In 1980, Geert Hofstede, in an article challenging the assumption that American management theories apply in cross-cultural settings, noted that the “first U.S. book about the cultural relativity of U.S. management theories is still to be written.” His landmark study on cultural differences in management practices (G. H. Hofstede, 1980) had just been published. But most American managers and leaders continued to proceed on the parochial assumption that the wisdom of American management literature represented the one best approach that could be offered to leaders worldwide. Over the years this notion has been thoroughly challenged by cross-cultural researchers. The work of Hofstede led to further investigations of cultural management practices and values. What many of these studies had in common was the notion that there were culture dimensions that could be compared from culture to culture (Adler, 2002; Lewis, 1996; Schwartz, 1999; Trompenaars, 1998). The most ambitious of all cross-cultural leadership studies, however, is the so-called GLOBE study, a collaborative research endeavor that according to the Hong Kong scholar Kwok Leung may very well “go down in the history of management research as a hallmark for diversity, inclusiveness, richness, and multilateralism” (xvi). Culture and Leadership, Across the World is the second volume of the GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) research project. This volume presents the results of GLOBE’s Phase 3, which consisted of an in-depth description of culture and leadership in 25 of the 62 countries studied by the GLOBE project. The results of Phase 1 (the development and validation of the research methods) and Phase 2 (the description of culture and leadership factors in 62 countries) were reported in the 818-page book Culture, Leadership, and Organizations (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004), which was reviewed by Thom Wolf in the first issue of this journal (2006).
The present volume contains 28 chapters, written by 57 authors, in 1162 (xxxi) pages, including 61 pages of index. The first two chapters are introductory, followed by 25 country chapters, and a concluding chapter integrating the rich findings of the volumes that readers will find particularly enlightening. In chapter 1, which serves as a general introduction to the GLOBE project, its purpose, structure, history, and methodology, the authors defend the need of a country-specific (emic) approach to leadership and culture and define the main constructs of culture, organizational practices, and leadership.
The GLOBE project approaches culture in terms of nine quantitative dimensions: (1) Assertiveness, (2) Future Orientation, (3) Gender Egalitarianism, (4) Humane Orientation, (5) Institutional Collectivism, (6) In-Group Collectivism, (7) Performance Orientation, (8) Power Distance, and (9) Uncertainty Avoidance. One contribution of the GLOBE project has been to measure culture variables not only on the practice and manifestation (“as is”) level, but also on the level of values, beliefs, and implicit theories (“should be,” cf. McClelland, 1985). Furthermore, GLOBE distinguishes two units of analysis: organizations and societies. The operational definition of leadership in the GLOBE study is “the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members” (p. 6). Thus GLOBE focuses on organizational leadership, not leadership in general.
In chapter 2 the authors first discuss the methodology of the GLOBE project as a whole, and then describe the specific methodology of the country chapters integrating both quantitative and qualitative methods, such as focus groups, ethnographic interviews, media analysis, as well as unobtrusive measures and participant observation data from the country co-investigators (CCIs). As a result the country chapters not only contain information that allowed the researchers to compare and rank the countries on the culture dimension level, but also develop rich country-specific (emic) descriptions of how leadership typically manifests itself in a country. These in-depth leadership portraits make this book an enormously useful volume for leaders of international organizations or multicultural institutions because they give insights not found at the level of the country general (etic) leadership dimensions.
The 25 country chapters are arranged in 10 clusters of countries based on unique patterns of societal and organizational characteristics. They are listed in Table 1. Each chapter follows a common format, moving from general facts about the country (demographics, economy, government, etc.) to a brief historical sketch and finally a more extensive picture of any cultural features that allows the readers to catch a glimpse of the unique character of leadership in this context. Thus we learn (not surprisingly) that Switzerland employs about twice as many people in the banking sector as Italy, France, and Great Britain, and that it derives about half of its foreign trade from the banks. Some readers may find it interesting to analyze the placement of certain “boundary-spanning” countries which seem to defy easy classification. The Netherlands, for instance, are found in the Germanic section even though it shares certain characteristics also with the Nordic and Anglo clusters. If you look for Turkey, go to the Middle East cluster, while Israel is found in the Latin European cluster.
