Cultural Differences in Leadership Styles - Essay Example

Cultural differences in Leadership styles Name Institution Date Introduction Leadership is the process by which a leader influences followers. Features of leadership are functions of situation and time and are different in various countries and cultures. The significance of culture on the leadership styles cannot be ignored. Cultural values and traditions play a major role in the leadership style applied in any given organization. Leadership traits emanates partly from the needs of the leadership job and partly from the cultural norms. Managers of international corporations have to gather adequate knowledge of the cultural characteristics and differences as well as possess versatility during execution of leadership tasks. Different regions like China, Europe, U.S.A, Japan, and Arab countries have very different cultural characteristics which may impact significantly on the approach to leadership. Cultural differences influence the way people relate in an organization and hence they will impact the manner in which they are led (Jarisat, 2004). Leadership styles are directed by the cultural differences that exist in different settings. Culture is responsible for reinforcing leadership traits. Different leadership styles will achieve different results in different cultural setting. While authoritative leadership may be appreciated in a certain culture participative or democratic leadership style may be effective in another culture. Autocratic leaders will kill the morale of workers in a collectivist society. This paper examines cultural differences in leadership styles. Managers influence people and direct and motivate them towards achieving the goals and objectives of the organization. Motivating staff is fundamental because it creates enthusiasm and a spirit of teamwork among members of the organization. Leadership skills that are highly valued in one country may be dismissed as crude and ineffective in another country. Understanding the cultural setting is very important for managers in order to be effective in their role in the organization. Cultural norms and values impact the behavior and attitudes of leaders; they also have an influence on how subjects perceive and accept the practices and behaviors of the leaders (Woodside, Hsu & Marshall, 2011). The culture of the organization is drawn from the cultural setting within which it operates. Managers can only influence what they understand. Understanding cultural setting will help managers to know how to inspire their workers to be more productive. Hofstede came up with five dimensions of culture that can be used to describe the culture of a given place and can contrast or compare different cultures. These dimensions include: Individualism, power distance, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long term orientation. Individualism refers to the level at which people are less likely to respond to in-groups such as clans, families, organizations, and the whole society. Where there is high individualism, leaders will care less about the personal lives and welfare of their workers some long as they are paid well. Family matters less in such an environment. In cultures where individualism is low, the leader is expected to show love and affection towards the workers and embrace in-groups like family. In individualistic societies people are expected to be independent and manage themselves with less supervision (Hofstede & Peterson, 2000). Workers will be less dependent on guidance or aid from collective entities like family, organization, and teams. Power distance-this is the extent at which people and communities who are less privileged except and accept unequal distribution of power. High degree of power distance makes managers to be more dependable on their positional power as opposed to their personal power. Leaders use their authority to make independent and quick decisions without involving other people. In such environments, the authority of the leader is less questionable in the society and this gives them the confidence even though the decisions may not turn out to be the best. Workers or subjects in environments with high power distance look forward to their leaders to be straight forward and decisive. Indecisiveness is viewed as a weakness on the part of the leader. Therefore, the cultural setting can affect the decision making process and how leaders approach issues in the organization (Byrne & Bradley, 2007). Cultures with high power distance will have more of authoritative leadership while cultures with low power distance will have participative or democratic leadership whereby many people are consulted before a decision is made. Culture impacts directly on the leadership style. Leadership in individualistic societies allows people to be independent and leaders are facilitating, participative, and flexible. Mutual respect and self respect are important in maintenance of such a society. Tasks are prioritized as opposed to relationship, and consequently workers are focused on productivity. The third dimension is masculinity. Masculinity is the degree to which people are driven by success, achievement, and power as opposed to harmony, caring, and quality of life. In a culture that is more masculine people are ambitious and embrace with zeal achievement, success, and power. Therefore a leader in such an environment will be under pressure to perform and demonstrate that he has the qualities of being an effective leader. A culture that is inclined towards femininity will embrace love, caring, and harmony. In such a society there is shrewdness and people care about each other a lot. In a masculine society, fast and big are more appealing as compared to slow and small. Leaders are decisive, performance driven, and highly motivated. Individual inspiration is an important driving force (Bass, 1997). Leadership styles are directly or indirectly influenced by the cultural setting. Forms of rewards and punishment will vary from one culture to another and it is upon the leader to understand the direction that will not tear the organization apart. The fourth dimension is known as uncertainty avoidance. Uncertainty avoidance is the level at which societies are not tolerant to changes and appear to be more likely threatened by the uncertainty of the environment. Uncertainty avoidance can define the extent to which a leader can be a risk taker. Where this attribute is low, the leader may become unpopular if he initiates risky ventures. Cultures with high uncertainty avoidance will see managers willing to take order risky investment. Leadership style from different countries with different uncertainty avoidance will definitely differ. In one culture a leader will be deemed shrewd for not investing in a risky venture while in another he may be viewed as a coward who does not deserve the leadership position. The leader has to understand the kind of cultural environment that he is in before initiating anything in the organization. People in cultures having high uncertainty avoidance expect rules, agreements, and laws for the rigid