In The Eye of The Beholder - Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership From Project GLOBE (Javidan) .

In the Eye of the Beholder: Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership from Project GLOBE
Author(s): Mansour Javidan, Peter W. Dorfman, Mary Sully de Luque and Robert J. House
Source: Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 67-90
Published by: Academy of Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166219
Accessed: 06-09-2015 15:32 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166219?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Academy of Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Academy of Management
Perspectives.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 143.167.2.135 on Sun, 06 Sep 2015 15:32:51 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
2006 Javidon,
Jovidan,
Dorfman, deLuque,
Sully
Dorfman,
Sully
de andHouse
Luque,
andHouse 67
IntheEye
oftheBeholder:
Cross
Cultural
Lessons
inLeadership
from GLOBE
Project
Mansour Peter
Javidan,W.Dorfman,
Mary deLuque,
Sully andRobert
J.House*
Executive
Overview
Global leadership has been identified
as a criticalsuccessfactorforlargemultinationalcorporations.While
thereis muchwriting on the topic,mostseemsto be eithergeneraladvice (i.e., beingopen mindedand
respectfulofothercultures)or veryspecificinformation abouta particularcountry basedon a limitedcase
study(do not show the soles of yourshoes whenseatedas a guestin an Arab country).Both kindsof
information arecertainly useful,butlimitedfromboththeoretical and practicalviewpointson howto lead
in a foreigncountry.In this paper,findingsfromthe Global Leadershipand OrganizationalBehavior
Effectiveness (GLOBE) researchprogram are usedto providea soundbasisforconceptualizing worldwide
leadership differences.
We use a hypothetical case ofan Americanexecutivein chargeoffoursimilarteams
in Brazil,France,Egypt,and China to discussculturalimplications fortheAmericanexecutive.Usingthe
hypothetical case involvingfivedifferent countriesallows us to providein-depthaction orientedand
contextspecificadvice,congruent withGLOBE findings, foreffectively
interacting withemployeesfrom
differentcultures.We end thepaperwitha discussionofthechallengesfacingglobalexecutivesand how
corporations can developusefulgloballeadershipcapabilities.
ofGlobalization
Impact impactthatnationalculturehas on theirvision
Almostno Americancorporationis immune and interpretation of the world.Because culture
fromthe impactof globalization. The reality colorsnearlyeveryaspectof humanbehavior,a
forAmericancorporations is that theymust workingknowledgeof cultureand its influences
increasinglycope withdiversecross-culturalem- can be usefulto executivesoperatingin a multi-
ployees,customers, suppliers,competitors,and culturalbusinessenvironment. It is a truismby
a
creditors, situationwell capturedbythe follow- now thatlargecorporations need executiveswith
ingquote. global mindsetsand cross-cultural
leadership abil-
So I was visiting
a businessmanin downtown the
ities.Foreignsales by multinational corporations
Jakarta
otherdayandI askedfordirections
tomynextappointment. have exceeded $7 trillionand are growing20
His exactinstructions
were:Go to thebuildingwiththe percentto 30 percentfasterthan theirsales of
ArmaniEmporium upstairs-youknow,just abovethe exports.1But whilethe importance of such busi-
HardRockcafe-andthenturn rightatMcDonalds."I just nessgrows,85 percentof Fortune500 companies
lookedat himand laughed,"Wheream' I?"
have reporteda shortageof globalmanagerswith
ThomasFriedman, New YorkTimes,July14, 1997
the necessaryskills.2Some expertshave argued
Notwithstanding Tom Friedman'sastonishment thatmostU.S. companiesare not positionedto
aboutthe globalworldin Jakarta, thefactis that implement globalstrategiesdue to a lackofglobal
peopleare not generally awareofthe tremendous leadershipcapabilities.3
*Mansour Javidan is professor and director of the Garvin Center for the Cultures and Languages of International Management at
Thunderbird,The GarvinSchool of InternationalManagement in Arizona. He is on the board of directorsof the GLOBE (Global Leadership
and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness)research program. Contact javidanm@t-bird.edu
Peter W. Dorfman is a full Professorin the Department of Management, New Mexico State University.Contact: pdorfman@nmsu.edu
Mary Sully de Luque is an AssistantProfessorof Management and a Research Fellow at Thunderbird,The GarvinSchool of International
Management. Contact: sullym@t-bird.edu
Robert J. House holds the Joseph Frank Bernsteinendowed chair of Organizational Studies at the Wharton School of the
Universityof
Pennsylvania.Contact: house@wharton.upenn.edu
68 68Academy ofManagement~~~~~~~
Academy Perspectives
Management
PrecIve February
ebuI
How can companiesbestuse the availablein- shortly,people in different countriesdo in fact

formation forexecutivedevelopmentand, more- have different criteriaforassessingtheirleaders.10
over,whatis thevalidityand valueofsuchinfor- The issueforthe Americanmanageris whether
mation? U.S. and European executiveshave theattributes thatmadehimorhersuccessful as a
plentyofgeneraladviceavailableto themon how leaderin the UnitedStateswillalso lead to suc-
to perform in foreign settings.Duringthepastfew cessoverseas,be ofno valueor,worstofall,cause
yearsmuchhas been written aboutgloballeader- harmin theforeign operation.Usingthefindings
ship, including several books.4 Journalsare also froman extensiveresearcheffort knownas the
gettingintothe globalactionas seen in The Hu- Global Leadershipand OrganizationalBehavior
manResource Management Journal whichrecently Effectiveness (GLOBE) project,thisarticlepro-
publisheda special issue on global leadership.5 vides a fewanswersto the questionsabout the
Nevertheless, in a recentreviewof the literature, universaland culturespecificaspectsof leader-
Morrisonconcludedthatdespitethe importance ship.We will presentspecificinformation about
ofgloballeadership, "relativelylittleresearchhas key culturaldifferences among nations and con-
thus far been carriedout on global leadership nectthe"dots"on howthesedifferences influence
characteristics, competencies,antecedents,and This information
leadership. shouldhelpa typical
developmental strategies."6 globalexecutivebetterunderstand the leadership
Adviceto globalmanagersneedsto be specific challengess/hefaceswhilemanagingoperations
enoughto help themunderstand how to act in outsidethe United States. It will also provide
different For
surroundings. example, managers suggestionson how to moreeffectively cope with
with an overseasassignmentare frequently ex- suchchallenges.
hortedto have an open mindand to showrespect To makethe GLOBE findings come alive,we
forothercultures.7 They mayalso be told of the will follow a hypothetical American executive
importance of cross-cultural relationship manage- who has been giventwo yearsto lead a project
mentand communication. Some willwrestlewith based in fourdifferent countries:Brazil,France,
the idea thattheyneed to developa globalper- Egypt,and China. This hypothetical projectin-
spectivewhilebeingresponsive to localconcerns.8 volvesdeveloping a somewhat similarproductfor
Or theymaywonderiftheyhave the "cognitive the fourdifferent markets.The projectteam in
complexity" and psychological maturity to handle each country is tasked withthe marketing of a
lifeand workin a foreignsetting.And theyare newtechnology in thetelecommunications indus-
likelyto hearor readthattheymust"walkin the try.The executive willwork with local employees
shoesofpeoplefromdifferent cultures" in orderto in each location.Successwill be determined by
be effective.9 There is nothingwrongwithsuch two criteria:the executive's to
ability produce
advice, and the scholarsand writers whoproffer it resultsand to showeffective leadershipin differ-
have oftenbeen pioneersin the field. But it is ent culturesand settings.
insufficientfora managerwho is likelyto assume, The fourcountriesrepresentdifferent conti-
mistakenly, thatbeingopen mindedin Atlanta, nentsand verydiversecultures.Brazilis themost
Helsinki,and Beijing will be perceivedidenti- populous and economicallyimportantSouth
cally,or thatwalkingin someoneelse'sshoeswill Americancountry.France is the largest,most
feel the same in Houston,Jakarta, and Madrid. populous,and mosteconomically developedLatin
Becauseof the lack of scientificallycompiledin- Europeancountry.Egypt is the largestand most
formation,businesspeoplehave not had suffi- populousArabcountry. China is thefastgrowing
cientlydetailedand context-specific suggestions gianteconomy with unprecedented growthin its
about how to handle these cross-cultural chal- economicand diplomaticpowerin theworld.We
lenges. This is a particularproblem for those in chose thesecountriesto providecontextspecific
leadershippositions. analysisleadingto generalrecommendations for
Althoughthereare universalaspectsofleader- global executives.Our choice of countrieswas
ship,information about whichwill be presented guidedby our efforts to cover a wide rangeof
2006 Javidan,
Dorfman,
Sully andHouse
deLuque, 69
cultures.Beforeturningto our hypotheticalsce- parsimoniousset of ten cultureclusters(list pro-

nario,we will examinecommonculturaldimen- vided in the next section). GLOBE studies cul-
sions that characterizenationsand discusswhy turesin termsof theirculturalpractices(the ways
thesedimensionsare important forthe develop- things are) and their cultural values (the way
mentofgloballeaders. things should be). The nine cultural attributes
(hereaftercalled culturedimensions) are:
Common CulturalDimensions Performance Orientation.The degreeto whicha
o be open minded and to understandthe cul- collectiveencouragesand rewards (and shouldencour-
turesofthedifferent countries,managers need age and reward)groupmembersforperformance im-
to be able to comparetheirown cultureswith provementand excellence.In countrieslike the U.S.
those of othercountries.Aftera reviewof the and Singaporethatscorehighon thisculturalpractice,
availableliterature,especiallythe workof Hofst- businessesare likelyto emphasizetrainingand devel-
ede, Trompenaars, and Kluckhohnand Strodt- opment;in countriesthatscorelow,suchas Russiaand
beck,"1GLOBE conceptualizedand developed Greece,familyand background countformore.
measuresof nine culturaldimensions.These are Assertiveness.The degree to which individuals
aspectsofa country's culturethatdistinguishone are (and should be) assertive,confrontational, and
societyfrom another and have important mana- aggressivein theirrelationships
withothers.People in
gerialimplications. While a fewof thesedimen- highlyassertivecountriessuch as the United States
sionsare similarto the workofotherresearchers, and Austriatendto have can-do attitudesand enjoy
the mannerin whichwe conceptualized and op- competitionin business;thosein less assertivecoun-
erationalizedthemwas different.12 We reconcep- triessuchas Swedenand New Zealandprefer harmony
tualizeda fewexistingdimensionsand developed in relationships and emphasizeloyaltyand solidarity.
a few new dimensions.In all cases, the scales FutureOrientation.The extentto whichindivid-
designedto captureand measurethese cultural uals engage (and should engage) in future-oriented
dimensions passedveryrigorous psychometrictests. behaviorssuchas delayinggratification,planning,and
A briefdescription of each culturaldimensionis investing in thefuture.Organizationsin countrieswith
provided below along withthe basic researchde- high futureoriented like and
practices Singapore Swit-
signof GLOBE. Furtherdetailscan be foundon zerlandtend to have longertermhorizonsand more
GLOBE's website, http://www.thunderbird.edu/ systematic planningprocesses,but they tend to be
wwwfiles/ms/globe/. averseto risktakingand opportunistic decisionmak-
It mightbe notedthattheGLOBE Projecthas ing. In contrast,corporationsin the least futureori-
been called "the mostambitiousstudyof global entedcountrieslike Russiaand Argentinatendto be
leadership."3Our world-wideteam of scholars lesssystematic and moreopportunistic in theiractions.
proposedand validatedan integratedtheoryofthe Humane Orientation. The degree to which a col-
betweencultureand societal,organi-
relationship lective encouragesand rewards( and should encourage
zational,and leadershipeffectiveness.The 170 and reward) individualsforbeing fair,altruistic,gen-
researchersworkedtogether forten yearscollect- erous,caring,and kind to others.Countries like Egypt
ing and analyzingdata on culturalvalues and and Malaysia rank veryhigh on this culturalpractice
practicesand leadershipattributesfrom over and countrieslike France and Germany rank low.
17,000managersin 62 societalcultures.The par- Institutional Collectivism. The degree to which
ticipating
managers wereemployedin telecommu- organizationaland societal institutionalpractices en-
nications,food,and bankingindustries. As one courage and reward (and should encourage and re-
outputfromthe project,the 62 cultureswere ward)collectivedistribution of resourcesand collec-
rankedwithrespectto nine dimensionsof their tive action. Organizationsin collectivisticcountries
cultures.We studiedthe effectsof thesedimen- like Singaporeand Sweden tend to emphasizegroup
sions on expectationsof leaders,as well as on performance and rewards,whereasthosein the more
organizationalpracticesin each society.The 62 individualistic
countrieslikeGreeceand Braziltendto
societal cultures were also grouped into a more emphasizeindividualachievementand rewards.
70 Academy
Academy Perspedives
ofManagement
Management
Perspectives February
February
In-GroupCollectivism.The degreeto whichin- respectto the nine culturedimensions(e.g.,per-

