Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

The Ubiquitous Nature of Leadership Attributes: An Exploration

by

Understanding leadership requires an appreciation of the influence that culture has on the leadership system. Different cultures have different expectations of what constitutes a good leader. For instance, what an American may view as a leader may look different than what other countries look for in a leader. Take the example of Fidel Castro, a former Cuban commander, who was once viewed by Americans as being cruel, immoral, and dangerous. However, some Cubans appreciated and respected him during his time as chief. This is because the attributes of a leader are culturally contingent, meaning the person viewed as a leader is dependent on the culture in which it exists (The Pennsylvania State University, 2023).

Castro was viewed as being ambitious, which is one leadership attribute. To achieve his goals, he would do what was needed by any means necessary. His followers were on board with his plans and actions because to them it meant less inequality if the government rules, an internally stable economic system, and stronger social communities. His leadership tactics led to success in reforms that provided rural areas with electricity, offered free education and health care to all Cubans, and weeded out racism in his country’s society (Nasir, 2016). However, Castro’s domineering behaviors, which is another culturally contingent leadership attribute, are what drove the majority of his people away leading them to flee to America (The Pennsylvania State University, 2023). Freedom of expression was highly unacceptable in Cuba during his reign which cost Cubans their freedom and landed them in prison for politically motivated reasons with long-term prison sentences if they were caught (Nasir, 2016).

As you can see, leadership attributes may mean one thing but the approach in how it’s used could mean another. What certain cultures may view as being acceptable politically, ethically, or morally can have a different tone on a global scale. Either way, a leader should be effective in their approach no matter what attribute is being exercised as the time to reach practical, social goals, and universal goals.

 

References: 

Nasir, N. (2016, November 26). Fidel Castro, a Cuban revolutionary and communist leader, died at 90. PBS NewsHour. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/cuban-revolutionary-fidel-castro-dead

The Pennsylvania State University. (2023). The universality of Leadership Attributes [Lecture notes]. Canvas@PSU. https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2283258/modules/items/38927276

Culture, Diversity, and Leadership

by

The world’s increasing globalization requires more interaction among people from diverse cultures, beliefs, and backgrounds than ever before. People no longer live and work in a national marketplace, they are now part of a worldwide economy with competition coming from nearly every continent. According to Green, et al., (2002), due to the world’s increasing globalization, profit and non-profit organizations need diversity to become more creative and open to change. Maximizing and capitalizing on workplace diversity has become an important issue for management today (Green, et al., 2002). In this blog post, I will explore how managers and businesses can effectively lead diversity and diverse cultures at work. 

According to Taylor (2015), both transformational leadership and effectively managed workplace diversity have been theorized and shown to lead to increased employee creative performance at work. According to Northouse (2018), transformational leadership is part of the “New Leadership” paradigm, which gives more attention to charismatic and affective elements of leadership. Furthermore transformational leadership is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards, and long-term goals (Northouse, 2018). Transformational leaders are charismatic leaders who are strong role models for the beliefs and values they want their followers to adopt (Northouse, 2018). Businesses can use practices rooted in transformational leadership to effectively lead diversity at work. For example, Nordstrom (2022), is committed to compelling future-oriented leadership expectations and shared culture that will drive their business ambition. In addition, they are measuring leaders on their performance in this area through the Inclusion Index and feedback from their teams and coworkers (Nordstrom, 2022). In alignment with transformational leadership practices, Nordstrom joined a multiyear corporate partnership with the National Urban League, a historic civil rights organization dedicated to economic empowerment, equality and social justice (Nordstrom, 2022). Furthermore, Nordstrom is committed to change. They are doubling their charitable giving to nonprofit organizations that promote anti-racism, bringing that total to approximately $1,000,000 per year for the next five years (Nordstrom, 2022).

