According to the GLOBE project a country low on humane orientation values
|
The GLOBE Anglo cluster is comprised of Australia, Canada (English speaking), New Zealand, Ireland, England, South Africa (White sample), and the United States of America. The societies belonging to this cluster reflect relatively high scores of the societal cultural practices dimension of Performance Orientation. Countries in this cluster reward high performance and value competitiveness. On the cultural dimension of In-Group Collectivism the cluster is relatively low compared to other clusters, signifying its well-known propensity for individualistic behavior. The Institutional Collectivism score is medium, but it is higher than the average among other clusters. This dimension reflects a society’s more collective distribution of resources and the importance of group cohesion. The other societal culture dimensions including Assertiveness, Future Orientation, Uncertainty Avoidance and Humane Orientation are rated in the middle range )for these cultural practices). Power Distance, or the degree to which the community accepts and endorses authority, power differentials, status privileges, and social inequality, is also rated in the middle range, although it is relatively low compared to the average of the country clusters. These results indicate that Anglo societies are traditionally performance oriented with limited cohesiveness within organizations or families. It is male dominated, as are all societies, but average in comparison to the other country clusters. The acceptance of power differences and status privileges is on the low end compared to the average among country clusters. Show As for societal values (indicating a society’s belief as to what should be), the Anglo cluster desires much more Performance Orientation, Humane Orientation, Future Orientation, Gender Egalitarianism, and In-Group Collectivism. In fact, in comparison to other culture clusters, it is among the highest cluster desiring more gender equity. While its desire for Institutional Collectivism (i.e., collective efforts and distribution of resources) is on par with what presently exists, it is in the lower range in comparison to other clusters. It also desires less Uncertainty Avoidance indicating a wish for less rules and procedures to reduce uncertainty in events. These results reveal that Anglo societies would ideally like to see a trend toward greater gender equality, less power stratification and more future and higher performance orientation. Countries in this cluster also desire a more humane society. In the Anglo cluster, leadership dimensions viewed as contributing the most to outstanding leadership include Charismatic/Value-Based, Team-Oriented, and Participative Leadership. The Charismatic/Value-Based score of the Anglo cluster is the highest of all of the GLOBE clusters. It should be clarified that the GLOBE endorsement of charismatic leadership reflects a leader who creates a desirable and realistic vision, who has high performance expectations, is decisive, and has high integrity. Interestingly, the endorsement of Participative Leadership Dimension score is among the higher end of the ranks for the clusters. This indicates that in general, leaders in this country cluster are likely to encourage employees to contribute to decision making and implementation. Humane-Oriented Leadership, on the other hand, is only considered a moderate facilitator of outstanding leadership but its score is actually higher than the average cluster score among all clusters. Regarding the other dimensions, the Autonomous Leadership score reflects a general neutral view of autonomous leadership and is roughly average in comparison to other cluster rankings. The Anglo societies view Self- Protective behaviors among leaders negatively, and the cluster is ranked very low on Self-Protective leadership. This indicates that status conscious, face-saving, and self-centered attributes are believed to strongly inhibit outstanding leadership. Overall, the rankings indicate that an outstanding leader for this cluster would be one who is highly charismatic, team oriented and participative, and is able to provide inspiration, vision, and encouragement of high performance while creating outstanding teams. It is important for leaders in this cluster to value freedom, delegate responsibility, and include all relevant parties in the decision-making process. Similar to Hofstede, the GLOBE researchers uncovered nine cultural dimensions. However, basing their work on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, it is not surprising to note that five of these dimensions are similar to those uncovered by Hofstede, namely 1) uncertainty avoidance, 2) power distance, 3) future orientation (degree to which society values the long term) 4) assertiveness orientation (masculinity), 5) gender egalitarianism (femininity), 6) institutional, and 7) societal collectivism (similar to individualism/collectivism). The only two cultural dimensions unique to the GLOBE project are performance orientation (degree to which societies emphasize performance and achievement) and humane orientation (extent to which societies places importance on fairness, altruism, and caring). Similar to Hofstede, the GLOBE researchers categorized countries into clusters of countries with similar cultural characteristics. This categorization provides a convenient way to summarize cultural information for a larger number of countries and simplifies the task of the international manager attempting to manage effectively in countries within clusters. Because the clusters include societies with similar cultural profiles, similar cultural adaptations can be made. Although the GLOBE study identified ten clusters, we will discuss only the seven clusters most relevant for international managers: the Anglo cluster, the Confucian Asia cluster, the Germanic Europe cluster, the Nordic Europe cluster, the Latin America cluster, the Middle East cluster, and the sub-Saharan cluster. shows these various clusters and the countries in each cluster. Country ClustersAngloConfucian AsiaGermanic EuropeLatin AmericaNordic EuropeMiddle EastSub-Saharan AfricaBased on Dorfman, P., Paul J. Hanges, and F. C. Brodbeck. 2004. “Leadership and cultural variation: The identification of culturally endorsed leadership profiles.” In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, and V. Gupta, eds. Culture, Leadership, and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 669–720. Australia Canada Ireland New Zealand South Africa (White) United Kingdom United States China Hong Kong Japan Singapore South Korea Taiwan Austria Switzerland Netherlands Germany (former East) Germany (former West) Argentina Bolivia Brazil Colombia Costa Rica El Salvador Guatemala Mexico Venezuela Denmark Finland Sweden Qatar Morocco Turkey Egypt Kuwait Namibia Nigeria South Africa (Black) Zambia Zimbabwe Table 6.6 To compare how the different clusters rate different forms of leadership, the GLOBE researchers considered six leadership profiles:
shows how the various clusters rank these leadership types. Country Clusters and Preferred Leadership StylesLeadership StyleAngloConfucian AsiaGermanic EuropeLatin AmericaMiddle EastNordic EuropeSub-Saharan AfricaBased on Dorfman, P., Paul J. Hanges, and F. C. Brodbeck. 2004. “Leadership and cultural variation: The identification of culturally endorsed leadership profiles.” In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, and V. Gupta, eds. Culture, Leadership, and Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 669–720.CharismaticHighMediumHighHighLowHighMediumTeam-orientedMediumMedium/HighMedium/LowHighLowMediumMediumParticipativeHighLowHighMediumLowHighHighHumane-orientedHighMedium/HighMediumMediumMediumLowMediumAutonomousMediumMediumHighLowMediumMediumLowSelf-protectiveLowHighLowMedium/HighHighLowMedium Table 6.7 provides further insights to understand how cultural differences affect preferences for leadership styles.9 Consider, for example, the Nordic Europe cluster, including Scandinavian countries such as Denmark, Finland, and Sweden. These countries have low levels of masculinity, low levels of power, and high individualism. It is therefore not surprising to see that individuals in such societies prefer leaders who are more charismatic and who demonstrate participative leadership tendencies. The least preferred style for this cluster is the self-protective leader, which is more representative of individualist cultures. Countries in the Latin American cluster (which includes some of the emerging markets of Argentina, Mexico, and Brazil) tend to be more collective, have high power distance, and have high uncertainty avoidance. It is therefore not surprising that leaders who are successful in this cluster are those who make decisions collectively, who treat their subordinates with formality, and who display charisma. The countries in the Middle East cluster (which includes countries such as Egypt, Morocco, and Turkey) tend to score high on uncertainty avoidance, high on collectivism, and medium on power distance. As a result, because of the high levels of uncertainty avoidance, subordinates are often reluctant to make decisions that involve risk, thereby explaining the high ranking for autonomous leadership style. Thus, it is not surprising that the Middle East cluster prefers leaders who are less participative. Furthermore, the preferred leadership style in this cluster behaves in a collective manner and tries to maintain harmony because of the high level of collectivism. Although there are cultural differences between clusters, it is important to see that the clusters do share some similarities. For example, the charismatic leadership style is preferred in all clusters except the Middle East cluster. In addition, shows that the humane-oriented leadership style is preferred in all but the Nordic Europe cluster. In contrast, leadership styles based on individualist tendencies, such as the autonomous and the self-protective types, tend to be least preferred. Traits and Behaviors That Are Universally Admired and DislikedBased on Den Hartog, Deanne N., Robert J. House, Paul J. Hanges, Peter W. Dorfman, S. Antonio Ruiz-Quintanna, and 170 associates. 1999. “Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed?” Leadership Quarterly, 10, 219–256.Positively-Regarded Traits and Behaviors across the WorldTrustworthyDependableIntelligentJustHonestDecisivePlans aheadEffective bargainerEncouragingWin-win problem solverPositiveSkilled administratorDynamicCommunicatorMotivatorInformedConfidence builderTeam builderNegatively-Regarded Traits and Behaviors across the WorldLonerEgocentricAntisocial[what does this mean? is it different from antisocial?RuthlessNot cooperativeDictatorialNonexplicit Table 6.8 The GLOBE team also found that a number of traits, such as being honest, trustworthy, positive, and dynamic, were viewed positively worldwide and were endorsed irrespective of national culture. Similarly, leadership behaviors such as being a loner, egocentric, and dictatorial were viewed in a negative light by all clusters. shows which traits are viewed as positive and which are viewed as negative by the various clusters. SummaryIn this section, we have learned about the various tools that managers can use to understand and prepare for cross-national differences and how they impact behaviors of employees across multinational corporations. We’ve also seen that there are many similarities among cultures. Relying solely on such frameworks to understand a culture can be misleading, however. In the next section, we discuss some of the dangers of cultural stereotyping and examine the need to be cautious and to take into account the interaction between a nation’s culture and its social institutions. Concept Check
Managing ChangeNegotiations in Malaysia and ChinaYou are a rising star in your company, and your CEO asks you to accept an exciting and promising assignment in Malaysia and China, during which you will meet with representatives of your company’s local affiliates. In Malaysia, you are introduced to the company executives in a flashy ceremony. You understand that the affiliate’s CEO is named Roger, and you have a great time socializing with him. You even decide to show your fondness for him by calling him “Rog.” However, later you find that your host’s name is actually Rajah. After your trip to Malaysia, you go to China. You are welcomed lavishly by the local affiliate’s executives and are invited to several important meals. Over the next few days, you seem to be spending time mostly at lunches or dinners. Whenever you try to discuss specifics of your products, you find that your hosts are more interested in eating and drinking. You attempt to provide your hosts with contracts that your company has drafted, but you are not successful. Despite your reservations, you return home feeling strongly about your efforts. However, your CEO soon asks to meet with you. During the meeting, she mentions that neither the Malaysian company nor the Chinese company is interested in doing further business with your company. In fact, both companies decide to go with competitors. The CEO wants to know what happened, and you need to figure out what went wrong. What is low humane orientation?LOW HUMANE ORIENTATION societies have characteristics such as... One's own self-interest is important. People are motivated primarily by a need for power and material possessions. The state provides social and economic support for individuals' well-being. Child labor is an issue of low importance.
When a country has a humane orientation its people?Humane Orientation refers to the degree to which members of a society are fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring and kind to others.
What does high humane orientation mean?Humane Orientation. The extent to which being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous caring, and kind to others is encouraged and rewarded by members of a collective.
Which countries score high and low in performance orientation?Performance Orientation.
The United States and European countries have high performance orientations; Argentina, Russia, and Greece have low performance orientations.
|