dividualsexpress(and shouldexpress)pride,loyalty, formance orientation).Table 1 showsa summary
and cohesivenessin theirorganizations or families. of how the clusterscomparein termsof their
Societies like Egyptand Russia take pride in their scoreson culturalpractices.The clustersthatare
familiesand also take pridein the organizations that relevantto thispaperare in bold. For instance,
employ them. clustersscoringhighestin performance orienta-
GenderEgalitarianism.The degreeto whicha col- tionwereConfucianAsia, GermanicEuropeand
lectiveminimizes(and shouldminimize)genderin- Anglo (U.S. and U.K. among other English-
equality.Not surprisingly, Europeancountriesgener- speakingcountries).Clustersscoringlowest in
ally had the highest scores on genderegalitarianism performance orientationwereLatinAmericaand
practices.Egyptand SouthKoreawereamongthemost EasternEurope.The Appendixshowsthe actual
male dominatedsocietiesin GLOBE. Organizations country scoresforthe six clustersin thispaper.
operatingin genderegalitariansocietiestend to en-
G
couragetolerancefordiversity ofideasand individuals. Managing and Leadingin DifferentCountries
PowerDistance. The degreeto whichmembers of iventhe differencesfoundin culturesaround
a collectiveexpect(and shouldexpect) powerto be the globe,whatdoes an effective American
distributed equally.A high powerdistancescore re- managerneed to do differently in different
flectsunequalpowerdistribution in a society.Coun- countries?Everything, nothing, only certain
or
triesthatscoredhighon thisculturalpracticearemore things?Froma leadership perspective we can ask
stratified
economically, socially,and politically;those whether thesameattributes thatlead to successful
in positionsof authority expect,and receive,obedi- leadershipin the U.S. lead to successin other
ence.Firmsinhighpowerdistancecountries likeThai- countries.Or are theyirrelevant or, even worse,
land, Brazil,and France tend to have hierarchical dysfunctional?In the following sections,we will
decisionmakingprocesseswithlimitedone-waypar- answerthese questions.We will examinesome
ticipationand communication. similarities
and differencesamongcultures regard-
UncertaintyAvoidance. The extentto which a ing management and leadershippractices.We
society,organization, or grouprelies(and shouldrely) thenassertthatmanyoftheleadership differences
on social norms,rules,and proceduresto alleviate foundamongculturesstemfromimplicitleader-
unpredictability of futureevents.The greaterthe de- shipbeliefsheld bymembers ofdifferent nations.
sireto avoid uncertainty, the morepeopleseekorder- Expatriatemanagersworking in multinational
liness,consistency, structure, formalproceduresand companieshardlyneedto be reminded ofthewide
lawsto coversituationsin theirdailylives.Organiza- of
variety management practicesfound aroundthe
tionsin highuncertainty avoidancecountries likeSin- world.Laurent,and morerecentlyTrompenaars
gapore and Switzerland tend to establish elaborate and Briscoeand Shuler,14 documenttheastonish-
processesand proceduresand preferformaldetailed ing diversityof organizational practicesworld-
strategies.In contrast,firmsin low uncertainty avoid- wide,manyof whichare acceptableand consid-
ance countrieslike Russiaand Greece tendto prefer ered effectivein one countrybut ineffective in
simpleprocessesand broadlystatedstrategies. Theyare anothercountry. Forinstance,supervisors are ex-
also opportunistic and enjoyrisktaking. pected to have precise answers to subordinates'
questionsin Japan,but less so in the United
Regional ClusteringofGLOBENations States.As anotherexample,the effectiveness of
G LOBE was able to empiricallyverifyten cul- workingalone or in a groupis perceivedvery
ture clusters from the 62-culture sample. differentlyaroundtheworld;thiswouldcertainly
These cultureclusterswereidentifiedas: Latin influencethequality,aptitude,andfairevaluation
America,Anglo, Latin Europe (e.g., Italy),Nordic of virtualteamsfoundin multinational organiza-
Europe, Germanic Europe, Confucian Asia, Sub- tions.'5An inescapableconclusionis thataccept-
Saharan Africa,Middle East, Southern Asia, and able management practicesfoundin one country
Eastern Europe. Each culture clusterdifferswith arehardlyguaranteed to workin a different coun-
2006
2006Javidan, Dorfman,
Javidan, Sully
Dorfman, de Luque,
Sully andHouse
Luque, 71
Table1
Cultural
Clusters
Classified
onSocietalCulture
Practices
(AsIs)Scores
Cultural
Dimension Clusters
High-Score Mid-Score
Clusters Clusters
Low-Score Cluster-Average
Range
Performance
Orientation Confucian
Asia Southern
Asia Latin
America 3.73-4.58
Germanic
Europe Sub-Saharan
Africa Eastern
Europe
Anglo Latin
Europe
Nordic
Europe
Middle
East
Assertiveness Germanic
Europe Sub-Saharan
Africa Nordic
Europe 3.66-4.55
Eastern
Europe Latin
America
Anglo
Middle
East
Confucian
Asia
Latin
Europe
Southern
Asia
Future
Orientation Germanic
Europe Confucian
Asia East
Middle 3.38-4.40
Nordic
Europe Anglo Latin
America
Southern
Asia Eastern
Europe
Sub-Saharan
Africa
Latin
Europe
Humane
Orientation Southern
Asia Middle
East Latin
Europe 3.55-4.71
Sub-Saharan
Africa Anglo Germanic
Europe
Nordic
Europe
Latin
America
Confucian
Asia
Eastern
Europe
Institutional
Collectivism Nordic
Europe Anglo Germanic
Europe 3.86-4.88
Confucian
Asia Southern
Asia Latin
Europe
Sub-Saharan
Africa Latin
America
Middle
East
Eastern
Europe
Collectivism
In-Group Southern
Asia Sub-Saharan
Africa Anglo 3.75-5.87
Middle
East Latin
Europe Germanic
Europe
Eastern
Europe Nordic
Europe
Latin
America
Confucian
Asia
Gender
Egalitarianism Eastern
Europe Latin
America Middle
East 2.95-3.84
Nordic
Europe Anglo
Latin
Europe
Sub-Saharan
Africa
Southern
Asia
Confucian
Asia
Germanic
Europe
Power
Distance Southern
Asia Nordic
Europe 4.54-5.39
Latin
America
Eastern
Europe
Sub-Saharan
Africa
Middle
East
Latin
Europe
Confucian
Asia
Anglo
Germanic
Europe
Avoidance
Uncertainty Nordic
Europe Asia
Confucian Middle
East 3.56-5.19
Germanic
Europe Anglo Latin
America
Sub-Saharan
Africa Eastern
Europe
Latin
Europe
Southern
Asia
NOTE: Means of high-scoreclustersare significantlyhigher (p < 0.05) than the rest,means of low-score clustersare significantlylower
(p < 0.05) than the rest,and means of mid-scoreclustersare not significantlydifferentfromthe rest (p > 0.05).
72 12 Academy
ofManagement
Perspectives
Perspect~~~~~~Ive ebur
February
try.Titus Lokananta,forexample,is an Indone- ese, and Iranian managersin termsof their

sian Cantoneseholdinga Germanpassport, man- leadershipstyles.20
aging a Mexican multinationalcorporation Should we also expect that leadershippro-
producing GummyBearsin theCzech Republic.'6 cesses,like managementpractices,are similarly
What management stylewillhe be mostcomfort- influenced byculture? The answeris yes;substan-
able with,and will it be successfulwithCzech tial empiricalevidenceindicatesthat leaderat-
workers and MexicanCEOs? How does he effec- tributes,behavior,status,and influence varycon-
tivelymanageifa conflictevolvesbetweenman- siderably as a resultof uniqueforcesin
culturally
aginghis workers and satisfying his supervisors? thecountries orregionsin whichtheleadersfunc-
Should we, however,conclude that cultural tion.21But,as thecolloquialsayinggoes"thedevil
differences are so vastthatcommonmanagement is in thedetails,"and current cross-cultural
theory
practices among countriesare the exception is inadequateto clarify and expandon thediverse
ratherthantheruleand willeverremainso?Not culturaluniversalsand culturalspecificseluci-
datedin cross-cultural research.Some researchers
necessarily. Companiesare forcedto shareinfor-
and trainingin a globalecon- subscribeto the philosophy thatthe primary im-
mation,resources,
The best business schoolseducatemanagers pact of culture depends on the level of analysis
omy.
fromall overtheworldin the latestmanagement used in the researchprogram. That is,someview
thebasicfunctions ofleadershipas havinguniver-
techniques.Using academicjargon,the issueof
sal importance but the specific
and applicability,
commonversusuniquebusinessand management
ways in which functions
leadership areenactedare
practicesis framedusingcontrasting perspectives
embodiedin the termsculturaluniversals versus stronglyaffectedby culturalvariation.22 Other
researchers, including the contributorsto this ar-
culturalspecifics.The formerare thoughtto be
foundfromthe processof culturalconvergence ticle,questionthisbasic assumption, subscribing
moreto the viewpointthatculturalspecificsare
whereasthe latterfrommaintaining culturaldi-
realand woe to the leaderwho ignoresthem.
vergence.Perhaps not surprisingly,empiricalre-
searchsupports bothviews.Forexample,in their
event managementleadershipresearchprogram DoRequired QualitiesDiffer
Leadership
Smith and Petersonfoundboth commonalities Nations?
acrossculturesin the mannerby
Among
and differences leader-
t has beenpointedoutthatmanagerial
whichmanagers handledrelatively routineevents
shipdifferences(and similarities)amongnations
in theirwork.17 All managerspreferred to relyon
may be the resultof the citizens'implicitas-
their own and if
experience training appointing a
sumptionsregardingrequisiteleadershipquali-
newsubordinate, relativeto otherinfluences such ties.23Accordingto implicitleadershiptheory
as consultationwithothersor usingformal rules (ILT), individuals hold a set of beliefsaboutthe
and procedures.However,thereweremajordif- kinds of attributes,personalitycharacteristics,
ferencesin countriesin thedegreeto whichman- skills,and behaviorsthatcontribute to or impede
agersusedformalcompanyrulesandprocedures in outstanding leadership.These beliefsystems, var-
contrastto more informalnetworks,and these iously to
referred as prototypes, cognitivecatego-
differences covarywithnationalculturalvalues.18 ries,mentalmodels,schemas,and stereotypes in
As anotherexample,Hazucha and colleagues'9 the broadersocial cognitiveliterature, are as-
founda good deal of similarity amongEuropean sumedto affect theextentto whichan individual
countriesregarding the importance of core man- accepts and respondsto othersas leaders.24
agementcompetenciesfor a Euromanager. Yet GLOBE extendedILT to the culturallevel of
thereweresignificant differences amongcountries analysisbyarguingthatthestructure and content
in the perceivedattainment of theseskills.Javi- ofthesebeliefsystems will be shared amongindi-
dan and Carl have recently shownimportant sim- viduals in commoncultures.We referto this
ilaritiesand differences amongCanadian,Taiwan- sharedculturallevelanalogof individualimplicit
2006
2006Javidan, Javidan,
Dorfman,
Sully andHouse
deLuque, 73
13
leadershiptheory(ILT) as culturally endorsedim-emphasizeseffective teambuildingand imple-