Transformational leadership involves commitment to its organizations long-term goals (Northouse, 2018). Nordstrom plans to increase demographic diversity in all their corporate and leadership positions to better reflect the North American population (Nordstrom, 2022). In addition, by the end of 2025, they will increase representation of Black and Latinx populations in people-manager roles by at least 50% (Nordstrom, 2022). They will also leverage their internship program and other initiatives that help them reach qualified candidates early in their careers, with a goal on average of at least 50% of participants in these programs coming from underrepresented populations (Nordstrom, 2022). Nordstrom’s business practices embody inclusive values, ethics, high standards, and long-term goals. They are revisiting their practices and the training resources they offer for all customer-facing roles to ensure they include anti-racism and anti-bias content (Nordstrom, 2022). Furthermore, their commitment to diversity and their zero-tolerance policy for discrimination of any kind extends to the partners they work with (Nordstrom, 2022). Nordstrom works hard to partner with influencers and bloggers who have similar values to them when it comes to important topics like racism and discrimination (Nordstrom, 2022). Other businesses and individual leaders can adopt these transformational leadership practices to effectively lead diversity at work. 

In regards to leading diverse cultures at work, global leaders need to develop five cross-cultural competencies (Northouse, 2018). First, leaders need to understand business, political, and cultural environments worldwide (Northouse, 2018). Second, leaders need to learn the perspectives, tastes, trends, and technologies of many other cultures (Northouse, 2018). Third, they need to be able to work simultaneously with people from many cultures (Northouse, 2018). Fourth, leaders must be able to adapt to living and communicating in other cultures (Northouse, 2018). Fifth, they need to learn to relate to people from other cultures from a position of equality rather than cultural superiority (Northouse, 2018). Managers can implement these cross-cultural competencies at work when working with individuals from diverse cultures and backgrounds. For example, when working with someone from the UAE or who is from Arab culture, managers should research how their business, political, and cultural environments differ from their own. Contrast to US culture, according to the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates Washington, DC (n.d.), punctuality is not considered a virtue in the Arab world. People are often kept waiting before or during a meeting (Embassy of the United Arab Emirates Washington, DC, n.d.). It is important for managers to know this information because in the US culture, being kept before or during a meeting is a sign of disrespect. However, in Arab culture it is quite normal behavior. Furthermore, when managing people from different cultures, it is important to understand and respect their religion. Managers should allow employees to be excused from work during prayer times and major holidays. This is a prime example of humane-oriented leadership which emphasizes being supportive, considerate, compassionate, and generous (Northouse, 2018).

Furthermore, it’s important to consider how different cultures prefer different methods of leadership. For example, Asia countries prefer self-protective leadership (Northouse, 2018). They are used to leaders who do not invite them to be involved in goal setting or decision making (Northouse, 2018). In Asia countries, leaders use status and position to make independent decisions without the input of others (Northouse, 2018). For example, if a manager needs to promote one of their employees, they will not discuss the opportunity with their employees. The manager would make the decision on his or her own without input from the employees’ feelings, suggestions, or considerations. In contrast to Asia countries, countries in Nordic Europe prefer leadership that is highly visionary and participative, while being somewhat independent and diplomatic (Northouse, 2018). Nordic Europeans prefer leaders who are inspiring, and who involve others in decision making (Northouse, 2018). For example, in Nordic Europe if the manager needed to make a decision about a new policy the company wants to implement, the manager would discuss the new policy with his or her employees. The manager would want their feedback, comments, and suggestions. 

