Assessment item 2leadership.docx
- 文档编号:23827487
- 上传时间:2023-05-21
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:13
- 大小:23.74KB
Assessment item 2leadership.docx
《Assessment item 2leadership.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Assessment item 2leadership.docx(13页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
Assessmentitem2leadership
ExclusiveSummary
Thisstudywilldiscussandcomparethebothofexpectedleadershipstylesontwoculturesandculturalvaluesofemployeeswithintwocountries,TaiwanandtheUnitedStates.Thepurposeofthisstudyistodemonstratethatbothnationalcultureandleadershipstyles,whichbothsimilaritiesanddifferenceshaveahighuncertaintyavoidancevalueandpreferthedemocraticleadershipdecision-makingstyle,andthetask-orientedleadershipconflictmanagementstyle.Ontheotherhand,understandingtheinfluenceofnationalcultureonleadershipbehaviorswouldbeavaluablecontributiontothetheoryofTransformationalleadershipaswell.Therefore,thisresearchalsodescribeshowtheeffectivenessoftransformationalleadershipmayvarydependingontheculturalvaluesandthecross-culturesetting.
Content
Executivesummary1
TableofContents2
1.Introduction3-4
2.Nationalcultureandleadershipstyles5
3.RelationshipsamongLeadership,FollowershipandCulture6-8
4.LeadershipcommunicationstylesintheDecision-makingProcess--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9-10
5.CultureandConflictManagementstyles11-12
6.TheeffectivenessofTransformationalLeadership13-14
7.Transformationalleadershipinacross-culturesetting15-16
8.Conclusion17
9.Reference18-20
Introduction
Leadershipisoneofthemostcloselyexaminedtopicsinthefieldsoforganizationalcommunication,appliedpsychologyandmanagement.Consequently,manyleadershiptheorieshavebeengenerated,butmostofthesetheoriesweredevelopedfromtheperspectiveofNorthAmericanculture.AccordingtoHofstede(1984)said:
“Americantheoriesofleadershiphavebeenwidelyexportedtoallpartsoftheworld,inanormativeway,withoutculturalprovisos”(p.258).AndHofstede(2001:
463)alsokeeparguingthattherehasbeenaltogethertoomuchrelianceoneAmerican-mademanagementandtheoriesforcountriesinwhichneithersocietalconditionsnorthementalprogrammingofthepopulationweresimilartothoseintheUnitedStatesinthepast30years.
Themainpurposeofthisstudywastocompareexpectedleadershipstylesontwocultures,TaiwanandUnitedStates.TaiwanandtheUnitedStateswerechosenforcomparisonbecauseprevioustheoriesandstudiesimpliedthatthesetwoculturesdiffergreatly.Hall(1981:
123)categorizedculturesaseitherhighorlowcontext.Accordingtohiscategorization,mostAsianculturesarehighcontextculturesandAmericancultureisalowcontextculture.Inhighcontextcultures,peopletendtouseindirectstrategies(suchashints)tocommunicatewitheachother,whileinlowcontextcultures,peopletendtodirectlyexpresstheiropinionsandfeelings.Inaddition,Hofstede’s(1984;2001)studiesdemonstratedthatTaiwanandtheUnitedStatescontrastgreatlyinwork-relatedculturalvalues.Accordingtothisconceptualization,Americancultureisahighindividualisticandmediumpowerdistancesculture,whereasChinesecultureisahighcollectivisticandhighpowerdistanceculture.Chenandchung(1994:
93)alsoarguedthatConfucianismaffectsAsianpeople’sorganizationalcommunicationbehaviors.Yet,veryfewstudieshavequantitativelyexaminedConfucianism’simpactonorganizationalcommunication.Thus,sincepreviousstudiessuggestedthatTaiwanandUnitedStateshavedifferentwork-relatedculturalvalues,itwouldbemeaningfultocomparethedifferencesinexpectedleadershipstylesbetweenthesetwocultures.
2.Nationalcultureandleadershipstyles
Leadershipisacomplicatedphenomenonandcanbedefinedinavarietyofdifferentways.Afterreviewingmanyleadershipliteratures,Yukl(1998:
2)categorizedthedefinitionsofleadership.Henotedthatleadershiphasbeendefinedintermsoftraitsbehavior,influence,interactionpatterns,rolerelationshipsandoccupationofanadministrativeposition.AccordingtoYukl(2002:
7),‘leadershipistheprocessofinfluencingotherstounderstandandagreeaboutwhatneedstobedoneandhowitcanbedoneeffectivelyandtheprocessoffacilitatingindividualandcollectiveeffortstoaccomplishthesharedobjectives’.Therefore,leadershipcontributessignificantlyinthesuccessandfailureofanorganization.Yukl(2002:
16)hasclearlydefinedleaders’rolesandresponsibilitiesandrevealedtheimportanceofleadershipeffectivenessinorganizations.Followinghisdefinition,Leadersshouldplaymultipleorganizationalroles,includingdecision-making,conflict-resolutionandinterpersonalcommunicationrolesinorganizations.Leadershipeffectivenessis,thus,themostimportantfactorthataffectsorganizationalperformance.However,howleadershipcaneffectivenessbeevaluatedinorganizations.Thefollowingsectionbrieflyreviewstheliteratureinthisarea.