plicitleadershiptheory (CLT). GLOBE mentation
empirically ofa commonpurposeorgoalamong
identifieduniversallyperceived leadershipat- team members.Team-orientedleadershipis
tributesthat are contributors to or inhibitors ofgenerally reported to contribute to outstanding
outstanding leadership.ProjectGLOBE's leader- leadership(Highestscore in Latin American
shipquestionnaire itemsconsistedof 112 behav- cluster(5.96); lowestscorein MiddleEastclus-
ioraland attribute descriptors ter(5.47)).
(e.g., "intelligent")
thatwerehypothesized to eitherfacilitateor im-
3. Participative.A leadershipdimensionthatre-
pede outstanding leadership.Accompanying eachflectsthe degreeto which managersinvolve
itemwas a shortphrasedesignedto help interpret othersin makingand implementing decisions.
the item.Itemswereratedon a 7-pointLikert- Participative leadershipis generally reported to
typescale thatrangedfroma low of 1 (this be- contribute to outstanding leadership, although
havioror characteristic greatlyinhibitsa person thereare meaningful differences amongcoun-
frombeingan outstanding leader)to a highof 7 triesand clusters.(Highestscorein Germanic
(thisbehaviororcharacteristic contributes Europecluster(5.86); lowestscore in Middle
greatly
to a personbeingan outstanding leader).ProjectEast cluster(4.97)).
GLOBE also empirically reducedthehugenumber 4. Humane-Oriented.A leadershipdimension
of leadershipattributes intoa muchmoreunder- thatreflects supportive and considerate leader-
standable,comprehensive grouping of 21 primaryship but also includescompassionand gener-
and then 6 global leadershipdimensions.The 6 osity.Humane-oriented leadershipis reported
globalleadership dimensions differentiatecultural
to be almostneutralin some societiesand to
profiles of desired leadershipqualities, hereafter
moderately contributeto outstandingleader-
referred to as a CLT profile. Convincingevidence shipin others.(Highestscorein SouthernAsia
fromGLOBE researchshowedthatpeoplewithin cluster(5.38); lowestscore in NordicEurope
culturalgroupsagreein theirbeliefsaboutleader- cluster(4.42)).
ship;thesebeliefsare represented bya setofCLT5. Autonomous.This newlydefinedleadership
leadership
profilesdevelopedforeach nationalcul- dimension,whichhas not previously appeared
tureand clusterof cultures.For detaileddescrip- in the literature, refersto independentand
tionsof the statisticalprocessesused to formthe individualisticleadership. Autonomousleader-
21 primaryand 6 global leadershipdimensions is to
ship reported rangefromimpedingout-
and developmentof CLT profilessee House et standingleadershipto slightly facilitating out-
al.25Using the six countryscenarios,in the last standingleadership.(Highest score in Eastern
halfofthispaperwe willshowthe rangeof lead- Europe cluster(4.20); lowestscore in Latin
ershipresponsesthatshouldbe effective in each Americacluster(3.51)).
culturalsetting.The six dimensionsof the CLT 6. Self-Protective. Froma Westernperspective,
leadershipprofiles are: this newlydefinedleadershipdimensionfo-
cuseson ensuring thesafety and security ofthe
1. Charismatic/Value-Based. A broadlydefined individual.It is self-centered and facesavingin
leadership dimensionthatreflects theabilityto itsapproach.Self-protective leadershipis gen-
inspire,to motivate, and to expecthighperfor- erallyreportedto impedeoutstanding leader-
mance outcomesfromotherson the basis of ship. (Highest score in Southern Asia cluster
firmly held core beliefs.Charismatic/value- (3.83); lowestin NordicEurope(2.72)).
based leadershipis generallyreportedto con-
tributeto outstanding leadership.The highest Table 2 presentsCLT scoresforall 10 clusters.
reported score is in the Anglo cluster(6.05); Analysisof Variance(ANOVA) was used to de-
the lowestscore in the Middle East cluster termineifthe culturesand clustersdiffered with
(5.35 out of a 7-pointscale). respect to their CLT leadershipprofiles. Results
2. Team-Oriented.A leadershipdimensionthat indicatethat cultures(i.e., 62 societalcultures)
74 74 Academy
ofManagement
PrpcIve
Management~~~~~I
Perspectives
. February
ebIr
and clusters(i.e., 10 groupsconsistingof the 62 Cross-cultural Is NotOnly

Leadership
societalcultures)differed withrespectto all six AboutDifferences
CLT leadershipdimensions(p < .01).
Table 3 presentssummary comparisons among The globaland cross-culturalleadershipliterature
cultureclustersto indicatewhichclustersaremost is almostexclusivelyfocusedon culturaldiffer-
likelyto endorseor refutetheimportance ofthe6 ences and theirimplications formanagers.There
CLT leadershipdimensions.Tables 2 and 3 may is a basic assumptionthat leadersoperatingin
be usedin combination to providean overallview differentcountrieswillbe facingdrastically
differ-
ofhow the different culturalclusterscompareon ent challengesand requirements. GLOBE surveys
thesixculturally implicitleadershipdimensions.26 showthatwhiledifferent countriesdo have diver-
Table2
CLT
ScoresforSocietalClusters
CLT
Dimensions
Charismatic/ Team Humane
Societal
Cluster Value-Based Oriented ParticipativeOriented Autonomous Self-Protective
Eastern
Europe 5.74 5.88 5.08 4.76 4.20 3.67
Latin
America 5.99 5.96 5.42 4.85 3.51 3.62
Latin
Europe 5.78 5.73 5.37 4.45 3.66 3.19
Confucian
Asia 5.63 5.61 4.99 5.04 4.04 3.72
Nordic
Europe 5.93 5.77 5.75 4.42 3.94 2.72
Anglo 6.05 5.74 5.73 5.08 3.82 3.08
Sub-Sahara
Africa 5.79 5.70 5.31 5.16 3.63 3.55
Southern
Asia 5.97 5.86 5.06 5.38 3.99 3.83
Germanic
Europe 5.93 5.62 5.86 4.71 4.16 3.03
Middle
East 5.35 5.47 4.97 4.80 3.68 3.79
NOTE:CLTleadershipscoresare absolutescoresaggregatedto the clusterlevel.
Table3
SummaryofComparisons
forCLTLeadership
Dimensions
CLT Dimensions
Leadership
Charismatic/ Humane
Societal
Cluster Value-Based Team-Oriented Oriented
Participative AutonomousSelf-Protective
Eastern
Europe M M L M H/H H
Latin
America H H M M L M/H
Latin
Europe M/H M M L L M
Confucian
Asia M M/H L M/H M H
Nordic
Europe H M H L M L
Anglo H M H H M L
Sub-Sahara
Africa M M M H L M
Southern
Asia H M/H L H M H/H
Germanic
Europe H M/L H M H/H L
Middle
East L L L M M H/H
NOTE:Forlettersseparatedbya "/",the firstletterindicatesrankwithrespectto the absolutescore,second letterwithrespectto a
responsebias correctedscore.
H = highrank;M = mediumrank;L = low rank.
H or L (bold) indicatesHighestor Lowestclusterscorefora specificCLTdimension.
2006 2006 Jav~~~~~~~~~~~~~Idn
Jovidan,
Dorfmon,
DofIn Sully andHouse
deLuque,
SulIeLe,adHue7 75
gentviewson manyaspectsof leadershipeffec- underwaybyGLOBE teammembers isfocusedon

tiveness, they also have convergent views on some thisissue.
other aspects.From the largergroupof leader
behaviors,we found22 attributes thatwereuni- Understanding Culturally Contingent Leadership
versallydeemed to be desirable.Being honest, In thissection,we willfocuson thoseattributes of
decisive,motivational, and dynamicareexamples leadershipthatwerefoundto be culturally con-
of attributes that are believedto facilitateout- tingent.These are attributes thatmayworkeffec-
standingleadership in all GLOBE countries. Fur- tivelyin one culture but cause harmin others.To
thermore,we foundeight leadershipattributes providean action orientedanalysis,we explore
thatare universally undesirable. Leaderswho are differencesin effectiveleadership attributes
loners, irritable,egocentric,and ruthlessare amongthefourcountriesin ourhypothetical sce-
deemedineffective in all GLOBE countries. Table nario and discussspecificimplicationsof these
4 below showsa fewexamplesof universally de- differences forour hypothetical Americanman-
sirable, universallyundesirable,and culturally ager.Admittedly, we arebeingethnocentric using
contingentleadershipattributes. the Americanmanageras the focal personwho
Identifying universally desirableand undesir- findshimself/herself managingin a foreigncul-
able leadershipattributes is a criticalstepin effec- ture.Obviously,expatriatemanagersare found
tive cross-cultural leadership.It showsmanagers fromvirtually all industrialized
nations;however,
thatwhilethereare differences amongcountries, thereare over 200,000 U.S. expatriatesworld-
thereare also similarities. Such similarities give wide.27Nevertheless, expatriatesfromnon-Amer-
some degreeof comfortand ease to leadersand ican and non-Western countriesshould be able to
can be usedbythemas a foundation to buildon. identify with culturaldifferences betweentheir
Of course,theremaystillbe differences in how cultureand that of the comparisoncountries.
leadersenactsuchattributes. Forexample,behav- GLOBE culturaldata for the five comparison
iors that embodydynamicleadershipin China countriescan be foundin Table 1 and the Ap-
maybe different fromthosethatdenotethesame pendix.PleasenotetheUnitedStates,Brazil,and
attributein the U.S. Currentresearchcurrently FrancearepartoftheAnglo,LatinAmerican,and
Latin European,clusters, respectively.Egypt,and
China part of the Middle East, and Confucian
Table4
Asia clustersrespectively.
CulturalViewsofLeadershipEffectiveness
Each sectionbelow beginswitha summary of
The isa
following list
partial ofleadership with
attributes
thecorrespondinghow each cultureclusterfareswithrespectto the
leadership
primary inparentheses.
dimension
CLT profile.We thenshowhow the countriesof
Universal ofLeadership
Facilitators Effectiveness interestin thispapercompareon specificleader-
* Being
trustworthy, andhonest
just, (integrity) ship attributesthat are culturallycontingent.
* Having andplanning
foresight ahead(charismatic-visionary) Next,we examinein detailwhatthesedifferences
* Being
positive,
dynamic,
encouraging, andbuilding
motivating, confidencemean and what
theyimplyforthe hypothetical
(charismatic-inspirational) Americanexecutive.
* Being informed,
communicative, team
a coordinator,
and (team
integrator
builder) Brazil
Universal
Impediments toLeadershipEffectiveness
Brazilis partofGLOBE's LatinAmericancluster.
* Being
a lonerandasocial
(self-protective)
* Being andirritable
ViewingTables 2 and 3, it is apparentthatthe
non-cooperative (malevolent) CLT leadership dimensions themost
* Being contributing
dictatorial
(autocratic) to outstanding leadershipin thiscountrycluster
Contingent
Culturally Endorsement ofLeader
Attributes includeCharismatic/Value-Based and Team Ori-
* Being
individualistic
(autonomous) ented leadership,followedby the Participative
* Being conscious
status (status
conscious) and HumaneOrientedCLT dimensions.Auton-
* Being
a risk
taker Ill:self-sacrificial)
(charismatic omousand Self-Protective leadershipare viewed
16
76 ofManagement
Academy Perspectives February
as slightly negative.Table 3 showsthatthe Latin pany in Brazilnoted that blue and white-collar
Americaclusterreceivesthe highestrankforthe workersfromthe same companyrarelysocialize
Team Orienteddimension,among the highest together withinand outsideofwork.Theyexpect
ranks for Charismatic/Value-Based leadership, leaders to treatpeople accordingto theirsocial
and rankslowestwithrespectto theAutonomous and organizationallevels. Perhapsdue to their
CLT leadership dimension.It occupiesthemiddle high power distanceculture,Braziliansbelieve
ranksforthe remaining CLT dimensions. thatpeoplein positionsofauthority deserveto be
Figure1 belowcontrasts theU.S. and Brazilon treated with respect and deference. Theyprefer a
the culturallycontingentleadershipitems.Per- formalrelationshipbetweenthe leader and fol-
hapsdue to theirhighin-group collectivism, Bra- lowers.The same petrochemicalsales manager
zilianmanagersintenselydislikethe leaderswho toldhow Braziliansubordinates tendto stayout-
areindividualistic, autonomous, and independent. side of the perceived boundaries of theirleaders
A Braziliansales managerworkingin the petro- and respecttheir own decision-making limita-
chemicalindustry recentlyreflected thissuggest- tions. He added, "It's clear who has the most
ing, "We do not preferleaderswho take self- powerin the workenvironment in Brazil,but in
governingdecisions and act alone without America this is not always the case." Americans
engagingthe group.That's partof who we are." tend to frownon statusand class consciousness.
While Americanmanagersalso frownuponthese Respect,to an Americanmanager,does not nec-
attributes, theydo not regardthemas negatively essarilymean deferencebut mutualrespectand
as do theBrazilians.An Americanmanagerneeds opendialogue.Americanstendto see formality as
to be morecognizantto make surethat his/her an obstacleto open debate. But what seemsan
actionsand decisionsare not interpreted as indi- open debate to an Americanmanagermay be
vidualistic.He/sheneedsto ensurethatthegroup viewedas aggressiveand unacceptablebehavior
or unitfeelsinvolvedin decisionmakingand that on the part of the subordinates by a Brazilian
others'viewsand reactionsare takenintoconsid- manager.So, whileBraziliansdo not likeindivid-
eration. ualistic leaders, a typical American manager
On the otherhand,Brazilianmanagersexpect shouldbe cautioususingan open styleofdecision
their leaders to be class- and status-conscious. making.While it maybe a good idea in an Amer-
Theywantleadersto be awareofstatusboundaries ican organization to directly contactanyonewith
and to respectthem.A managerin a largecom- the right information regardlessof their level,
suchbehaviormaybe seen as a signofdisrespect
to thosein formalpositionsin a Brazilianorgani-
. r.
Autonomous
zation.
Anotherimportant difference is thatAmerican
.
Indlvidualtitic - t conflictavolder
- Intra-group
managersprefera less cautiousapproachand a

