Effect Of Culture On Leadership Style

Effects of culture on leadership

Discuss about the Effect of Culture on Leadership Style.

Organizational culture refers to the values, beliefs and practices which the organization has been following from the long time, the values foreseen in the employees work deeply influences their attitude and behavior (Aitken, 2012).. Leaders adjust their leadership style to accomplish the vision of the organization. Culture in the organization plays a vital role in creating and sustaining a happy and healthy work environment. It promotes the work ethics and once accepted, it effects the work of the employees. When the communication between the employee and management is good it will lead to a greater contribution and contribution to the team.

It is therefore, critical to understand how the culture prevailing in the organization influences the leadership style of the leaders (Bhagat & Steers, 2013).

Businesses are going global; however, each organizational culture is shaped by the industry and business they are in, the country they function in, or the executives who run the business. Imagine a situation where an Indian Executive trained in a British school is asked to run an American manufacturing facility in China. What kind of leadership approach should he develop? The answer is he needs to analyze and understand the culture within he works and how his employees perceive leadership.

Many attribute Charisma as an effective leadership trait but in some countries, it invokes ambivalence. It is seen in some cultures that when excessive focus on achievement is given by the charismatic leader’s people tend to lose their perspective and balance (Bu, Craig & Peng, 2011). Most apt example of a charismatic leader is Hitler. In some cultures, one might need to take strong actions in order to be perceived as a leader, while in some cultures consultation and democratic approach may be preferred to exercise effective leadership.

In China, the leaders with long term vision who talk out of situations without engaging into war of actions are preferred. Whereas, in India, managers care less about visionaries and prefer bold assertive style of leadership (Byrne & Bradley, 2016). Leaders are often known to be risk takers however, research pointed out risk taking is not the most valued contribution to effective leadership.

Communication skills are also valued as one of the most characteristic of a leader. However, what is considered a good communication differs from country to country. For example, In America, leaders like to tell subordinates what to do on a Face to Face basis while In Japan, managers prefer to use memos to instruct when and how task is to be done. Same goes while giving feedbacks subordinates provide negative feedback directly to their managers however, In japan they are channeled indirectly through peers and colleagues (Daft, 2013). This shows U.S has an individualistic approach which is based on Brute Honesty- Speak on the face meanwhile in japan, the collectivist approach of face saving is most followed.

Examples of how culture effects relationship are

Hofstede identified five dimensions that explain cultural differences in the world (Hanges et al, 2014)

Power distance: it is used to measure the equality or inequality among the people in the society that makes leader more dependable or less dependable on their positional power. It measures the extent to which society can tolerate hierarchy and power structure.

Uncertainty avoidance: It measures the extent to which society can tolerate uncertainty or its risk-taking capacity. Culture which have high uncertainty avoidance shows less extreme response and low uncertainty avoidance expect leadership to be fair and flexible (Hofstede & Bond, 2016). Autocratic leadership is suitable for high uncertainty avoidance whereas, laisse faire for low uncertainty avoidance (Robert, 2015).

Masculinity and femininity: It analyses the roles which a gender play in a social setting. Masculine societies are more achievement oriented and therefor are aggressive whereas, feminine societies are more oriented towards harmony and human welfare which are general traits of women. Gender roles in masculine society are fixed and clearly defined which is not the case in feminine society.

Individualism vs Collectivism: It refers how people identify and relate themselves to others. In individualistic societies, the focus of the person is more on themselves as they maintain their own attributes, they less prefer to work in groups. Whereas, in collective society the focus is more towards the all-round benefit of the society/team rather than individual benefit. Individualistic societies thrive when democratic style of leadership is practiced whereas, collective society thrives when laisse faire is practiced (Hofstede, 2010).

Long term vs short term orientation: Long term oriented societies ignores the short-term benefits and command greater loyalty and commitment from the people, they are much more flexible as they think for long term, cultures with short term orientation focuses more in the short-term gains and quick results. They are rigid and not flexible to adapt to context of the situation.