cultural framework maintenance. Leadership is characterized by less fairness, less flexibility, and judgment. The last dimensions is long-term orientation which is the level at which societies demonstrate future-oriented perspectives as opposed to a short-term perspective. This aspect can impact on the strategic planning of an organization. A culture with high long-term orientation will base most of its plans on long term planning while one with the low log-term orientation will appreciate tasks being accomplished at a time without many projections into the future. Such cultures believe in one step at a time. Cultures that are short-term oriented vastly respect traditions and look forward to quick results (Bass, 1997). Cultures that are long-term oriented adapt their traditions to changing conditions and emphasize on investing and saving. Leaders with short term visions and longing for quick results shape themselves as productive, straightforward, and decisive people. Long-term oriented leaders possess guidance, inspiration, and quality. The dimensions used by Hofstede have been used to categorize different cultures in the world. By using these dimensions as an indicator, one can tell what to expect in a specific cultural environment. Aspects like communication, time keeping, dressing, and respect for gender can impact significantly by the cultural setting. Looking at the five dimensions discussed by Hofstede, it can be concluded that leadership is contingent on context and situation. In a rapid globalizing and diversifying world, cultural and national differences have to be considered when choosing leadership approaches in cross-cultural settings. Cultural and cultural differences are significant in work-related values and attitudes, and different cultural settings are clustered by religion, language, geography, and economic development level. A leader attending an international confidence discovered that charisma and initiative is not appreciated in Romania while it is highly valued in the United States. Cultural intelligence is important in accomplishing things like recruitment, training and developing, and retaining cultural talent. A leader will decide to apply participative or authoritative kind of leadership after he has ascertained the cultural setting within which his organization is operating. Building trust and fostering good communication are important in leadership, but getting to know how to do so in a diverse cultural environment is a challenge. Effective leadership need to adaptation in strategy and approach. Managers in international organization must be willing to learn and adapt to the cultural orientation of a given setting when they are choosing the leadership style to apply. Motivational strategies, human resource policies, and performance reviews have to be adapted for the diverse cultural groups that make up teams in the organization (Jarisat, 2004). Even the manner in which a meeting is contacted can be influenced by the cultural setting. Leaders have to demonstrate empathy to the local culture. Cultural is required in the attainment of the right blend of rigidity and flexibility. This means that the leader has to embrace the local culture without comprising the values of the organization. Reasons for cultural intelligence include adapting leadership style, communicating respect, recruiting talent, managing personnel, and understanding customers. Many expatriates are assigned the role of managers in international organizations hence understanding cultural difference is important. Management methods and leadership styles across the world are diverse and are influenced by specifications which are dominant in the environment within which they operate. In collectivist cultures, leaders are looked upon to focus on tasks as well as demonstrate concern for people. A leader has to appreciate the cultural environment within which the organization exists. The organization expects the support of the local community and this also forms the first customer base that builds up the market share. If a leader will ignore cultural orientations of place then he is bound to face rebellion or opposition from the people being led. Employees in most Western countries like Germany and the United States of America possess a high independent concept of self and consequently will be close supervision as an infringement of their personal space. In such environments workers give the best results when they are recognized and given much space to do their own independent decisions (Woodside, Hsu & Marshall, 2011). Leaders therefore distance themselves from the employees. Employees are not often nurtured and an individual learn from experiment her or his own ways. In most developing countries supervision is highly regarded and leaders who are ever present to supervise their team members are regarded as effective. A leader has to learn the type of cultural environment so as to understand which leadership style will be applied without causing instability in the organization. The Japanese culture demonstrated its difference in cultural fields and supervision styles in a comparative study when compared with American. Japanese put importance on human training and nurturing innovators. Many organizations apply laws and regulations in leading their staff to accomplish tasks and emphasize on cultural values and norms as a way of dominance on staff. Functionality of Japanese staff is normally controlled by their own colleagues in the particular working group. CEOs in America tend to apply five leadership styles which include: participative, directive, charismatic, empowering, or celebrity. Conclusion Cultural differences in leadership style demonstrate the diverse environment within which international business is conducted. Various leadership styles adapt to the culture within which they are applied. Leaders have to know what to do in order to motivate their workers to give the best results. Effective leadership can be attained when the leaders understand the cultural environment within which they operate. Cultural differences have an impact on the leadership styles which are used in organizations. In order to lead people well in an organization, international managers have to possess cultural intelligence to understand what a leadership style works in which culture. Understanding cultural diversity makes the leader to be effective in his approaches to leadership. References Hofstede, G. & Peterson, M (2000). Culture: national values and organizational practices, Handbook of organizational culture and climate. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage. Jarisat, J. (2004). Governance in globalizing world, Tampa: Florida. Byrne, G.J. & Bradley, F. (2007). Culture’s influence on leadership efficiency: How personal and national cultures affect leadership style, Journal of business research, 60 (2): 168-175. Woodside, A.G., Hsu, S. & Marshall, R. (2011). General theory of cultures’ consequences on international tourism behavior, Journal of Business Research, 64 (8): 785-799. Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52 (2): 130-139. Read More