-'
\ .5---.. /
greater degreeofrisktaking.In contrast, Brazilian

managersprefera somewhatmorecautiousand
r,
riskaverseapproach.This is consistentwiththe
findingthatU.S. cultureis moretolerantof un-
Status-conscious I;- \ / \ Independent certainty than is Brazilianculture.Also, perhaps
due to stronger assertiveness and performance ori-
entation in American culture, U.S. managers
Cauttous . - , - Provocateur seemto favora speedierdecisionmakingprocess
Compasslonat
and a higherlevelofactionorientation. Brazilians
on theotherhand,maybe moresensitiveto group
|- -USA - Brazdil
harmony and riskavoidance.A Brazilianaccount
Figure1 manager leading a four-company consortium
USAvs.Brazil working on a $200 million U.S. contract withthe
2006 Javidan, Id
2IDorfman, deLuque,
Ior Sully andHouse 77
FederalDepartment ofRoadsin Brazilrealizedthis it seemsto be rootedin the fact that Brazilis

when a conflictoccurredamongthe consortium reportedto be a less humaneculturethan is the
players.He noted, U.S. Confirming thisfinding,
one managerstated
that this reflectsthe expectationthat people
Sinceourcontract
wasa long-term wecould
relationship,
notfocusonlyon theparticular
moment. I hadtofinda should solve theirown problems,
relyingon help
waytomotivateandtobuilda trusting
environment.The fromtheirfamilyor groups.
onlywaytodoso wastopromote several withall
meetings
theconsortiummembers to to
tryingfind way putall the
a WheninBrazil...
members backtogether.
Bydoingthis,I assumedthiswas Here are a fewspecificideas on whatour hypo-
thebestactiontoproduce no matter
results, howdifficult
theticalAmericanmanagerneedsto do whenhe
it was or howmuchtimeitrequired.
startsworkingwithhis Brazilianteam:
Still anotherdifference relatesto the strongin- Veryearlyon, he needsto spendtimemeeting
group collectivism dimension of the Brazilian cul- with thekeyexecutivesin the organization, even
ture.They expecttheirleadersto avoid conflict those who may not be directlyrelevantto his
withinthegrouptoprotectitsharmony, butat the project.This is an important stepbecauseofhigh
sametimetheyliketheirleadersto induceconflict powerdistanceand in-groupcollectivismin that
withthoseoutsidethe group.A particularly suc- culture.Being a foreigner and a newcomer,it is
cessfulexecutiveworkingin Braziltoldhow Bra- crucialto show respectto those in positionsof
zilianstakepridein membership in smallgroups, powerand to starttheprocessofbuildingpersonal
especiallyfamilies. In business, he saidthatpeople tiesand movingintotheirin-groups. Further, this
whoaremembers ofthesamegroupexpectspecial stephelpsmakesurethatthe otherstakeholders
treatment (such as pricediscounts,exclusivity of do not viewthe manager'steamas beinginsular,
contracts, etc.). In fact,withoutthesegroupaffil- somethingthat is likelyto happen in high in-
iations,attracting and conducting businesscan be groupcultures.
difficult. Americanmanagers seemto dislikeboth While it is important to workwiththeindivid-
theseattributes, perhapsdue to theirstronger per- ual members oftheteam,itis alsocriticalto spend
formanceorientationculture.Avoidinginternal as muchtimeas possiblewiththeteamas a whole,
conflict, simplyto maintaingroupharmony, even both in formalworkrelatedoccasionsand in in-
at theexpenseofresults, is nota positiveattribute formalsettings. The familiesoftheteammembers
to Americans.The typicalAmericanviewofhar- shouldalso be invitedto get togetheron many
monyis reflected in thefollowing quote fromthe occasions.They are an important partof the re-
popular book Execution by Bossidyand Charan:28 lationshipsamongteam members.The high in-
Indeed,harmony-sought outbymanyleaderswhowish groupculturefacilitates thegroupworking closely
to offendno one-can be theenemyof truth.It can together, and the Brazilians'dislikeforindepen-
squelchcritical
thinkinganddrivedecisionmaking under- dent and individualistic leadersmeans that the
ground. When harmony here's
prevails, howthingsoften leader is to
expected treattheteamand theirclose
getsettled:afterthekeyplayersleavethesession,they familiesas an extendedfamily,spendingmuch
quietlyvetodecisionstheydidn'tlikebutdidn'tdebateon timetogether.
thespot.A goodmottoto observeis: "Truthoverhar-
In developinga businessstrategy fortheteam's
mony.
product, it is to in
important keep mindBrazil's
Last, but not least, an importantand counter low scoreson performance orientationand future
intuitivefindingis that Americanrespondents orientation and itshighscoreon powerdistance.
have a much strongerdesireforcompassionin The processof strategy development needsto al-
theirleaders.They wanttheirleadersto be em- lowforinputfromtheemployees, butthemanager
patheticand merciful. The Brazilianrespondents, needs to be patientand to make an effortto
on the otherhand, are quite neutralabout this encourageand facilitatetheemployees'participa-
attribute. While thisseemsto go againstthecon- tion.The Brazilianemployees willnotbe as forth-
ventionalstereotypes ofAmericansand Brazilians, coming with their ideas and input as typical
18
78 Academy Perspedives
ofManagement
Americanemployeesare. At the same time,the uncertainty avoidance. Althoughboth cultures

managerwillneed to makethefinaldecisionand utilizepredictable lawsand procedures in business
communicate it. Brazilianemployeesare not used and society,characteristic of uncertainty avoid-
to strongparticipationin decisionmaking,but ance cultures, Franceis muchbetterknownforits
they also do not like leaders who simplydictate strong labor unions and bureaucraticformality.
thingsto them.The strategy shouldnotbe seenas There are, however,significant differences be-
too riskyor ambitiousand shouldnothave a long tweenthe Frenchand Americanrespondents on
timehorizon.Instead,it shouldconsistofexplicit other cultural dimensionsand leadershipat-
shorttermmilestones.It should also focuson tributes.Both groupsseem to like sincereand
delivering shorttermresultsto enhanceemployee enthusiastic leaderswho impartpositiveenergyto
understanding and support. theirgroup,althoughAmericanmanagershave
Due to thecountry's low scoreon institutional much strongerpreferences for these attributes.
collectivism, employees will not be moved much This may be a reflection of the finding thatFrench
bygrandcorporatestrategies and visions.Instead, cultureis not as performance orientedas U.S.
they would be more motivated by theirindividual culture.
and teaminterests, so therewardsystem shouldbe Besidestheirdislikeforavoidanceof conflict
based on both individualand teamperformance, withinthe group(as discussedearlier)American
althoughthe team componentshouldhave the managershave a clear dislikeforcunningand
greateremphasis.The managershouldalso notbe deceitfulleaders.The French,on theotherhand,
surprised ifthereare not manyclearrulesor pro- are neutralabout both attributes. While Ameri-
cessesand iftheones in existencearenotfollowed cans see these attributesas dysfunctional, the
veryseriously. These areattributes ofa societylike Frenchsee themas a partofthejob thatgoeswith
Brazilwithlow levelsofrulesorientation. Instead, thepositionofleadership. Comparedto theU.S.,
the managerneedsto makeit veryclearearlyon in-groupcollectivismis more noted in French
which rulesand proceduresare expectedto be societiesin theformof"favoritism" givento peo-
followedand why. ple fromsimilareducation,family,social, and
even regionalbackgrounds. This is shownin the
France generaltensionthatis perceivedto existbetween
FranceispartoftheLatinEuropeGLOBE country laborand management, as welland employees and
cluster.The mostdesirableCLT dimensionsin clients.29
this cluster are Charismatic/Value-Based and
Team Orientedleadership.Participativeleader-
shipis viewedpositively butis notas important as Independent
..7 --r ..
thefirsttwodimensions. HumaneOrientedlead- 6- - I -. Inta-group conflict avolder
ership is viewed as slightly positive,whereasAu- 5 _-- -/
tonomousleadershipis viewedas slightly negative

and Self-Protective is viewednegatively. Table 3
showsthat the Latin Europeclusteris Medium/
HighforCharismatic/Value-Based It is
leadership. - ' Enthuskstic
.,'/",'7 \. :r"
in the middlerankforthe remaining CLT lead-
ershipdimensionsexceptthe Humane Oriented
and Autonomousdimensionswhere it ranks ~/ \
Habitual
'
~.
'.. i..'
- -' ' Compassonate
among the lowest scoring clusters.

Figure2 below shows the contrastbetween
nsclous Cunning
Status-co
French and American leadershipon culturally |-- USA - France|
contingent leadershipattributes. The Frenchcul-

