Conflict and its resolution liein differentangles such as sociology, psychology, communication, anthropology, health sciences, and behavioral sciences. This article discusses cross-cultural conflict and its resolution in the context of global leadership. The cross-culturalconflict involves conflict between different social groups or individuals with different cultural backgrounds (Stahl et al. 2017). However, individuals from the same society may have a cross-culturalconflict because of different affiliations based on race, political interests, religion, language, ethnicity, organizations, and bureaucracies, among others. The more differentiated and complex the society the more the cross-cultural conflict intensifies. It is because conflict across cultural boundaries occursat different levels simultaneously at all the levels of the social grouping. For example, those that separate American, Chinese, Russian, British, and European cultures during the conflict.
The global leadership environment is always complicated, volatile, and uncertain filled with an atmosphere of instability globally. The current election of Donald Trump asthe president of the United States and Brexit shook the international geostrategic and liberal system, not only because of their specific impacts on global order and Europebut also because of the rapid,dramatic changes that occurred (Ramírez & Abad-Quintanal 2018). Such events have shown a rise of cross-cultural conflicts like nationalist populism that have fueled powerlessness among the political class as they desire to bring back calm among the population.
The current cross-cultural conflict in global leadership came from the geopolitical balance of power of multipolarity. It is whereby global leaders exercise their authority in their countries without following any global standards of leadership (Stahl et al. 2017). President Trump declined to assume world leadership, a role that his predecessors tacitly accepted. The vacuum left has led significantpowers like Russia and China trying to occupy it by seeking out countries like North Korea and Saudi Arabia.
Nevertheless, Mr. Trump has expressed, repeatedly, his willingness to lifting Russia’s sanctions as well as potentially officially recognizing Moscow’s illegal annexation of Crimea. Mr. Trump’s open,friendly feelings towards Russian president Vladimir Putin show an affront to European countries. They have stated that it undermines the old transatlantic relationship. In the Middle East, the U.S has expressed its cooperation with Russia to defeat the Islamic State in Syria (Ramírez & Abad-Quintanal 2018). The U.S risks being complicit of Russia’s indiscriminate bombings and reinforce Iran’s militias in Syria at the same time. Then comes the Southeast Asian unstable Sino-Japanese geopolitical balanceas well as China’s territorial disputes with Malaysia, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Brunei as well as North Korea’s nuclear projects.
This global leadership panorama, characterized by interdependence and multilateralism need a resolution. The favorableresolution is negotiations between the United States, the European Union, Russia, China, Japan, and India. Therefore, the international community must maintain tolerance, dialogue, andrespect by acting proactively and permanently (Chen et al. 2018). They should demand and encourage the application of universal values of solidarity, equality, and dignity (Stahl et al. 2017). They must define the new rules of engagement with maximum international participation. Deriving from the cultural values of power distance and individualism/collectivism (Chen et al. 2018), when people with collectivist values work with those with individualistic values, disagreements occur. Studies show that low power distance/individualism, high power distance/individualism, high power distance/collectivism, low power distance/individualism, and low power distance/collectivism leads to a more cohesive environment and integrated solutions (Ramírez & Abad-Quintanal 2018). Practicing values like benevolence and universalism may help achieve common ground. Finally, being open to change helps in cross-cultural conflict resolution by seeing the other side’s view of things.
References
Chen, N., Chao, M. C. H., Xie, H., & Tjosvold, D. (2018). Transforming cross-cultural conflict into collaboration: The integration of western and eastern values. Cross-Cultural& Strategic Management, 25(1), 70-95.
Ramírez, J. M., & Abad-Quintanal, G. (Eds.). (2018). Cross-Cultural Dialogue as a Conflict Management Strategy. Springer.
Stahl, G. K., Miska, C., Lee, H. J., & De Luque, M. S. (2017). The upside of cultural differences: Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in cross-cultural management research. Cross-Cultural& Strategic Management, 24(1), 2-12.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.