Culturally Endorsed Implicit Leadership Theory
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Literature Review of GLOBE’s CLT: Culturally Endorsed Implicit Leadership Theory Brian T. Moore Regent University This study provides a beginning step in an exhaustive literature review of articles related to the culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory within the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project from 2008 to 2018. While there are many articles related to the GLOBE project since its inception in 1991 and beginning research in 1994, this study is limited to scholarly and peer-review journal articles available in the Regent University Summon database that specifically cover or use GLOBE’s culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory. Each article is summarized by author, GLOBE project year, study method, cultural and leadership dimensions associated with the culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory, and article highlight. This literature review includes the following observations: (a) researchers in most articles from 2014 to 2018 used GLOBE 2004 because data was reliable, publicly accessible, and the only data available in specific areas; CLT leadership dimensions are effective tools for measuring cross-cultural leadership effectiveness within countries and clusters or across regions; and unlike some other leadership theories, GLOBE’s cultural and CLT leadership dimensions remained relatively unchanged for more than two decades; (b) that although GLOBE defined nine cultural dimensions and six global CLT leadership dimensions, the 21 primary dimensions and 112 leadership attributes are undefined, which was considered ambiguous; (c) that while GLOBE included 62 societies in its 2004 report, it did not contain specific data for each country, or it consolidated data into broad clusters containing dissimilar countries; and finally, (d) that although GLOBE published a report in 2014, researchers in this small sample of articles continued to use GLOBE 2004 data rather than the newer data in GLOBE 2014. This study begins the first step in an exhaustive literature review of the culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory (CLT) developed under the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project (Dorfman, Javidan, Hanges, Dastmalchian, and House, 2012, p. 504). This literature review covered how researchers in journal articles referred to or used GLOBE’s CLT from 2008 to 2018. After almost two and a half decades of research, GLOBE (sometimes referred to as Project GLOBE, Spiritual Leadership in Collectivist and Individualist Cultures P a g e | 2 GLOBE project, GLOBE study, or just GLOBE) and the affiliated nonprofit GLOBE Research and Education Foundation were designed to analyze the effectiveness of leadership across cultures, and GLOBE was recognized as one of the largest leadership studies covering numerous societies globally (Dorfman et al., 2012). An internet search of the GLOBE study using Google Scholar produced 1,390,000 results, with some articles cited more than 200 times. A Google Scholar search of culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory revealed over 56,000 results, 221 results when the topic was bounded with quotation marks, and 178 results when delimited with quotation marks and limited to the period of 2008 to 2018. Due to the constraints of this literature review, the scope was limited to scholarly and peer-reviewed journal articles available from 2008 to 2018 in Regent University’s Summon database specifically related to the topic of culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory bounded by quotation marks. Of the 35 articles listed in the Summon database, only 14 accessible articles provided adequate information for the purpose of this study as it relates specifically to GLOBE’s CLT. GLOBE and CLT Development Researchers published three GLOBE reports in the form of books from 2004 to 2014. Most studies in this literature review referred to or used the GLOBE report released in 2004. To better understand how researchers drew from and used CLT data and the empirically based theoretical framework produced by GLOBE, the following introduces the development of GLOBE since its inception in 1991. Robert House initiated the idea of GLOBE in 1991 based on the concept of charismatic leadership (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004, p. xxi). House concluded that charismatic leadership might have universal application, but finding little empirical studies on the subject, he began designing the GLOBE study without first conducting an exhaustive literature review because it would take a year to complete, and he believed it was not necessary for design development given his extensive background as a social scientist (House et al., 2004, p. xxi). The US Department of Education funded GLOBE in 1993 (House et al., 2004, p. xxii; Koopman, Den Hartog & Konrad 1999, p. 505) and research began with 65 countries in 1994 (House et al., 2004, p. xxii). To help categorize data collection, the final 62 societies were divided into ten clusters: Latin America, Anglo, Latin Europe, Nordic Europe, Germanic Europe, Confucian Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle-East, Southern Asia, and Eastern Europe (House et al., 2004, p. 201). Initial research resulted in the identification of nine independent variables of cultural attributes, referred to as cultural dimensions. The nine cultural dimensions are (a) Uncertainty Avoidance; (b) Power Distance; (c) Collectivism I, Institutional Collectivism; (d) Collectivism II, In-Group Collectivism; (e) Gender Egalitarianism; (f) Assertiveness; (g) Future Orientation; (h) Performance Orientation; and (i) Humane Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 11 Iss. 1, pp.1-13. © 2018 Regent University School of Business & Leadership ISSN 1941-4684 | [email protected] Spiritual Leadership in Collectivist and Individualist Cultures P a g e | 3 Orientation (House et al., 2004, pp. 11-13). House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, and Gupta (2004) define the cultural dimensions as: Uncertainty Avoidance is the extent to which members of an organization or society strive to avoid uncertainty by relying on established social norms, rituals, and bureaucratic practices. Power Distance is the degree to which members of an organization or society expect and agree that power should be stratified and concentrated at higher levels of an organization or government. Collectivism I, Institutional Collectivism, is the degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward collected distribution of resources and collective action. Collectivism II, In-Group Collectivism, is the degree to which individuals expressed pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or families. Gender Egalitarianism is the degree to which an organization or a society minimizes gender role differences while promoting gender equality. Assertiveness is the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies are assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in social relationships. Future Orientation is the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies engage in future-oriented behaviors such as planning, investing in the future, and delaying individual or collective gratification. Performance Orientation is the degree to which an organization or society encourages and rewards group members for performance improvement and excellence. Humane Orientation is the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies encourage and reward individuals for being fair, altruistic, friendly, generous, caring, and kind to others. (pp. 11-13) Built on the framework of Lord and Maher’s implicit leadership theory (ILT) (Dorfman et al., 2012, p. 505; House et al., 2004, p. 18), researchers developed six global leader behaviors (referred to as leadership dimensions) labeled as culturally endorsed implicit theories of leadership or culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory, both referred to as CLT (House et al., 2004, p. 11). The six CLT leadership dimensions are (a) Charismatic/Value-Based, (b) Team-Oriented, (c) Self-Protective, (d) Participative, (e) Humane-Oriented, and (f) Autonomous (House et al., 2004, p. 137). House et al. (2004) defined CLT leadership dimensions as: Charismatic/Value-Based Leadership. A broadly defined leadership dimension that reflects the ability to inspire, to motivate, and to expect high-performance outcome from others based on firmly held core values. Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 11 Iss. 1, pp.1-13. © 2018 Regent University School of Business & Leadership ISSN 1941-4684 | [email protected] Spiritual Leadership in Collectivist and Individualist Cultures P a g e | 4 Team-Oriented Leadership. A leadership dimension that emphasizes effective team building and implementation of a common purpose or goal among team members. Participative Leadership. A leadership dimension that reflects the degree to which managers involve others in making and implementing decisions. Humane-Oriented Leadership. A leadership dimension that reflects supportive and considerate leadership but also includes compassion and generosity. Autonomous Leadership. A newly defined leadership dimension that refers to independent and individualistic leadership attributes. Self-Protective Leadership. From a Western perspective, this newly defined leadership behavior focuses on ensuring the safety and security of the individual and group through status enhancement and face-saving. (p. 14) GLOBE was based on three phases. Phase one consisted of ten years of research from 1994 to 2004 (House et al., 2004, pp. 4,