tureis similarto the U.S on one culturaldimen- Figure 2
sion,in thattheybothpracticemoderatelevelsof USAvs.France
2006 2006 Javidon,
Dorfman,
Sully
Sulyd
jav~~~~~~~~~
~~~Idn
Iofmn andHouse
~deLuque,
IuuadHue7 79
Americanmanagers seemto have a strongpref- denote lack of characterfromthe followers. He

erence for compassionateand sensitiveleaders addsthata leadershouldguidewithouthavingtoo
who show empathytowardsothers.In contrast, muchpoweroverthefollowers' thought processes,
Frenchmanagersseemto have a distinctly nega- to ensurediversethinkingcriticalto conserve
tiveviewtowardsboththeseattributes. The CEO severalsolutionsto the leader.
of an international auditfirmexpressedthisin a To sumup, a typicalAmericanexecutivetak-
quality auditof a French hotel stating,"The staff ingon a leadershiprole in a Frenchorganization
had an inabilityto apologizeand empathize.I will face a more bureaucraticand formalwork
thinkthatcould be construedas typically Euro- environment withhigherlevelsof aggressiveness
pean, and especiallyFrench."30 These same be- and lowerlevelsofpersonalcompassionand sen-
haviorswould be expected fromtheir leaders. sitivity thans/heis used to.
Such a largecontrastcan perhapsbe explainedby
the fact that the Frenchcultureis much less When inFrance...
humaneorientedand muchmorepoweroriented. The Americanmanagerin ourscenariowillfacea
To Frenchmanagers, people in positionsof lead- verydifferent experiencewithhis or her French
ershipshouldnot be expectedto be sensitiveor team.These managers willexperiencemuchmore
empathetic, or to worry about another's status formal and impersonalrelationships among the
because such attributes wouldweakena leader's team members.The concept of visionaryand
resolve and impede decision making.Leaders charismaticleadershipthat is popular among
shouldmakedecisionswithoutbeingdistracted by Americanmanagers maynotbe as desirableto the
otherconsiderations. Indeed,a verysuccessful cor- French.They do not expecttheirleadersto play
porateexecutivein Francenoted that a leader heroicactsand,due to theirhighpowerdistance,
shouldbe able to handlechangethataffects the have a morebureaucratic viewof leaders.So, the
environment, butat thesametimenotchangehis Americanmanager,in contrastto his experience
orhercharacteristics, and skillsthatputthe in Brazil,needsto tonedownthepersonalsideof
traits,
leader in that position. In other words,they relationships andbe muchmorebusinessoriented.
shouldallow no distractions. The manageralso has to be more carefuland
In contrastto Americans,Frenchrespondents selectiveincontacting otherexecutivesandstake-
have a negativeview of leaderswho are self- holders.Their preference for maintaininghigh
sacrificial
and self-effacing. do
They not likelead- powerdistancemaycurbtheirenthusiasm about
erswhoaremodestabouttheirroleandforgotheir meetingwithsomeoneiftheyfeelit is a wasteof
ownself-interest.The Frenchexecutiveadded,"A timeand of no clearvalue to them.It is perhaps
leadermustbe clearabouthis roleand vision.Ifa bestforourAmericanmanagerto makean offer to
leaderputshimselfin a compromising situation, them and leave it to them to decide. Their low
thendoubtwillarisein thefollowers' mindsabout humaneorientationculturemaymean thatthey
theleaderand thatwouldaffect theirviewsofthe are not particularly interested in beingsupportive
rolesthefollowers playin thebroaderpicture." To of others,even in the same organization, espe-
them, theleader has an important role to play and if
cially they are from separatein-groups.
important decisionsto make,and s/heshouldnot Due to lowerlevels of futureorientationand
minimizethat.They also do not likeleaderswho performance orientation, grandcorporatestrate-
are habitualand tendto routinizeeverything be- gies and visionsmay be of limitedvalue to a
causethatdiminishes theimportance oftheirrole. Frenchteam. Any strongcompetitivelanguage
Theydo stillprefer theirleadersto workwithand may be seen as typicalAmericanbravado.The
rely on others to getthingsdone and do not like managerneeds to develop a processformaking
independentleaders.A FrenchCEO knownfor strategicdecisionsabout the projectand get the
his corporateturnaround finesseexplainedthat teammembersinvolved,buthe needsto keep in
leadersshouldnot have too muchindependence mindthat Frenchemployeesmaybe best moti-
fromtheirfollowers becauseotherwise thiswould vatedby transactional formsof leadershipwhere
80 ofManagement
Academy Perspectives February
theysee clearindividualbenefitin implementing selvesand micromanage theiremployees. Theydo

the team'splans. The strategyand action plans not want theirleadersto suppressothers'ideas,
need to be simpleand wellplanned.So, thecon- even iftheydisagreewiththem.Egyptianmanag-
tentand processof strategydevelopmentforthe ers have a moretemperateview of such execu-
Frenchteammayhave manysimilarities withthe tives,perhapsdue to theirstrongpowerdistance
Brazilianteam,even thoughtheyare differenton culture.
many other dimensions. A veryimportantdifference is the image of
leadersin the Egyptianvs. the Americanmind.
Egypt Egyptianmanagersseem to have an elitist,tran-
scendentviewoftheirleaders.Theyviewthemas
Egyptis partoftheMiddleEastcluster.Thereare
a numberofstriking differencesin comparisonto a distinctgroupand a breed apart.They want
other clusters.While both Charismatic/Value- theirleadersto be unique,superior,status-and
Based and Team Orientedleadershipare viewed class-conscious,individualistic, and betterthan
as positive,theyhave the lowestscoresand ranks the othersin theirgroup.They showstrongrev-
relativeto thoseforall otherclusters.Participa- erenceand deference towardtheirleaders.Amer-
tive leadershipis viewed positively,but again icans,on theotherhand,have a morebenignand
scoreslow comparedwithotherclusters'absolute simplistic viewtowardtheirleaders.Theydo not
scoreand ranks.Humane Orientedleadershipis see themas a breedapartor superhuman. They
them as successful but not extraor-
perceivedpositively,but only about equally to regard people
otherclusterscores.The Self-Protective CLT di- dinary ones.
mensionis viewed as an almostneutralfactor; The countryof Egypthas been ruledbydicta-
however,ithas thesecond-highest scoreand rank torsdatingas farbackas thetimeofthePharaohs.
of all clusters. Leaderswere expectedto lead by portraying a
Figure3 below showsa contrastof leadership
self-assured image.To maintainpower,Egyptian
culture leaders need to continuously be involvedin mak-
stylesin theU.S. and Egypt.The Egyptian
is distinctby its emphasison in-groupand insti- ing decisions.In the Arabic culturethat is very
much influencedby Islam,men do not wish to
tutionalcollectivism, powerdistance,humaneori-
entation,and male domination.In termsof lead- appearweak.
ership, American managersdislike autocratic Despitesuch highlevel of respectforleaders,
leaderswho wantto makeall thedecisionsthem- Egyptianemployees,perhapsdue to theirvery
strongin-groupcollectivism, prefertheirleaders
to respectgroupharmony,avoid groupconflict,
Intr-group competitor
7. -
and takecautionin decisionmaking.It is rareto
Indlvldualltic - 6 see leaders,especiallypoliticalleaders,come out
. Intra-group conflict avoider
publiclyand criticizea popularbelief.They tend

Ru,r "'.. to avoid a conflictwhen it is not necessary, and
-. they often use this collectivism to build their
influenceand popularity.
The importance ofkinshipas thefamilyis the
mostsignificant unitof Egyptiansociety.An in-
dividual'ssocial identity is closelylinkedto his or
herstatusin thenetwork ofkinrelations.Kinship
is essentialto theculture.Describing thetendency
Clas conscious Si towardgenerosity
tatu-consclous and caringin theirsociety,an
Egyptianmanagertold of how earlyIslamicau-
thoritiesimposeda tax on personalproperty
I -UA USA-Evp
-
I -, -
pro-
I .
Figure 3 portionate to one's wealth and distributed the

USAvs. Egypt revenuesto the needy.This typeof government
90Jvn
2006 Drmn Sully
Javidon, SullIdeLuque,
Dorfman, He
an House
and 81
behaviorlefta certaincultureofdoingbusinessin Given suchculturalunderpinnings, the Amer-

Egyptthathas a strongemphasison harmony with ican managerneedsto do even morethanhe did
the environment, the industry, and the competi- in Brazilto build and maintaingroupharmony.
tion. Many informal and formalmeetingsare needed,
but thereare threeimportantdifferences com-
Whenin Egypt... paredwiththeexperiencein Brazil.First,to Egyp-
Our hypotheticalAmericanmanager will find tians,the teamleaderis morethanjustan exec-
thathis experiencein Egyptwillhave bothsimi- utive;he is a paternalfigurewho will be rather
laritiesanddifferences withhistimein Franceand autocraticbut benign.He caresabout themand
Brazil.First,what the managermayregardas a theirfamilies.The relationship betweenthe boss
normalinformal leadershipstylein the U.S. may and employeesis muchmoreemotionaland per-
be seen as weak and unworthy of a leader.This sonal in Egypt.The Egyptianprojectmanager
manager(typically a male) expectedto act and describedhow he helped one of his employees
is
be seen as distinctfromthe otherson the team who had experiencedsome personaldifficulties.
and presentan image of omnipotence.In the Explainingthattheemployee'sbehaviourwasun-
mindsofhis Egyptianteammembers, he needsto acceptable,the manageradded, "At the same
be seen as deservingof his leadershiprole and time,I triedto understand iftherewereanyper-
status.Addressinghis role as a leader,a project sonal issuesthatforcedhimto behavethewayhe
managerfromEgyptnoted that being a leader did. I feltan obligationto tryto help him."Sec-
broughtwith it greatresponsibility. He was in ondly,due to veryhigh humaneorientationin
chargeofdisciplining anyonethatdid not follow Egypt,ifthefamily ofan employeehas a problem,
the team rules.He noted,"In orderto keep the colleaguesand the bosswill quicklyget involved
teamspiritup and focusedon ourgoals,we can't to help.Takingcare offriendsin need is a major
afford to have individuals deviatingfromwhatwe elementof the cultureand there is verylittle
have setout to do." This is almosttheoppositeof demarcationbetween colleagues and friends.
his experiencein France. Third,it is easierand moreacceptablefortheboss
The Americanmanagerwillalso findthatdue in Brazilto get to knowthe familymembersand
to very strong in-groupcollectivism,various spendtimewiththemduringsocialoccasions.It is
groupsinsideand outsidetheorganization tendto not,however,a good idea forhimto tryto do the
show in-group/out-group phenomenain decision same withEgyptianfamilies.The contactshould
making; i.e., strongparticipationby in-group onlybe withand through theemployee.Egyptian
members, littleparticipation by out-group mem- familiestendto be moreprivateand inaccessible
bers;strongcommunication within-groupmem- to outsiders, possiblydue to the intensein-group
bers, and little communicationwith out-group culture.People tend to stayclose to theirroots
members.The extentto which Egyptianstake and developa verystrongsenseof belonging.In
pridein belongingto certaingroupsis immensely short,even thoughthe Americanmanagerwill
important. Familieshave enduredthroughdiffi- spendtimebuildingpersonaltiesand maintaining
culttimes,requiring manyofthemembers to stay in-grouprelationships both in Egyptand Brazil,
togetherand work together.Familybusinesses thenatureofhis behaviourwillneed to be some-
tendto be passedfromfatherto son withouttoo whatdifferent.
manyexceptions.Maintenanceof the in-group is Like Brazil,the managerneeds to pay his re-
in
paramount any decision. Leaders build their spectsand call on thekeyexecutivesin theEgyp-
legitimacy not necessarily by accomplishing high tianorganization and starttheprocessofbuilding
performance but rather by forging loyalty to the personalrelationships. Unlike the Frenchexecu-
