Individualism and collectivism

In this study, we examined the validity of the measurement model and factor structure of Bass and Avolio’s Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Form 5X). We hypothesized that evaluations of leadership—and hence the psychometric properties of leadership instruments—may be affected by the context in which leadership is observed and evaluated. Using largely homogenous business samples consisting of 2279 pooled male and 1089 pooled female raters who evaluated same-gender leaders, we found support for the nine-factor leadership model proposed by Bass and Avolio. The model was configurally and partially metrically invariant—suggesting that the same constructs were validly measured in the male and female groups. Mean differences were found between the male and female samples on four leadership factors (Study 1). Next, using factor-level data of 18 independently gathered samples (N=6525 raters) clustered into prototypically homogenous contexts, we tested the nine-factor model and found it was stable (i.e., fully invariant) within homogenous contexts (Study 2). The contextual factors comprised environmental risk, leader–follower gender, and leader hierarchical level. Implications for use of the MLQ and nine-factor model are discussed.

/pdf/context-and-leadership-an-examination-of-the-nine-factor-1jdmdo3ngs.pdf

Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.

Top Management Leadership and Influence on Innovation: The Role of Sociocultural Context

This paper compares the Uncertainty Avoidance (UA) dimension of national culture across the Hofstede and GLOBE models, looking at relationships in both data and analysis. Rather than mutual support, we detail major differences and anomalies across the studies. We show how these anomalies are resulting in contradictory explanations in research on national differences across a range of individual-, firm- and country-level phenomena. We clarify the UA measurement in both Hofstede and GLOBE, and find that the two models are measuring different components of the UA construct. We propose a two-component model of UA, namely, UA-stress and UA-rule orientation, and confirm its validity with national culture data from the Hofstede and GLOBE studies, and economic data from the World Bank. We also explain the negative GLOBE UA practices–values relationship using motivational theories. A way forward in future UA-related research is suggested. The Hofstede UA index, the GLOBE UA practices scores and the GLOBE UA values scores should be used within the specific domains that they represent: that is, stress, rule orientation practices and rule orientation aspirations, respectively. Resolving the contradictions in UA between and within Hofstede and GLOBE will help cross-cultural researchers develop more robust theories and more practical recommendations for international business management.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fjibs.2009.96.pdf

Avoiding uncertainty in Hofstede and GLOBE

Goals-in-use of successful businesspersons were rated by over 1,800 junior managers and professionals, attending evening MBA courses at local universities in 15 countries. A hierarchical cluster analysis of perceived goals divided the countries into seven clusters. The relative ordering of goals within these clusters suggested seven different archetypal business leader roles. Perceptions correlated significantly with national wealth, as well as with dimensions of national culture.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fpalgrave.jibs.8491044.pdf

What Goals Do Business Leaders Pursue? A Study in Fifteen Countries

Different cultural groups may have different conceptions of what leadership should entail, i.e. different leadership prototypes. Several earlier studies revealed that within Europe various cultural clusters can be distinguished (Hofstede, 1991; Ronen & Shenkar, 1985). Using recent data from the GLOBE project, this article discusses similarities and differences on culture and leadership dimensions among 21 European countries. The results show that two broad clusters or patterns of cultural values can be distinguished, contrasting the North-Western and South-Eastern part of Europe. Within these clusters, differences in leadership prototypes to a certain extent mirror differences in culture. On the basis of these results it is hardly possible to speak of a single typically European culture or one distinct European management style. However, on some dimensions European scores are different from at least some other regions in the world.

/pdf/national-culture-and-leadership-profiles-in-europe-some-20af6t459i.pdf

R. Jorbenadse

Papers

National Culture and Leadership Profiles in Europe: Some Results From the GLOBE Study