Each chapter then reports the results of the nine GLOBE culture dimensions, providing many examples helpful for a better understanding of the scores, such as for instance the representation of women in organizations and society. One example of a culture dimension reported is Future Orientation. What I found remarkable was that Switzerland ranked second in the “As Is” score for this dimension with a Mean score of 4.73, which is remarkably close to its “Should Be” value of 4.79, a score that makes its comparative rank drop to 59 out of 61. Evidently there are many countries aspiring to be forward-looking in their leadership practices, but Switzerland actually seems to achieve it. The authors note that religious roots, particularly the Calvinist influence in part of the population, which gets translated into a strong work ethic, and the legendary Swiss thriftiness may be one explanation for this near convergence of Swiss aspirations and reality in Future Orientation.
Table 1: GLOBE Society/Culture Clusters
Is it really possible to describe what can be considered manifestations of a typical Indian manager “(a) common to the entire country without exception and (b) unique to the country insofar as these are not found in other societies” (p. 991)? The authors are cautious in their optimism that this can be done in useful ways. Thus I found it refreshing to discover a certain tentativeness with which authors approached their task of describing culture-specific factors. Yet their familiarity with the culture seemed to allow them to highlight aspects that can help cross-cultural managers and researchers approach each country with greater depth. Thus, each chapter is a goldmine of interesting details about how leaders approach their task, some of them pointing to the need for understanding specific worldview issues and possibly careful preparation for cross-cultural projects. One worldview issue that shows up in several countries is the prevalence of spirit and luck factors. In the chapter on India, you will notice the authors’ stress on the role of astrology in determining appropriate dates and times to under- take some important activities. Most Western leaders shaped by hundreds of years of Enlightenment worldview and secularized Christian notions will find themselves rather uncomfortable in such settings. Another aspect I found rather fascinating is the fact that some of the Nordic countries and Switzerland are rather suspicious of the very notion of leadership.
This discussion of the culture variables is usually followed by a description of the implicit leadership model present in the country among middle managers by listing the scores on 21 leadership variables that can be grouped into 6 (second-order) leadership dimensions: (1) Autonomous, (2) Charismatic, (3) Humane, (4) Participative, (5) Self- protective, and (6) Team oriented leadership. While the listed scores allow for a certain comparison with other countries, it is the additional information derived from multiple qualitative sources that allow a rich tapestry of cultural threads to emerge. Often chapters also include biographical highlights of examples of leaders considered especially significant by a country (e.g. Gandhi in India), and appendices with supporting material.
The authors seem to have had quite a bit of freedom to construct their chapters. This freedom seems to be responsible for the variability in the usual chapter length of 30-45 pages (Singapore, 22 pages; USA, 70 pages) and a certain inconsistency in the way some statistical scores are reported that occasionally makes comparison between countries unnecessarily awkward. While striking this critical note, I also found a few figures whose format had gone astray (e.g.: Figure 1.1 repeated much cleaner in Figure 2.1, and Figure 1.2). Table 1.2, which reports the GLOBE Society/Culture Clusters, indicates the countries with chapters in this volume with a star but fails to mark Greece, Russia, India and Switzerland, which are actually represented in the book. This is correct, however, in Table 28.1. Appendix A3 is titled wrongly as Power Distance while the chart is In-Group Collectivism. Some of the country markers in Appendix B charts in my book were unfortunately illegible. Given the sheer massiveness and the complexity of the volume, these are minor problems. I suspect that these problems have been corrected by now in later printings.
A more serious question is raised by the way the 25 countries were selected based on those authors accepting the invitation to participate in Phase 3 rather than on an attempt to represent the different regions of the world more inclusively. This pragmatic approach to research reporting has led to the exclusion of Black Africa (South Africa is based on a white sample and included in the Anglo cluster), the Arab World (Turkey is the only Middle-East cluster representative) and the under- representation of Southern Asia (1 out of 6), Latin America (3 out of 10), and Eastern Europe (2 out of 8), and the overrepresentation of Anglo and other European countries (15 of 21). May I suggest that the richness of this volume is a strong argument for the need of a further volume reporting the remaining 37 countries?
The last chapter of the book is a brilliant tour de force that attempts a synthesis of the results of Phases 2 and 3. This chapter is full of insights for students of cross-cultural leadership. Particularly interesting is the discussion on cluster-typical and boundary-spanning societies and different “species” of leadership. Some societies, like Argentina or Colombia, exhibit characteristics that are quite representative of their clusters. Others like the Netherlands are related to several clusters: located in the Germanic cluster, its societal characteristics overlap with the Nordic cluster (in Power Distance, In-Group Collectivism, Institutional Collectivism, and Gender Egalitarianism) and some with the Anglo cluster (in Uncertainty Avoidance). Boundary- spanning societies may facilitate access to cultural information and skills for organizations wishing to expand into other culture clusters.