groupand groupvalues.Furthermore, as a resultof tives,theEgyptian executiveswillin all likelihood
relianceon personalrelationships, decision mak- enjoythis approachand respondpositively.
ingcriteriaand processesregarding any aspectof In developinga businessstrategy forthe team,
theorganization tend to be informal and unclear. severalcultural attributesneed to be takeninto
82 Academy
ofManagement
Management
consideration. The teamwill enjoyprovidingin- low with respectto Participativeand relatively

put but theyexpectdecisionsto be made by the high with respectto Self-Protective leadership
leader.Familyrelatedactivitiesare alwayscele- dimensions.
bratedand employees areoftenexcusedfromwork As shownin the Appendix,the US and Chi-
to be able to properly plan suchoccasions.How- nese culturesare similarin termsof theirperfor-
ever,leaders also tend to use thefriendlyenviron- mance orientation,humane orientation,and
mentto maintaintheircontroland buildloyalty powerdistance.The Chinesecultureseemsto be
withintheirworkforce. Egyptianemployeesex- lessfutureoriented,lessassertive,morecollectiv-
pect theirleadersto develop and communicate ist,bothsmallgroupand socially,and morerules
heroic and grandstrategies.Due to theirhigh oriented.
institutional collectivismand performance orien- Figure4 belowshowsthecomparison ofcultur-
tation, it is to
helpful design and communicate ally contingentleadership attributes between
ambitious strategiesandputthemintothebroader Americanand Chinesemanagers. BothAmerican
contextof the corporation. Employeeswill reso- and Chinese managerslike excellenceoriented
nateto ideasthatwouldhelp thecorporation and leaderswho striveforperformance improvement
theunitachieveprominencein theircompetitive in themselves and theirsubordinates.This is prob-
arenas. They also like strongrhetoricand get ablydrivenbythe factthatbothculturessharea
excitedby the desireto be partof the winning strongperformance orientation,as shownin the
team. In termsof the rewardsystem,individual Appendix.They also both like leaderswho are
performance-based financialrewards, whilehelp- honest.However,the figureshowsthat the US
ful,arenotthebestmotivators. The system should scoreson boththeseattributes arehigherthatthe
be seen to be humane to all; it shouldhave a Chinesescores.
stronggroupbasedcomponent, and itshouldcon- Chinesemanagersseemto likeleaderswhoare
sistof a varietyof benefitsthatare not typically fraternaland friendlywiththeirsubordinates and
offeredin the U.S. Such benefitsshouldbe fo- who have an indirectapproachto communica-
cusedon the familiesof employees.Forexample, tion,usingmetaphorsand parablesto communi-
tuitionassistanceto employees'children,paid cate theirpoint.Americanmanagershave a neu-
familyvacation,freeor subsidizedtoysor home tral view of fraternalleadershipand a negative
appliancescould be verywell received.As with view of indirectleadership.The difference can
otherMiddleEastcountries, althoughit is impor-
tantforthe individualto be successful, it is the
or success
Frateral
family group that is more dominant.
China
China is partof the ConfucianAsia cluster.The
twoCLT dimensionscontributing to outstanding
leadership are Charismatic/Value-Based and
Team Oriented leadership,even thoughthese
scoresarenotparticularly high.HumaneOriented
leadership is viewed favorably,but it is not as
important as the firsttwo CLT dimensions.Al-
thoughParticipative leadershipis also viewedpos-
itively,it is about equal to the lowest-scoring
clusters.Autonomousleadershipis viewedneu-
trally,and Self-Protective leadershipis seen as a |- USA * China
slightimpediment to effective
leadership. Table 4
showsthatcomparedto otherGLOBE countries, Figure 4
the ConfucianAsia clusteris rankedrelatively USAvs.China
2006
VL ....l .f
Sullv
Dorfman.
Javidan. andHouse
deLuque.
de u n- 83
probablybe explainedby the factthatthe U.S. verydifferent. They learned that the Chinese
cultureis muchmoreassertiveand less in-group company wanted to use themeetings to helpbuild
orientedthanthatin China (see appendix).In a personalties amongthe Chinese and American
less assertiveculturelike China, people tend to managersand was upsetthatthe Americanswere
use nuancesand a contextrichlanguageto com- asking aggressivequestions and were focused
municate.Theyprefer indirectcommunication to solelyon businessratherthan personalmatters.
avoidthepossibility ofhurting someone.Further- Theyalso learnedthatthetopChineseexecutive
more, in a highlygroup orientedculturelike had no interestin sharingdecisionmakingwith
China, groupharmonyis criticaland the leader's anyone. Instead,he wantedto useprivatelunches
roleis to strengthengroupties.As a result,leaders and dinnerswiththehead oftheAmericandele-
areexpectedto be supportive oftheirsubordinates gationto makeseriousdecisionsand reachagree-
and act as good friendsforthem.They are ex- ments.
pectedto buildemotionalties withtheirgroups Chinese managersare verynegativetowards
and theirrelationships withtheirsubordinates go worldlyleaderswho have a global outlook. In
farbeyondwhatis thenormin a country likethe contrast,Americansadmiresuch leaders.This
U.S. The leaderis seen as a paternalfigurewho could be explainedby the factthatthe two cul-
should take care of his subordinatesand their turesare verydifferent in termsof in groupcol-
families. The Chinesecultureisveryhighon this
lectivism.
Americanmanagers arenotexcitedaboutlead- dimension,which means it is less interestedin
ers who are statusconsciousand are negative anythingoutsideof theirin-group.Perhapsthey
towardsleaderswho are elitist.In contrast,Chi- view the worldas out-group comparedto China
nese managerslike the former typeof leadership and view it as less important.
and are neutraltowardsthe latter.This is reflec-
tiveoftheimportance ofhierarchyin theChinese WheninChina...
culture.Confucianism's 'Three Bonds'-emperor The Chinesecultureis distinctbyitshighperfor-
rulesthe minister,fatherrulesthe son, and hus- manceorientation, highinstitutional orientation,
band rulesthe wife-serve as the foundationof and highin-group collectivism. Buildingpersonal
the Chinesesociety: ties and relationships is reflectedin the Chinese
Chinesebusiness linkedto the
can be directly
conceptof"guanxi" whoseloose Englishtransla-
structure It is a manifestationofthefact
tionis networking.
history theowner
ofpatriarchy: ormanagerplaysthefather's
playtheson.31
oremployees
role,andthesubordinates thatone's value and importanceis embeddedin
his/her tiesand relationships. As a result:
Withinsuch a hierarchicalstructure, the leader In China,theprimary in a leaderor
qualitiesexpected
tendsto be authoritativeand expectsrespectand executiveis someonewho is good at establishingand
obedienceand tendsto make autonomousdeci- nurturingpersonalrelationships,whopracticesbenevo-
sions.That is whyChinese managersdo not ad- lencetowards whoisdignified
hisorhersubordinates, and
mireleaderswho are self-effacing, because such aloofbutsympathetic,andputstheinterestsofhisorher
employees abovehisor herown.32
leadersdo not emanateconfidence.A groupof
Americanmanagerswas recently in China to dis- Much of Chinese life and cultureis based on
cussa possiblejointventurewitha Chinesecom- Confucianideaswhichemphasizethe importance
pany.Americanmanagers expectedto spenda few of relationshipsand community. Even the word
daysworkingwiththeirChinese counterparts to "self'has a negativeconnotation.33
Ourhypothet-
brainstorm ideasand develop action plans.After a ical Americanmanagerneedsto be carefulabout
few frustrating days, they were told that they how his behaviorand mannersare perceivedby
needed to find a Chinese agent to help them theChinese.Beingpolite,considerate,and moral
implementthe deal. In conversationswith the are desirableattributes.At the same time,the
Chinese agent,they learned that the Chinese Americanmanagercan get the Chinese employ-
counterpart'sexpectationfromthe meetingswas ees excitedby engagingtheirhigh performance
84 Academy
ofManagement
Academy Perspedives
Perspectives
Management February
Februory
culture.Developingan excitingvisionis veryef- abouthisownas wellas thehostcountry's culture.

fective.The relativehighscoreon future orienta- Mostoftheadvicethatexecutivesreceiveis about
tion can also help the new managerget the em- how theycan adaptand adjustto othercultures.
ployeesmotivated.But perhapsthe mostcritical We propose a somewhatdifferentapproach.
keysuccessfactoris how the managergoesabout When people fromdifferent culturescome into
buildingpersonalties and relationships with a contact,theyusuallyhave unstatedand some-
widenetwork ofindividuals and groups.His "guan timesfalseor exaggerated stereotypes about the
xi" will be the ultimatetest of his success.In otherside. While it is important thatthe execu-
buildingguanxi withhis employees, he needsto tive learnabout the host culture,it is not suffi-
showhighrespectto theemployees' families,keep cient.Executivesneed to tellthehostemployees
themin mindwhendesigning workschedulesand about theirown cultures.For example,if these
rewardsystems, and makesurethatemployees see executivesare in Egypt,then theyshouldshow
himand the organization as a strongsupporterof the employeeshow the Americanand Egyptian
theirown guanxi. Perhapsa bigchallengeto the culturesand leadershipattributes compare.They
Americanexecutiveis how to makesurehis nat- shouldshowbothsimilarities and differences. In
uralAmericanassertiveness doesnotturnhisChi- thispaper,we showedthatthereis a set of lead-
nese employeesand counterparts offand does not ershipattributes thatareuniversally desirableand
impedehisefforts at buildingstrongrelationships. universallyundesirable.Similaritiesrepresenta
fertilegroundto buildmutualunderstanding. The
informed executivecan then use the sessionto
Embarking on a Cross-cultural discuss their implications.What does integrity
Leadership Journey mean to a Frenchmanager?Or to a Brazilian
The existing literatureon cross-cultural
manage- manager?The executivecan also comparethe
ment is more usefulat the conceptuallevel findings abouthis or her own culturewiththeir
thanat the behaviorallevel.Much of the ad- perceptionsof Americancultureto dispel any
vice offeredto executivestendsto be context-free misunderstandings. This exercisein mappingand
and generalsuch as "understand and respectthe surfacing culturalattributescan go a longwayto
otherculture."But the problemsfacinga typical buildmutualunderstanding and trustbetweenthe
global executive are for
context-specific; example, players. For example, our findingsshow that
how to understand and respectthe Braziliancul- Americancultureis reported to be moremoderate
ture.In behavioralterms,understanding the Bra- on manyculturaldimensions thanit is stereotypi-
zilianculturemaybe quite different fromunder- callybelievedto be. One oftheuniquefeatures of
standing and respecting the Egyptian culture GLOBE is that we have taken several stepsto
becausetheyare verydifferent cultures. ensurethatthe reportsby countrymanagersare
In thispaper,we have presentedthe cultural notconfounded bysuchthingsas methodological
profilesoffourcountriesbasedon a rigorous and problems and representthetruebroadercultureof
scientificresearchproject.We have also provided theirsocieties.
veryspecificideason themanagerialimplications Second, the global managerneeds to think
ofthedifferent culturalprofilesalong with action about how to bridgethe gap betweenthe two
orientedadviceon howan Americanmanager can cultures.Much of the advice executivesreceive
"puthimselfin the otherculture'sshoes"and be seemsto suggest, explicitly or implicitly,thatthe
adaptable.Besides the culturespecificideas pre- executive needs to become more likethem. We do
sentedearlier,we proposea two-step processforany notnecessarily subscribe to thisviewpoint. While
