Cross Cultural

Leadership is an integral component of the social fabric of many organizations, which makes leadership an important topic of investigation for researchers. Certain characteristics of a culture may render specific leadership characteristics and styles acceptable and effective (Casimir 47). For example, Hofstede’s Theory of Cultural Dimensions is the extent to which a culture could be characterized as collectivist or individualist, high or low in power distance, would be expected to influence the effectiveness of participative versus autocratic, or individually directed versus team-directed leadership strategies (Landy 576). What works in the United States may not work in business environments around the world, which implies that there is not one way of leading.

In 1993, The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program (GLOBE) was launched to test leadership hypotheses in various cultures. Over the past several years GLOBE has evolved to investigate over 60 cultures representing all major regions of the world to focus on universal and cultural-based variances in perceived effectiveness of leadership attributes by asking middle managers whether specific leadership characteristics and behaviors aid or hinder a person in becoming a leader. Universally accepted aspects of leadership include integrity, trustworthiness, and honesty, which are specific to cunning and sensitive cultures. These types of cultures do not value loners or those who are non-cooperative. In ambitious and status conscious cultures, a leader who is charismatic, visionary, inspirational, and motivational is valued rather than someone who is ruthless, non-explicit, and dictatorial. The list of universally accepted aspects of leader...

... middle of paper ...

...plicable to situational approaches because it takes into consideration the actions of the leader and the effects of the environment, which causes leadership tactics to be rendered more or less efficient. By examining this, contingency theory proves to be another way in which behavioral leadership works well with different countries.

In using Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, we can determine that there is not a best method to leadership because different countries require different leadership situations. This reinforces the notion that there are varying degrees that behavioral leadership approaches generalize into differing countries. Depending on whether a country is individualist or collectivist, masculine or feminine, of high power distance or low power distance, each country will need a leader to possess traits and abilities that fit into their cultural dimension.