One contribution of the GLOBE study is the ability to distinguish subtle differences in culture or leadership dimensions that are often not noticeable by quantitative studies alone. While countries may show similar numbers in a leadership dimension, these differences detected by qualitative data are so real that the authors even speak of different “species” of leadership. For instance, Humane Oriented leadership can mean (a) “a set of values and behaviors that espouse equanimity, egali- tarianism, and not flaunting one’s own status as a leader” (in several Anglo-cluster countries); (b) “friendly, open and generous interpersonal conduct” which in times of crisis is expected to be “direct and clear” (in New Zealand), “compassionate” (in the USA) or “aggressive” (in Australia); (c) “a Confucian principle of moderation and maintaining harmonious social relationships” (in China); or (d) “a traditional principle of humanity reposing faith and confidence in followers, giving them freedom, and taking personal care of their well-being” (in India) (pp. 1043-44). These are just a few examples to show the rich insights that the GLOBE study has produced and may be waiting to share with the world of leadership.
What does this volume do for leaders of international Christian organizations? For one thing, it helps Christian leaders understand that there are infinite variations of leadership that have arisen out of the complex interplay of history, religion, politics, and economics. Since this volume arose out of research in business organizations, the authors deal with worldview and religion issues only in a marginal way. Yet, it is precisely in this volume that includes qualitative research methods that these issues surface most clearly. It is curious that despite centuries of working in cultures around the globe, no Christian organization or denomination has ever attempted a similar research study, even though some Christian organizations or denominations with global presence could make an important contribution to the further unpacking of the many issues and questions yet left untouched by the GLOBE research study. For instance, in my international work with Christian organizations, I note that the local culture often influences the way leadership is practiced in a given country. American churches priding themselves in following Biblical models are often headed by a “president” and run by “committees” following parliamentary-like procedures.
- Adler, N. J. (2002). International dimensions of organizational behavior (4th ed.). Cincinati, OH: South-Western.
- Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: Do American theories apply abroad? [doi: DOI: 10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3]. Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42-63.
- Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
- House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Lewis, R. D. (1996). When cultures collide: Managing successfully across cultures. London: N. Brealey.
- McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman. Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 23-47.
- Trompenaars, A. (1998). Riding the waves of culture: understanding diversity in global business. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Wolf, T. (2006). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. [Book Review]. Journal of Applied Christian Leadership, 1(1), 55-71.
Erich Baumgartner, JACL Senior Editor, is Professor of Leadership and Intercultural Communication at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan.
The GLOBE Project (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Project) is a study of cross-cultural leadership that spans over 60 countries and cultures. The project was founded in 1993 by Robert J. House to analyze the organizational norms, values, and beliefs of leaders in different societies.What was the main purpose of the Globe project? ›
The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project is a research that offers international management strategies. It was developed to ensure managers can develop, assess and evaluate how effective leadership theories are in organizations.What are the 9 dimensions of the Globe framework? ›
The GLOBE project approaches culture in terms of nine quantitative dimensions: (1) Assertiveness, (2) Future Orientation, (3) Gender Egalitarianism, (4) Humane Orientation, (5) Institutional Collectivism, (6) In-Group Collectivism, (7) Performance Orientation, (8) Power Distance, and (9) Uncertainty Avoidance.What is the Globe framework? ›
A second important cultural framework, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project provides managers with an additional lens through which they can better understand how to perform well in an international environment.What are the Globe 6 leadership styles? ›
The GLOBE study provides scores on six CLT dimensions—charismatic/value-based/performance-based, team-oriented, humane-oriented, participative, autonomous, and self-protective.What are the Globe leadership scales? ›
The GLOBE leadership scales were developed to measure the implicit leadership beliefs shared by individuals in a culture. Thus these scales are called culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory (CLT) dimensions. The second phase of GLOBE focused on testing a portion of the integrated model.What is the globe study summary? ›
The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Research Program (GLOBE) As the name of the study suggests, GLOBE focuses on leadership. More specifically, it is a cross-cultural, global study that examined organizational leadership's effectiveness across multiple societies, cultures, and countries.What are the three points of globe? ›
Equator, Hemispheres, Axis, and Directions
The earth is divided into hemispheres by the equator. The earth rotates daily about its axis. The north and south poles are the two imaginary points where the axis would enter and exit from the earth if the axis were a pole or a line (see Fig. 1.9).