executive who is embarking on a new assignment in it is important to understand the other culture,it
a newcountry. Regardless ofthehostcountry, these does not necessarily mean thatone shouldauto-
two stepshelp build a positivepathway towards matically applytheir approach.Forexample,lead-
culturalunderstanding and adaptability. ers are seen as benignautocratsin Egypt.If an
the
First, executive needs to shareinformation Americanmanagerdoes not like thisapproach,
2006 Dorfman,
Javidan, Sully andHouse
deLuque, house 85
then he should educate the employeeson his U.S are bothhighon performance orientationbut
approachto leadership;whyit is not dictatorial, very differenton in-group collectivism. Furthermore,
and whyhe prefers it.Managersneedto makesure therearesimilarities anddifferences inthecountries'
the employeesunderstand thattheirapproachis leadership profiles.Whilea leadership attribute
like
not a signof weakness,buta moreeffective style irritabilityis universally undesirable, anotherat-
forthe managerand forthe team'sand organiza- tributelikecompassion is culturally contingent, i.e.,
tion's success.It's a judgmentcall to say it's a itismuchmoredesirable in theU.S. thaninFrance.
"moreeffective" stylethanwhatthe teamis used Tolerance of ambiguity is anotherimportant
to,butit is one thattheyshouldemploywiththe attributeof a global leader.Everynew country
team.The global managerneeds to tell the em- thats/hehas to workin represents a newparadigm
ployeeswhatmanagerialfunctions theyare will- and newwaysofdoingthings.This is typically an
ingto change and what team theywould
functions uncomfortable for
position manypeople to be in
liketheemployees to changeso thattheteamcan becauseit requireslearningnew ideasquicklyand
workfrom,and succeedon, commongroundin- lettinggo of what has alreadybeen learned.Of
corporatingboth cultures.The managerthen course,in thefourscenarios, we showedthatthere
needsto seektheirhelp on bothapproaches;i.e., arethingsin commonacrosscultures andthereare
each culturemakingchangesto accommodate and portableaspectsof culturallearning.But we also
strengthen the other. Both approachescan take showedthattherearedifferences as well.Figuring
place at the same timeand withrespectto both outwhichone is whichand whatto do represents
cultures,as longas the managergetsthe employ- potentiallystressful ambiguityto an expatriate
ees involvedin the process.In otherwords,in- manager.
steadofa solitarylearningjourneyforthe execu- Culturaladaptability refers to a manager's abil-
tive, managerscan create a collectivelearning ityto understand otherculturesand behave in a
journeythatcan be enriching,educational,and way that helps achieve goalsand buildstrongand
productive forbothsides. positiverelationswithlocal citizens.In thecoun-
tryscenarios,we showedthatwhilein Francethe
AttributesofGlobalLeaders managershouldnot emphasizegrandand ambi-
e essenceof globalleadershipis the abilityto tiouscorporate strategies, he can do thisin China.
influencepeoplewhoarenotliketheleaderand Culturaladaptability refers to thementaland psy-
come fromdifferent culturalbackgrounds. To chologicalability to move from one situationand
succeed,globalleadersneedto have a globalmind- countryto another.It meansthe abilityto do a
highlevelsofambiguity,
set,tolerate and showcul- good job of developingpersonal relationships
andflexibility.
turaladaptability Thispaperprovides whilein Egyptand thendoingit verydifferently
someexamplesof theseattributes. In contrast to a inFrance.The dexterity to adjustone'sbehaviorisa
domesticmanager,the hypothetical managerdis- criticalrequirement. Not everyone can do this;to
cussedin thispaperneedsa globalmindset because manypeopleit maybringintoquestionone's own
s/heneedsto understand a varietyof culturaland identity. In somewaysitis reminiscent ofactingbut
leadershipparadigms,and legal,politicaland eco- thedifference is thattheglobalmanager, unlikethe
nomic systems, as well as differentcompetitive actor, lives and works among real peopleand not
frameworks.34We usedGLOBE findings to provide otheractors,so his taskis morecomplicated.
a scientifically
based comparisonof culturaland
leadershipparadigmsin the five countries.We Developing GlobalLeaders
showedthat countriescan be different on some As mentioned earlierin thispaper,a largema-
culturaldimensionsandsimilaron others.Braziland jorityof Fortune500 corporationsreporta
Egypt are both on
high in-group collectivism,but shortageof globalleaders.Devisingprograms
differenton performance orientation.Franceand thatwoulddevelopa globalmindsetin leadershas
the U.S. are bothmoderateon uncertainty avoid- been called "the biggestchallengethatloomsin
ance butdiffer on powerdistance.China and the the new millennium forhumanresourcemanag-
86A
86 cadem y ofManagement
of
Perspectives
Management February
February
ers."35There are a varietyof ways that companies helpfulin developingglobal leaders.A recent
can enhancetheirpool of globalleaders.To start surveyshowed that a large majorityof firms
with,theycan makea largevolumeofinformation wereplanningto increasefundingforprograms
on cross-culturaland globalissuesand country spe- that would help globalize their leaders.38But
cificreports availableto theirmanagers. We have despiteitsprevalenceamongmultinational cor-
already referredto several books on thistopic.In porations,thereis generalconsensusamongex-
additionto thespecialissueoftheHumanResource pertsthat it is not a highlyeffectivesourceof
Management Journalmentioned therearespe- developingglobal leaders.39It is generallybest
earlier,
cialissuesofotherjournals.36Therearealsoa variety used as a
componentof a comprehensiveand
of software packagessuch as a multimedia package integrateddevelopmentprogram.Workexperi-
called "Bridging Cultures," a self-training
program ence and internationalassignmentis by farthe
forthosewho willbe livingand working in other
mosteffective sourcefordevelopinggloballead-
cultures.In addition,severalserviceslike Cultur-
ership capabilities.40Some expertsview long
eGrams(www.culturegram.com) provideusefulin- term international
formation aboutmanycountries. Thereare also a assignmentsas the "single
fewInteret sitesproviding usefulinformation to most powerfulexperiencein shapingthe per-
and capabilities of effectiveglobal
managers37 suchas www.contactcga.com belonging spective
to the CenterforGlobal assignments, the CIA leaders."41 Increasingly,companies like GE,
WorldFactBookat www.odci.gov/cia/publications/ Citigroup,Shell, Siemens,and Nokia are using
facxtbook/, and Global DynamicsInc.'s www. international assignments ofhighpotentialem-
globaldynamics.com/expatria.htm. ployees as the means to developtheirmanagers'
Formal education and trainingcan also be global leadershipmindsetand competencies.
Appendix
ScoresonCultural
Country Practices
Performance Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
East Asia
Cultures Confucian Latin
America
Orientation
USA4.49 France4.11 4.27
Egypt 4.45
China 4.04
Brazil
Canada
4.49 Israel
4.08 Kuwait
3.95 Hong
Kong4.80 3.61
Bolivia
4.08
England 3.58
Italy Morocco
3.99 4.22
Japan 3.65
Argentina
4.36
Ireland 3.60
Portugal 3.45
Qatar 4.90
Singapore Colombia
3.94
New 4.72
Zealand 4.01
Spain 3.83
Turkey South
Korea4.55 Costa 4.12
Rica
(W)4.11
Africa
South Swiss 4.25
(French) Taiwan
4.56 4.20
Ecuador
4.36
Australia ElSalvador
3.72
3.81
Guatemala
4.10
Mexico
3.32
Venezuela
Future Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
East Asia
Cultures Confucian America
Latin
Orientation
USA4.15 France3.48 3.86
Egypt China
3.75 Brazil
3.81
4.44
Canada Israel
3.85 3.26
Kuwait Hong
Kong4.03 3.61
Bolivia
4.28
England 3.25
Italy 3.26
Morocco 4.29
Japan 3.08
Argentina
3.98
Ireland 3.71
Portugal 3.78
Qatar 5.07
Singapore 3.27
Colombia
New 3.47
Zealand 3.51
Spain 3.74
Turkey South
Rica
(W)4.13
Africa
South Swiss 4.27
(French) 3.96
Taiwan Ecuador
3.74
4.09
Australia 3.80
ElSalvador
Guatemala
3.24
2006 J ------, SSully
-Javidan,
-1Dorfman
Dorfman, and
deLuque,
d House
a Hos
Luque, 87
Appendix(continued)
Mexico
3.87
Venezuela
3.35
Assertiveness Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
East Asia
Cultures Confucian America
Latin
Orientation
USA4.55 France
4.13 3.91
Egypt China
3.76 4.20
Brazil
Canada
4.05 Israel
4.23 Kuwait
3.63 Hong
Kong4.67 3.79
Bolivia
4.15
England 4.07
Italy 4.52
Morocco 3.59
Japan 4.22
Argentina
Ireland
3.92 3.65
Portugal 4.11
Qatar 4.17
Singapore 4.20
Colombia
NewZealand
3.42 4.42
Spain 4.53
Turkey South
Rica
South
Africa
(W)4.60 Swiss 3.47
(French) Taiwan
3.92 Ecuador
4.09
Australia
4.28 ElSalvador
4.62
Guatemala
3.89
Mexico
4.45
Venezuela
4.33
Societal Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe East
Middle Cultures Confucian
Asia Latin
America
Collectivism
USA4.20 France
3.93 4.50
Egypt 4.77
China Brazil
3.83
Canada
4.38 Israel
4.46 Kuwait
4.49 Hong
Kong4.13 Bolivia
4.04
4.27
England 3.68
Italy Morocco
3.87 5.19
Japan 3.66
Argentina
Ireland
4.63 3.92
Portugal 4.50
Qatar 4.90
Singapore Colombia
3.81
NewZealand
4.81 3.85
Spain 4.03
Turkey South
Korea5.20 Costa
Rica
3.93
Africa
South (W)4.62 Swiss 4.22
(French) 4.59
Taiwan Ecuador
3.90
4.29
Australia 3.71
ElSalvador
Guatemala
3.70
Mexico
4.06
3.96
Venezuela
In-Group Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
EastCultures Confucian
Asia Latin
America
Collectivism
USA4.25 France4.37 5.64
Egypt China
5.80 Brazil
5.18
Canada
4.26 Israel
4.70 Kuwait
5.80 Hong
Kong5.32 Bolivia
5.47
4.08
England 4.94
Italy Morocco
5.87 4.63
Japan 5.51
Argentina
Ireland
5.14 5.51
Portugal 4.71
Qatar 5.64
Singapore Colombia
5.73
NewZealand
3.67 5.45
Spain 5.88
Turkey South
Korea5.54 Costa
Rica
5.32
South
Africa
(W)4.50 Swiss 3.85
(French) Taiwan
5.59 Ecuador
5.81
4.17
5.35
Guatemala
5.63
Mexico
5.71
Venezuela
5.53
Humane Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
Asia Latin
America
Orientation
USA4.17 France
3.40 4.73
Egypt China
4.36 Brazil
3.66
4.49
Canada Israel
4.10 Kuwait
4.52 Hong
Kong3.90 Bolivia
4.05
3.72
England 3.63
Italy Morocco
4.19 4.30
Japan 3.99
Argentina
Ireland
4.96 3.91
Portugal 4.42
Qatar 3.49
Singapore Colombia
3.72
NewZealand
4.32 3.32
Spain 3.94
Turkey South
Korea3.81 Costa
Rica4.39
88 8 8cof-
Academy ae m Perspectives
ofMaaeetPrsDecive
Manoaement IFebruary February
r
Appendix(continued)
South
Africa
(W)3.49 Swiss 3.93
(French) Taiwan
4.11 Ecuador
4.65
Australia
4.28 ElSalvador
3.71
Guatemala
3.89
Mexico
3.98
Venezuela
4.25
Power
Distance Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
East
Cultures Confucian
Asia Latin
America
USA4.88 France5.28 4.92
Egypt China
5.04 Brazil
5.33
Canada
4.82 Israel
4.73 Kuwait
5.12 Hong
Kong 4.96 Bolivia
4.51
5.15
England 5.43
Italy Morocco
5.80 5.11
Japan 5.64
Argentina
Ireland
5.15 5.44
Portugal 4.73
Qatar 4.99
Singapore Colombia
5.56
NewZealand
4.89 5.52
Spain 5.57
Turkey South
Korea 5.61 Costa
Rica
4.74
South
Africa
(W)5.16 Swiss 4.86
(French) Taiwan
5.18 Ecuador
5.60
Australia
4.74 ElSalvador
5.68
Guatemala
5.60
Mexico
5.22
Venezuela
5.40
Gender AngloCultures Latin

Europe Middle
Asia Latin
America
Egalitarianism
USA3.34 France3.64 2.81
Egypt China
3.05 Brazil
3.31
Canada3.70 Israel
3.19 Kuwait
2.58 Hong
Kong 3.47 Bolivia
3.55
3.67
England 3.24
Italy 2.84
Morocco 3.19
Japan 3.49
Argentina
Ireland
3.21 3.66
Portugal 3.63
Qatar 3.70
Singapore Colombia
3.67
New Zealand
3.22 3.01
Spain 2.89
Turkey South
Korea 2.50 Rica
Costa 3.56
SouthAfrica
(W)3.27 Swiss 3.42
(French) Taiwan
3.18 Ecuador
3.07
Australia
3.40 ElSalvador
3.16
Guatemala
3.02
Mexico
3.64
Venezuela
3.62
Uncertainty Cultures
Anglo Latin
Europe Middle
Asia Latin
America
Avoidance
USA4.15 France4.43 4.06
Egypt China
4.94 Brazil
3.60
4.58
Canada Israel
4.01 Kuwait
4.21 Hong
Kong 4.32 Bolivia
3.35
4.65
England 3.79
Italy Morocco
3.65 4.07