	Strong characteristic	Weak characteristic
Power distance	Centralization Command structure	Decentralization Less difference in status
Uncertainty avoidance	No ambiguity Strong rules	Flexibility Risk oriented
Individualism/collectivism	Gender segregation Competition oriented	Equality Relationship oriented
Long-term/ short-term orientation	Future requirements are more important	flexibility

Autocratic style of leadership where leaders tend to take all the decisions for the departments without or little concern for the employees. They do not have any input in the organization, it could lead to high employee turnover, absenteeism but on the other hand due to strict control it could lead to best results. According to a research Chinese culture have the highest tolerance to take the orders from others whereas, USA has the lowest tolerance. Therefore, practicing autocratic leadership in USA would be a bad decision (Taleghani, Salamani, & Taatian, 2012).

Hofstede’s dimensions of cultural differences

Democratic leaders include the employees in the decision-making process to encourage mutual trust and creativity in ideas. This increases productivity due to high job satisfaction although there can be different opinions and no clear final decision (Lewin & White, 2014). This kind of leadership style can prove to be successful in countries which have a high individualistic approach such as Australia, Canada, Britain but can prove to be very fatal in countries like Brazil, China or Chile.

Laissez-faire leaders do not involve in the decision making and give team members freedom to decide how and when they want to set their deadline. They are allowed to make their own decisions; this style motivates the people and doesn’t require enough coordination. This style of leadership works best in the society which is high on individualistic approach but low on power distance.

A transformational leader is a person who inspires and transforms its subordinates to achieve outcomes. He/she pays attention and is concerned about the needs of the followers. Such leaders help them to consider the problems with a new perspective which can arouse, excite and inspire followers to put extra effort in achieving the goals (Hinterhuber, 2007). It is all about bringing positive change in the life of the subordinates by taking care of their interests and act in a way which is in the interest of the group/community in large.

This leadership style increases the morale, performance and motivation of the followers by using various mechanisms such as person’s individual identity is used to project with the collective identity of the organization. Leader acts as a role model and inspires its followers to take the ownership of their work and understand their strong and weak areas so that they can improve upon them.

Idealized influence: It analyzes the degree to which a leader stands by its values and convictions to demonstrate the traits which motivate its followers and act as a role model. He behaves in a way which is admirable and sets a positive example for them.

Inspired Innovation: The way the leader communicates and articulates the organization goal/ vison which appeals to its subordinates fills them with positivity and inspire them to align their individual goals with the organizational goals.

Intellectual Simulation: the degree to which the leader challenges the existing practices, assumptions and encourages the followers to act in a way which is new and creative. By providing the followers with such freedom he creates a rapport and connects with them so that they do not hesitate to come to him when they are stuck with obstacles.

Leaders and leadership styles

Personal and Individual attention: the degree to which leader attends and understands individual needs of the employees, protect their interest and recognizes their contribution towards the organization. This fulfills the need of the subordinates to get recognized and boosts their morale, self-worth which increases productivity.

Transactional leadership or managerial leadership focuses on the role of supervision and organizational group performance. Unlike transformational leadership where leader focuses on changing the future and the way the follower thinks. Transactional leader looks to promote compliance within the subordinates using rewards and punishments to keep the status quo within the organization. This leadership style is well suited for the organizations going through crisis as some projects require specific fashion to be carried out. It focuses more on the order of work and find faults and deviations.

Transactional leadership works at the basic level of Maslow’s need hierarchy theory which is physiological needs (food, clothes and shelter) where rewards are given for positive outcome or good work conversely, people may also get punished for negative outcomes or poor work until the problem is corrected. The leaders who follow such style of leadership are usually very effective in getting the tasks done since they manage each person individually (Schermerhorn, & Bond, 2014).

These leaders are often only concerned with the process rather than creativity or forward thinking ideas. The negative reinforcements are often handled with management by exception where exception is substandard performance there are two routes for management by exception Active and passive.

Active management by exception means that leader continuously keeps a check on the performance of the employee and corrects him throughout the process (Pillai, Scandura, & Williams, 2012).

Passive management by exception means the leader waits for the issues to come on the surface and then fixes it.