3.RelationshipsamongLeadership,FollowershipandCulture
Similartodefinitionsofleadership,differentresearcheshaveproposeddifferentcriteriaforevaluatingleadereffectiveness.AccordingtoYukl(2002:
38),afollower’sattitudetowardsaleaderisacommonindicatorofleadereffectiveness.Hofstede(2001)alsodiscussedtherelationshipsamongleadership,followershipandculture.AccordingtoHofstede(2001:
388)pointoutleadershipandfollowershipareinseparable…ideasaboutleadershipreflectthedominantcultureofacountry.BaseonHofstede(1984)proposedfourculturaldimensions:
powerdistance,uncertaintyavoidance,individualism-collectivismandmasculinity-femininity.
Theamountofpowerdistancewillaffecttheopennessofupwardcommunicationinanorganization.Inahighpowerdistanceculture,employeesareafraidofexpressingtheiropinionstotheirsupervisorsandexpecttheirsuperiorstoactautocratically.Forexample,firmsinSouthKoreaandChinesefirmsinTaiwantendtobeownedbyfoundersandfamilies.Theytendtobepaternalistic,promotevaluesofhighpowerdistanceandcollectivism,andhavebureaucraticcontrolandcentralizeddecisionmakingwithlittleworkerempowerment.Promotionisoftenassociatedwithfamilytiesandnetworksorrelationship(Chen,2002;ElKahal,2002;Somers,1995).Bycontrast,Westernfirmstendtobeownedbypublicshareholderandrunbyaprofessionalmanager.Theyareflatterinstructure,lessbureaucratic,promoteindividualism,decentralizeddecisionmakingandmoreempoweringtotheirworkers.(Chen,2002;Elkahal,2002).Therearesignificantdifferencesinnationalculturecharacteristicsbetweentheeasternandwestern(Chen,2002;Hofstede,1990).Forexample,theexistenceofhighpowerdistancevaluesandabureaucraticcultureinChinesefirmsoriswellacknowledged(Chen,2002).SinceorganizationsinHongKongaremainlymanagedbyethnicChinese,theirrelativehighpowerdistancepreferenceandConfucianvaluescanmakesignificantinfluenceontheorganizationalculture.Confucianvaluesareoftenassociatedwithobedience,respectofauthorityandloyalty.
Uncertaintyavoidancemeasurestheabilityofhumanstocopewithuncertainty.Theretendtobemorewrittenrulesandregulationsinhighuncertaintyavoidancecultures.Individualismreferstohowpeoplevaluethemselvesandtheirgroups/organizations.Peoplewithhighindividualisticvaluestendtocareaboutself-actualizationandcareerprogress,whereaspeoplewithlowindividualisticvaluestendtovalueorganizationalbenefitsmorethantheirowninterests.Masculinity(MAS)definesthegenderrolesinorganizations.InhighMASorganizationsorcultures,veryfewwomencanattainhigher-levelandbetter-paidjobs.InlowMASorganizations,womencanachieveanorganizationalstatusmoreequaltomen’s.Hofstede’sworks(1984,2001)havesuggestedtherelevanceoftheseculturalvalueswhenstudyingmanagementandleadershipbehaviorworldwide.Forinstance,WuandStewart(2005)conductedanempiricalstudytoexploretherelationshipbetweenwork-relatedculturalvaluesandexpectedleadershipstylesinTaiwanandtheUnitedStates.TheresultsoftheirstudydemonstratedthatallofHofstede’s(1984;1990;2001)work-relatedculturalvaluesaresignificantlycorrelatedwithfollowers’expectedleadershipstyles.Forexample,powerdistance,masculinityandcollectivismallpositivelycorrelatedwithauthoritarianleadershipdecision-makingstyle.Uncertaintyavoidanceispositivelycorrelatedwithdemocraticleadershipcommunicationstyle(Wu&Stewart,2005).WuandStewart’s(2005)studygainmoreinsightsintothesimilaritiesanddifferencesofculturalvaluesandleadershipexpectationsbetweentwospecificnationalcultures,TaiwanandtheUnitedStates.Specifically,thisstudyinvestigatesculturalimpactsonfollowers’expectedleadershipdecision-makingstylesandleadershipconflict-managementstyles.
4.LeadershipcommunicationstylesintheDecision-makingProcess
Decision-makingandinterpersonalcommunicationisimportantaspectsofmanagerialrolesinorganizations.AccordingtoHackmanandJohnson(1996:
32)pointoutaleader’scommunicationstylemayreflectaphilosophicalbeliefabouthumannatureormaysimplybeastrategydesignedtomaximizeoutcomesinagivensituation.Theyalsocomparedtwotypesofleadershipcommunicationstyles,calledauthoritariananddemocraticleadershipcommunicationstyles.Authoritarianleaderssetgoalsandmakedecisionsindividually,whereasdemocraticleadersinvolvefollowersingoalsettinganddecisionmaking.Authoritarianleadersprimarilyengageinone-way,downwardcommunication.Onthecontrary,democraticleadersengageintwo-way,opencommunicationwiththeirfollowers.
Previousresearch,accordingtoHofsted,(1984;2001)hassuggestedthatfollower
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- Assessment item leadership