Japan 3.65
Argentina
Ireland
4.30 3.91
Portugal 3.99
Qatar 5.31
Singapore Colombia
3.57
NewZealand
4.75 3.97
Spain 3.63
Turkey South
Korea 3.55 Rica
Costa 3.82
South
Africa
(W)4.09 Swiss 4.98
(French) Taiwan
4.34 Ecuador
3.68
4.39
3.62
Guatemala
3.30
4.18
Mexico
3.44
Venezuela
2006 Javidan,
Dorfmon,
Sully
Dorfman,
Javidon, deLuque,
andHouse 89
Endnotes model.HumanResourceManagement Journal, 39, 2&3,

1House,R. 117-131.
J.,Hanges,P. J.,Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorf- 14
Laurent,A. 1983. The culturaldiversity of westerncon-
man, P. W., Javidan,M., Dickson, M., et al. 1999. ceptionsofmanagement. InternationalStudiesofManage-
Cultural influenceson leadershipand organizations: mentand Organization, F.
13(2), 75-96; Trompenaars,
Projectglobe. In W. F. Mobley,M. J. Gessner& V. 1993. Ridingthe waves of culture:Understanding cul-
Arnold(Eds.), Advancesin globalleadership (Vol. 1, pp. turaldiversityin business.London: Breatley;Briscoe,
171-233). Stamford, CT: JAI Press. D. R., & Shuler,R. S. 2004. International humanresource
2 Gregersen, H.B., Morrison,A.J.& J.S. Black. 1998. De- management.2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
velopingleadersforthe global frontier. Sloan Manage- 15Davis,D. D., &
Bryant, J.L. 2003. Influenceat a distance:
mentReview,Fall: 21-32. in virtual teams.In W. H. Mobley&
3 Leadership global
Hollenbeck,G. P., & McCall, M. W. 2003. Competence, P. W. Dorfman(Eds.), Advancesingloballeadership (Vol.
not competencies:Making global executivedevelop- 3, pp. 303-340). Oxford:JAI Press.
mentwork.In W. Mobley& P. Dorfman(Eds.), Ad- 16 Millman, Trade wins: The world'snew
J. tigeron the
vancesingloballeadership (Vol. 3). Oxford:JAI Press. scene isn'tAsian; it'sMexico. Wall Street
4 export Journal,
Black, J.S., Morrison,A. J., & Gergersen,H. B. 1999. p. Al. May 9, 2000.
Globalexplorers: Thenextgeneration ofleaders. New York: 17Smith,P. B., & Peterson,M. F. 1988.
Leadership, organi-
Routledge;Rheinsmith, S. H. 1996.A manager's guideto zationsandculture: An eventmanagement model.London:
globalization.Chicago: Irwin;Osland, J. S. 1995. The Sage.
adventure of working abroad:Hero talesfromtheglobal 18 Smith,P. B. 2003. Leaders'sourcesof
guidanceand the
San Francisco:CA: Jossey-Bass,
frontier. Inc.; Black,J.S., challengeofworking acrosscultures.In W. Mobley& P.
Gergersen, H. B., Mendenhall,M. E., StrohL.K. 1999. Dorfman(Eds.), Advancesingloballeadership (Vol. 3, pp.
Globalizing peoplethrough international
assignments. Read- 167-182). Oxford:JAIPress;Smith,P. B., Dugan,S., &
ing,MA: Addisson-Wesley; Mobley,W. H., & Dorfman, Trompenaars, F. 1996.Nationalcultureand thevaluesof
P. W. 2003. Advancesin globalleadership. In W. H. organizational employees:A dimensionalanalysisacross
Mobley & P. W. Dorfman(Eds.), Advancesin global 43 nations.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 27(2),
(Vol. 3). Oxford:JAI Press.
5 leadership 231-264.
Gergerson,H.B., Morrison,A.J., & Mendenhall,M.E. 19Hazucha,J.F., Hezlett,S. A., Bontems-Wackens, S., &
2000. Guesteditors.HumanResource Management Jour- Ronnqvist. 1999. In search of the Man-
Euro-manager:
nal,39, 2&3. 113-299. agementcompetenciesin France,Germany,Italy,and
6Morrison,A.J. 2000. Developing a global leadership theUnitedStates.In W.H. Mobley,M.J.Gessner& V.
model.HumanResourceManagement Journal, 39, 2&3, Arnold(Eds.), Advancesin globalleadership (Vol. 1, pp.
117-131. 267-290). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
7
Kiedel, R.W. 1995. Seeingorganizational patterns: A new 20 Javidan,M. and D. Carl. 2004. East meetsWest.Journal
and
theory language oforganizationaldesign.San Francisco: ofManagement Studies, 41:4,June,665-691; Javidan,M.
Berrett-Koehler. and Carl,D. 2005. Leadershipacrosscultures: A studyof
8 Pucik,V., & Saba, T. 1997. Selectingand developingthe Canadian and Taiwaneseexecutives,Management Inter-
global versusthe expatriatemanager:A reviewof the nationalReview,45(1), 23-44.
stateof the art.HumanResource Planning, 40-54. 21 House, R. J., Wright,N. S., & Aditya,R. N. 1997.
9
Wills,S. 2001. Developing globalleaders.In P. Kirkbride & Cross-cultural researchon organizational leadership:A
K. Ward (Eds.), Globalization:The internaldynamic. criticalanalysisand a proposedtheory.In P. C. Earley&
Chicester:Wiley,259-284. M. Erez(Eds.), Newperspectives ininternational industrial/
0
Bass, B.M. 1997. Does the Transactional-Transforma- organizational psychology (pp. 535-625). San Francisco:
tional LeadershipParadigmTranscendOrganizational The New LexingtonPress.
and National Boundaries? AmericanPsychologist, 52(2), 22 Chemers,M. M. 1997. An integrative theory ofleadership.
130-139. London:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates;Smith,P. B., &
1
Hofstede,G. 1980.Culture'sconsequences:International Peterson,M. F. 1988. Leadership,organizations and
differencesin work-related values.New BuryPark,CA: culture:An eventmanagement model.London:Sage.
Sage; Hofstede,G. 2001 Culture'sConsequences:Com- 23 Shaw,J.B. (1990). A cognitive categorization modelfor
paringvalues,behaviors,institutions, and organizations thestudyofintercultural management. Academy ofMan-
across nations. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; agement Review,15(4), 626-645.
Trompenaars, F., & Hamden-Turner C. 1998. Riding the 24 Lord,R. G., & Maher,K. J.1991.Leadership andinforma-
wavesofculture. 2nd ed. New York:McGraw-Hill; Kluck- tionprocessing:Linking perceptions and performance (Vol.
hohn,F. R. & Strodtbeck, F. L. 1961.Variations invalue 1). Cambridge,MA: Unwin Hyman.
orientations.
New York:Harper& Row. 25 House,R. J.,Hanges,P. J.,Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dor-
12 House,R.
J.,Hanges,P. J.,Javidan,M., Dorfman, P. W., fman,P. W., Javidan,M., Dickson,M., et al. 1999.
& Gupta,V., & GLOBE Associates.2004. Leadership, Cultural influenceson leadershipand organizations:
cultureand organizations: The globestudyof 62 societies. ProjectGLOBE. In W. F. Mobley,M. J.Gessner& V.
ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Arnold(Eds.), Advancesin globalleadership (Vol. 1, pp.
13
Morrison,A.J. 2000. Developing a global leadership 171-233). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
90 90 Awdemy
ofManagement
Academy PrpcIvsebur
Perspectives
Monogement~~~~~~~ Februory
26
In additionto theaggregated raw(i.e., absolute)scoresfor forit: The complete guideto Chinesethought and culture.
CLTs providedin Table 2, we also computeda response Chicago, IL. PassportBooks.
biascorrectedmeasureas an integral 3
partoftheanalysis Rosen,R. GlobalLiteracies. Simonand Schuster,2000.
We referredto this measure as the relative 34
strategy. Black, J.S., & Gergersen,H.B. 2000. High impact
measurebecauseof a uniqueproperty attributedto this training:Forgingleadersforthe globalfrontier. Human
procedure. These relativeCLT scoresindicatethe rela- Resource Management Journal,39 (2&3), 173-184.
3sOddou,
tive importanceof each CLT leadershipdimension G., Mendenhall,M.E.,& Ritchi,J.B. Leveraging
withina person,culture,or culturecluster.This proce- travelas a tool forgloballeadershipdevelopment. Hu-
durenot onlyremovedtheculturalresponsebiases,but manResource Management Journal,39, 2&3, 159-172.
it also had the advantageof illustratingthe differences 36Dastmalchian, A., & Kabasakal,H. 2001. Guesteditors,
amongtheculturesand theclusters. Alongwithranking specialissueon the MiddleEast,AppliedPsychology: An
the clusterswith absoluteCLT scores,we used this Review.Vol. 50(4); Javidan,M., & House,
International
relativemeasureto comparethe relativeimportance of R. Spring2002 Guesteditors,specialIssueon GLOBE,
each CLT dimensionamongcultures.Rankingof clus- Journal ofWorldBusiness, Vol. 37, No. 1; Peterson,
M. F.,
tersusingbothtypesof scoresare presentedin Table 3. & Hunt,J.G. 1997. Overview:International and cross-
We shouldpointout thatthe correlationbetweenthe culturalleadershipresearch(Part II). Leadership Quar-
absoluteand relativemeasuresis closeto perfect-above 8(4), 339-342.
terly,
.90 forall of theCLT leadershipdimensions. Computa- 37 For moreinformation, see Mendenhall,M.E., & Stahl,
tionalprocedures forthismeasureare detailedin House G. K. Expatriatetrainingand development: Wheredo
et. al, 2004. we go fromhere?HumanResource Management Journal,
27Cullen,J. B. 2002. Multinational management: A strategic 39, 2&3, 251-265.
approach.(2nd ed.). Cincinnati,OH: South-Western 38 Black,J.S., Morrison, A. J.,& Gergersen, H. B. 1999.
ThomsonLearning. Globalexplorers:Thenextgeneration of New York:
leaders.
28
Bossidy,L., & Charan,R. 2002. Execution:Thediscipline Routledge.
ofgetting thingsdone.New York:CrownBusinessBooks. 3( Dodge, B. 1993. Empowerment and the evolutionof
p.103. learning,Education and Training.35(5), 3-10; Sherman,
29 Hallowell,R., Bowen,D., & Knoop,C. 2002. FourSea- S. 1995. How tomorrow's bestleadersare learningtheir
sons goes to Paris,Academyof Management Executive, stuff.
Fortune, 90-106.
16(4), 7-24. 40 Conner,J. Developingthe global leadersof tomorrow.
30 HumanResource 39, 2&3, 147-157.
Hallowell,Ibid. Management Journal,
31Dayal-Gulati,A. 2004. Kelloggon China: Strategies for 41Black,J.S.,Gergersen, H. B., Mendenhall,M. E., Stroh
success,Northwestern University Press. L.K. 1999. Globalizingpeoplethrough international
assign-
32De 2000. TheChinesehavea word ments.Reading,MA: Addisson-Wesley.
Mente,BoyeLafayette.

In The Eye of The Beholder - Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership From Project GLOBE (Javidan) .

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In The Eye of The Beholder - Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership From Project GLOBE (Javidan) .

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In the Eye of the Beholder: Cross Cultural Lessons in Leadership from Project GLOBE

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

How can companiesbestuse the availablein- shortly,people in different countriesdo in fact

cultures.Beforeturningto our hypotheticalsce- parsimoniousset of ten cultureclusters(list pro-

In-GroupCollectivism.The degreeto whichin- respectto the nine culturedimensions(e.g.,per-

try.Titus Lokananta,forexample,is an Indone- ese, and Iranian managersin termsof their

leadershiptheory(ILT) as culturally endorsedim-emphasizeseffective teambuildingand imple-

and clusters(i.e., 10 groupsconsistingof the 62 Cross-cultural Is NotOnly

gentviewson manyaspectsof leadershipeffec- underwaybyGLOBE teammembers isfocusedon

managersprefera less cautiousapproachand a

greater degreeofrisktaking.In contrast, Brazilian

FederalDepartment ofRoadsin Brazilrealizedthis it seemsto be rootedin the fact that Brazilis

Americanemployeesare. At the same time,the uncertainty avoidance. Althoughboth cultures

thefirsttwodimensions. HumaneOrientedlead- 6- - I -. Inta-group conflict avolder

ership is viewed as slightly positive,whereasAu- 5 _-- -/

tonomousleadershipis viewedas slightly negative

among the lowest scoring clusters.

French and American leadershipon culturally |-- USA - France|

contingent leadershipattributes. The Frenchcul-

Americanmanagers seemto have a strongpref- denote lack of characterfromthe followers. He

theysee clearindividualbenefitin implementing selvesand micromanage theiremployees. Theydo

publiclyand criticizea popularbelief.They tend

Figure 3 portionate to one's wealth and distributed the

behaviorlefta certaincultureofdoingbusinessin Given suchculturalunderpinnings, the Amer-

consideration. The teamwill enjoyprovidingin- low with respectto Participativeand relatively

culture.Developingan excitingvisionis veryef- abouthisownas wellas thehostcountry's culture.

Gender AngloCultures Latin

Endnotes model.HumanResourceManagement Journal, 39, 2&3,

You might also like