe that general directions are sufficient and that subordinates can use their initiative in working out the details?
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
Capacity for Leadership
and Initiative
Sharing Information
and Objectives
Most evidence indicates European
managers tend to use a participative
approach. Researchers investigated
four areas relevant to leadership.
Leadership in the International Context
Does the leader support participative leadership practices?
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
Capacity for Leadership
and Initiative
Sharing Information
and Objectives
Participation
Most evidence indicates European
managers tend to use a participative
approach. Researchers investigated
four areas relevant to leadership.
Leadership in the International Context
Does the leader believe that the most effective way to control employees is through rewards and punishment?
OR
Does the leader believe that employees respond best to internally generated control?
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
Capacity for Leadership
and Initiative
Sharing Information
and Objectives
Participation
Internal Control
Most evidence indicates European
managers tend to use a participative
approach. Researchers investigated
four areas relevant to leadership.
Clusters of Countries in the Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter Study
(Believe workers have more initiative,
more autocratic, more external rewards)
Leadership in the International Context
Higher-level managers tend to express more democratic values than lower-level managers in some countries – in other countries, the opposite was true
Company size tends to influence the degree of participative-autocratic attitudes
Younger managers were more likely to have democratic values when it came to capacity for leadership and initiative and to sharing information and objectives
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
The Role of Level, Size, and
Age on European Managers’
Attitudes Toward Leadership
Leadership in the International Context
Most European managers tend to reflect more participative and democratic attitudes – but not in every country
Organizational level, company size, and age seem to greatly influence attitudes toward leadership
Many of the young people in this study now are middle-aged –European managers in general are highly likely to be more participative than their older counterparts of the 1960s and 1970s
Attitudes of European
Managers Toward
Leadership Practices
Conclusion About European
Leadership Practices
Japanese Leadership Approach
Leadership in the International Context
Japan is well known for its paternalistic approach to leadership
Japanese culture promotes a high safety or security need, which is present among home country–based employees as well as MNC expatriates
Japanese managers have much greater belief in the capacity of subordinates for leadership and initiative than do managers in most other countries – only managers in Anglo-American countries had stronger feelings in this area
Japanese Leadership
Approaches
Leadership in the International Context
Except for internal control, large U.S. firms tend to be more democratic than small ones – the profile is quite different in Japan
Younger U.S. managers appear to express more democratic attitudes than their older counterparts on all four leadership dimensions
Japanese and U.S. managers have a basically different philosophy of managing people – Ouchi’s Theory Z combines Japanese and U.S. assumptions and approaches providing a comparison of seven key characteristics
Differences Between
Japanese and U.S.
Leadership Styles
Leadership in the International Context
Another difference between Japanese and U.S. leadership styles is how senior-level managers process information and learn
Differences Between
Japanese and U.S.
Leadership Styles
Variety Amplification
Japanese executives are taught and tend to use variety amplification – the
creation of uncertainty and the analysis of many alternatives regarding
future action
Variety Reduction
U.S. executives are taught and tend to use variety reduction – the limiting of
uncertainty and the focusing of action on a limited number of alternatives
Productivity of Japanese Groups with High-Achievement Motivation under Different Leadership Styles
80
50
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Pro
ductivity
Sessions
—— PM Leadership Style 9,9
(high task, high people)
—— M Leadership Style 1,9
(low task, high people)
—— P Leadership Style 9,1
(high task, low people)
—— PM Leadership Style 1,1
(low task, low people)
Productivity of Japanese Groups with Low-Achievement Motivation under Different Leadership Styles
—— P Leadership Style 9,1
(high task, low people)
—— PM Leadership Style 9,9
(high task, high people)
—— PM Leadership Style 1,1
(low task, low people)
—— M Leadership Style 1,9
(low task, high people)
80
50
25
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
7
Pro
ductivity
Sessions
Leadership in the Middle east
There may be much greater similarity between Middle Eastern leadership styles and those of Western countries
Western management practices are evident in the Arabian Gulf region due to close business ties between the West and this oil-rich area as well as the increasing educational attainment, often in Western universities, of Middle Eastern managers
Organizational culture, level of technology, level of education, and management responsibility were good predictors of decision-making styles in the United Arab Emirates
There is a tendency toward participative leadership styles among young Arab middle managers, as well as among highly educated managers of all ages
Leadership in the
Middle East
Differences in Middle Eastern and Western Management
Differences in Middle Eastern and Western Management
Managerial attitudes in India are similar to Anglo-Americans toward capacity for leadership and initiative, participation, and internal control, but different in sharing information and objectives
Leadership styles in Peru may be much closer to those in the United States than previously assumed
Developing countries may be moving toward a more participative leadership style
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries
Some research has focused on leadership styles in
developing countries such as India, Peru, Chile and
Argentina. These studies have examined leadership in
terms of Likert’s systems or styles (Table 13-1 Page-366) and
the managerial attitudes toward the four dimensions of
leadership practice.
Leadership styles in India would seem more likely to be
participative than those in the Middle East or other
developing countries.
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
Some degree of similarity between leadership styles in India and Anglo-American countries, but it was not so significant. The study found Indians to be similar to the Anglo-American in terms of managerial attitudes toward capacity for leadership and initiative, participation and internal control.
The difference is in sharing information and objectives.
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
Early research on leadership styles in India found that – A highly controlling superior had a positive effect on
subordinates’ job satisfaction.
Indian managers often is a more participative one.
Job satisfaction of Indian employees increases as leadership style becomes more participative.
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
One study reached similar conclusions based on interviewsand surveys conducted with managers in a cross-sectionof industries in northern and western India using aquestionnaire that identified Linkert systems or styles ofleadership.
Of the 120 respondents – Exploitive autocratic leadership (system 1) – 14%
Benevolent autocratic leadership (system 2) – 63%
Consultative participative leadership (system 3) – 23%
Democratic leadership (system 4) – none
This study found that the more autocratic the leadership styles(system 1 & 2) the lower the level of job satisfaction.
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
Different findings from India show that participativeleadership style may be more common and moreeffective in developing countries. Over time,developing countries may be moving toward amore participative style.
Leadership Approaches in Developing Countries(Continue…)
Leadership styles in Peru would have been different
from other South American countries such as
Argentina or Chile.
Leadership styles in Peru may be much closer to
those in the United States than previously assumed.
Differences in Leadership practices
Japanese vs. USA
Senior-level managers process information and learn.
Variety amplification.
Variety Reduction .
Middle –East vs. Western Highly authotarian.
Rigid instructions.
Developed vs. Developing Autocratic
Participative
Democratic