He identified five dimensions or 'problem areas' which represent differences among national cultures (Hofstede, 1997): power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity and long-term orientation.What is the difference between Globe project and Hofstede? ›
Hofstede's cultural dimension focuses on increasing cross-cultural communication in various cultural dimensions. The GLOBE framework focuses on enhancing collectivism and individualism in the various cultural dimensions.
These dimensions are power distance, uncertainty avoidance, performance orientation, assertiveness, future orientation, humane orientation, institutional collectivism, in-group collectivism, and gender egalitarianism. Let's look at each in more detail.What is 9th dimension theory? ›
In the ninth dimension, we can compare all the possible universe histories, starting with all the different possible laws of physics and initial conditions. In the tenth and final dimension, we arrive at the point in which everything possible and imaginable is covered.What are the benefits of globe study? ›
GLOBE studies provide a classification of cultural dimensions that is more expansive than the commonly used Hofstede classification system. GLOBE studies provide useful information about what is universally accepted as good and bad leadership.What are the benefits of globe model? ›
- Global is a three dimensional spherical model of planet earth. ...
- It shows the exact shape of the earth that is slightly spherical, flattened at the poles, and bulges at the equator.
- The physical features are more accurately shown. ...
- It provides the idea of the tilt of Earth's axis.
Criticisms of the GLOBE research:
Although the GLOBE study is diverse and quantitative in nature, it does not provide offer information on the relationship between culture and leadership or how culture may or may not influence the leadership process.
There are four factors to transformational leadership, (also known as the "four I's"): idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individual consideration.What are the 6 dimensions of leadership? ›
Illustrated with countless examples of leaders from history and today, The Six Dimensions of Leadership, first published in 1999, tackles these six qualities in turn, picturing leaders as: heroes, actors, immortalists, power-brokers, diplomats and willing victims.What is a humble level 5 leader? ›
A Level 5 leader is one who exhibits a combination of strong personal humility and professional will. This top level leader is incredibly driven and ambitious, maintains a healthy sense of self-awareness, and is able to put the needs of others above their own.What does GLOBE stand for in leadership? ›
The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) research program was founded by Robert House in 1991.What is the benefit of the Globe study and its impact on leadership? ›
The significance of the GLOBE study is that it helps leaders to understand the role of culture in leadership. By understanding one's culture, as well as that of others, it brings you to awareness of different perceptions of leadership and how cultures come to understand leaders.
The GLOBE project involves 170 researchers from over 60 countries who collected data on 17,000 managers from 62 countries around the world. Similar to Hofstede, the GLOBE researchers uncovered nine cultural dimensions.What was the goal of the Globe Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness Study? ›
The study's purpose, as the name implies, was to better understand leadership and organizational effectiveness from a global perspective. To that end, the researchers developed attributes, dimensions, and measurement standards.What are the 7 parts of the globe? ›
- Prime meridian.
- Northern Hemisphere.
- Southern hemisphere.
- Western Hemisphere.
- Eastern hemisphere. Get Started.
Continents on a world globe are accurately sized and proportional to one another. Their relative size and distance are correct, whereas maps inevitably contain some level of distortion. When it comes to geography, the world globe is superior to maps.What are four characteristics of a globe? ›
Answer : It is mounted on an axis, on which it can rotate freely. The oceans and continents are represented over the surface of the globe with different colors. The horizontal and vertical lines are drawn over the globe, in order to find the exact location of a place.Is USA indulgence or restraint? ›
Indulgence in National Cultures
Among indulgent countries are Australia, Canada, the US, Argentina, Chile, and several African countries. Cultures with high degree of indulgence enjoy life and behave in accordance with basic human drives. Therefore, having fun and fulfilling desires is considered natural.
Hofstede's initial six key dimensions include power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity, and short vs. long-term orientation.What are the 6 determinants of culture? ›
The major elements of culture are material culture, language, aesthetics, education, religion, attitudes and values and social organisation.What is assertiveness GLOBE? ›
2 Assertiveness: The degree to which individuals are (and should be) assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in their relationship with others. 2.1. Form Beta (Societal culture values and practices) 2.1.1 Practices (as is)Why is Hofstede good? ›
Hofstede developed this cultural model primarily on the basis of differences in values and beliefs regarding work goals. Hofstede's framework is especially useful because it provides important information about differences between countries and how to manage such differences.