With transactional leadership used at the higher level of needs transactional leadership is used at the basic level.

Both the leadership theories attempt to explain the relationship between the nature and effect on the leadership but both have their own advantages and disadvantages however, the situation effects the outcome of the leadership (Bolman & Deal, 2008).

Global integration of transactional and transformational leadership

Global mindset comes with some unique paradigms consultants suggests there may be 4 components

Curiosity and concern with the context: this component when looked in sync with both the leadership styles combine high performance with the excellence and quality. Behavioral traits of the followers align with the component which originates from the curiosity and concern with the context.

Transformational Leadership

Diversity consciousness and sensitivity: diversity has become important part of the business as all businesses are present in different nations under different circumstances, global mindset has believed that it increases creativity. Transformational leaders think that the followers are creative and there gives them freedom to take their own decisions. The fact that multidimensional leadership exists is the reflection of diversification and sensitivity (Duggan, 2014).

Seeking opportunities in surprises and uncertainties:  After globalization the environment is changing very rapidly and uncertainties are increasing with it. But uncertainties can be changed into opportunities and transformational leaders believe in hidden opportunities as their risk-taking capability and self-confidence makes it easy for them to take decisions. They build a network to monitor the developments.

Faith in organizational progress: Faith means trusting and delegating the responsibilities to other and not controlling them within the set of rules and regulations. Both transactional leadership believes in the principle of freedom and giving autonomy to the followers to show their creativity which show their faith towards the employees which lead to organizational progress.

Conclusion

Hofstede’s studies have shown that leadership is culturally linked and different cultures influence the leadership in different ways. For the organizations who are going global and function in the international environment must understand these differences, as it is important for the leaders to adapt their styles as per the situation. Transformational and transaction being so important concepts in the global leadership studies have been well received by the organizations and have certainly transcended from national boundaries.

References

Aitken, P. (2012). Walking the Talk: the Nature and Role of Leadership Culture within Organization Culture. Journal of General Management, 32(4), 17-37.

Bhagat, R. S. & Steers, R. M. (2013). Handbook of Culture, Organizations, and Work, Cambridge University Press.

Bu, N., Craig, T. J., Peng, T. K. (2011). Acceptance of supervisory direction in typical workplace situation: A comparison of US, Taiwanese and PRC employees. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 1(2), 131-152.

Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (2008). Reframing organizations (1st ed.). San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Byrne, G. & Bradley, F. (2016). Culture’s influence on leadership efficiency: How personal and national cultures affect leadership style. Journal of Business Research, 60(2),168-175.

Daft, R. L. (2013). The Leadership Experience, Thomson, South Western Fourth Edition, Deluga,

Robert. J. (2015). American presidential proactivity charismatic leadership rated performance. Leadership Quarterly, 9(3), 265-291.

Duggan, T. (2014). Cultural Differences in Leadership Styles, Retrieved 12^th  January, 2017 from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/cultural-differenc.es-leadership-styles-11872.html.

Hinterhuber, H. H. (2007): Leadership, Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch.

Hofstede, G. (2010). Culture’s consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.

Hofstede, G. & Bond, M. (2016) Hofstede’s Culture Dimensions. An Independent Validation Using Rokeach’s Value Survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 15, 417.

Hofstede, G. & Minkov, M. (2012): Cultures and Organizations, New York, McGraw Hill House.

R., Hanges, P., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. and Gupta, V. (2014). Culture, Leadership, and Organizations, Sage Publications, California.

Lewin, K., Lippit, R. & White, R. K. (2014). Patterns of aggressive behaviour inexperimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-301.

Pillai, R., Scandura, T. & Williams, E. (2012). Leadership and Organizational Justice: Similarities and Differences across Cultures.  Journal of International Business Studies, 30(4).

Schermerhorn, J. & Bond, M. (2014). Cultural leadership dynamics in collectivism and high power distance settings. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 18(4),187-193.

Taleghani, G., Salamani, D. & Taatian, A. (2012). Survey of leadership styles in different cultures.  Iranian Journal of Management Studies , 3(3), 91-111.