Power Distance. This is the way people in a society relate to each other on a hierarchical scale. A culture that gives great deference to a person of authority is a High Power Distance culture, and a culture that values the equal treatment of everyone is a Low Power Distance culture.What are the dimensions of Hofstede's globe? ›
The original theory proposed four dimensions along which cultural values could be analyzed: individualism-collectivism; uncertainty avoidance; power distance (strength of social hierarchy) and masculinity-femininity (task-orientation versus person-orientation).Is America egalitarian or hierarchical? ›
In the work environment, unexpected misunderstandings often arise as a result of cultural differences in leadership styles. Americans, for example, see themselves as egalitarian and think of the Japanese as hierarchical.What are the 10 cultural values? ›
- Low Power Distance.
- High Power Distance.
- Low Uncertainty Avoidance.
- High Uncertainty Avoidance Emphasis on planning and predictability.
What is 11th dimension? The 11th dimension is a characteristic of space-time that has been proposed as a possible answer to questions that arise in superstring theory. The theory of superstrings involves the existence of nine dimensions of space and one dimension of time for a total of 10 dimensions.What is the 4th dimension existence? ›
Theoretical physicists believe math shows the possibilities of a fourth dimension, but there's no actual evidence—yet. Albert Einstein believed space and time made up a fourth dimension. An example from a string theorist gives a view of what a fourth dimension could be.What is the philosophy of 4th dimension? ›
In philosophy, four-dimensionalism (also known as the doctrine of temporal parts) is the ontological position that an object's persistence through time is like its extension through space.What are the advantages and disadvantages of the globe? ›
The advantage of the globe is that it promotes visual accuracy. Students need to use a globe frequently if they are to form accurate mental maps. The advantage of the world map is that you can see the entire world at one time. The disadvantage is that world maps distort shape, size, distance, and direction.What are the main problem with the globe? ›
|Environment||pollution, deforestation, desertification, etc., see Global environment issues below|
|Family||socialisation of children, cf. Ageing, Children|
|Food||missing food security and safety, food riots, world hunger|
- Difficult to hold on hands or carry.
- Does not help to study the specific part of the Earth.
- It does not show towns, cities, district, roads, railways etc.
Lines of latitude and longitude are marked on a globe. Disadvantages :Only a part of the earth can be seen on a globe at one glance. All details cannot be marked on a globe. A globe is difficult to carry around.What is global leadership theory? ›
The Global Leadership-Learning Pyramid provides a framework for study that: integrates broad issues of globalization, history, culture and leadership; determines nation- state cultural patterns and implications for leadership; and adapts Western theories for cross-cultural use.What does Globe stand for in leadership? ›
The GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) research program was founded by Robert House in 1991.What is Globe versus Hofstede? ›
Hofstede's cultural dimension focuses on increasing cross-cultural communication in various cultural dimensions. The GLOBE framework focuses on enhancing collectivism and individualism in the various cultural dimensions.What is the Globe study of 62 societies about? ›
The GLOBE study describes how each of 62 societies in 10 regions of the world scores on 9 major dimensions of culture and 6 major behaviors of global leaders. By my count, the book contains 269 tables and 67 figures to accompany the 760 pages of text.What are the 4 C's global leadership model? ›
The 4C Leadership Capabilities Model suggests that there are four core capabilities that are always needed to be an effective leader – connecting, confidence, cognizance and compelling – each with a range of supporting skills.Is Global Leadership Adventures safe? ›
At Global Leadership Adventures, we value the health, safety and security of students and participants at the highest level. We have developed program policies and procedures that allow us to facilitate programs in the safest possible light while simultaneously managing and reducing risk wherever possible.What are the benefits of GLOBE study? ›
GLOBE studies provide a classification of cultural dimensions that is more expansive than the commonly used Hofstede classification system. GLOBE studies provide useful information about what is universally accepted as good and bad leadership.What does global leadership achieve? ›
Global leaders supervise employees who are of different nationalities. Global leaders develop a strategic business plan on a worldwide basis for their unit. Global leaders manage a budget on a worldwide basis for their unit. Global leaders negotiate in other countries or with people from other countries.Why is global leadership important? ›
For the business world, global leadership will make the difference between growth or losing ground to companies better equipped for the international landscape. This extends past the ability to navigate the obstacles of foreign business environments to a company's success in using talent from around the world.