In conclusion, diversity is beneficial to both associates and employers. Although employees are interdependent in the workplace, respecting individual differences can increase productivity (Green, et al., 2002). Diversity in the workplace can reduce lawsuits and increase marketing opportunities, recruitment, creativity, and business image (Green, et al., 2002). In an era when flexibility and creativity are keys to competitiveness, diversity is critical for an organization’s success (Green, et al., 2002). Businesses and managers can use practices rooted in transformational leadership to effectively lead diversity at work. Transformational leadership places a strong emphasis on followers’ needs, values, and morals which are crucial to leading diversity (Northouse, 2018). Furthermore, managers can implement cross-cultural competencies at work when working with individuals from diverse cultures and backgrounds. In order to effectively lead diversity and diverse cultures at work, managers should know that different cultures prefer different methods of leadership. Managing diversity is a comprehensive process for creating a work environment that includes everyone (Green, et al., 2002). When creating a successful diverse workforce, an effective manager should focus on personal awareness (Green, et al., 2002). Both managers and employees need to be aware of their personal biases. Therefore, organizations need to develop, implement, and maintain ongoing training because a one-day session of training will not change people’s behavior (Green, et al., 2002). Managers should also implement policies such as mentoring programs to provide employees access to information and opportunities (Green, et al., 2002). 

References

Embassy of the United Arab Emirates Washington, DC. Starting a Business: UAE Embassy in Washington, DC. Starting a Business | UAE Embassy in Washington, DC. (n.d.). Retrieved April 17, 2022, from https://www.uae-embassy.org/business-trade/getting-started 

Green, K. A., López, M., Wysocki, A., & Kepner, K. (2002). Diversity in the Workplace: Benefits, Challenges, and the Required Managerial Tools: HR022/HR022, 7/2002. EDIS, 2002(2). https://doi.org/10.32473/edis-hr022-2002

Nordstrom. (2022). Diversity, Inclusion & Belonging. Nordstrom.com. Retrieved April 17, 2022, from https://www.nordstrom.com/browse/diversity-at-nordstrom

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Culture and Leadership. In  Leadership: Theory and practice (Eight, pp.433-472). essay, SAGE Publications.

Northouse, P. G. (2018). Transformational Leadership. In Leadership: Theory and practice (Eight, pp. 163–196). essay, SAGE Publications.

Taylor, A. S. (2015). Transformational Leadership, Diversity, and Creativity at Work: A Moderated Mediation Model. UMI Dissertation Publishing , 1–223. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.2338 

 

Cultural Differences between Europe and the United States

by

For this blog post I have decided to examine the cultural differences between people in Europe and in the United States. I grew up in Europe and moved to the United States when I was 17 years old. What I quickly realized, was that there are many cultural differences in all aspects of life. Now that I have lived in the United States for a while, I believe that it is safe to say that I have also seen the cultural differences in leadership and in peoples professional lives. For this blog I will use some of the seven dilemmas that people of all cultures face that were created by (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). Using these dilemmas, I will share what I personally have noticed that has been different here in the United States compared to Europe.  

The first big difference that I noticed while studying the lecture was the “Source of Identity” dilemma. (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012) describes this as the degree to which individuals should pursue their own interests and goals or make a contribution to a larger group. I think that the individual/collective dilemma is a major difference between people in the US and in Europe. In Europe I would say that the majority of the people fall under the individual category. Based on my personal experiences, people are more individualistic and emphasize on individual success more than collective. It may sometimes even seem to be a little bit selfish. However, if you are from Europe, being individualistic is considered more normal. In the United States however, I have noticed many people want to belong to something bigger than themselves. People are more open to contribute to a larger group. I look at Thon as a good example of this. In the United States people want to contribute to Thon and contribute to a larger thing. The Penn State community wants to support this great cause that is something bigger than themselves. The huge donations and large amount of work that is put into Thon is an indicator of the contributions to a larger group.  

The perspective of time is another dilemma that I have realized is viewed differently in the United States. In Europe, I have learned that when doing work, leaders pinpoint doing things in a proper matter rather than quickly. It is obvious to say that the quicker the better, but I know that leaders in Europe tend to emphasize on making sure their followers do things the right way instead of emphasizing the time restrictions. That being said, the sense of time is viewed more relaxed in Europe. In the United States I have noticed that people work with more urgency. An example of it is in sports where I have noticed that when working out and training, it is common to try and get through the training session quickly. I have also noticed how when doing group work, people tend to focus on getting things done quickly instead of putting effort into making sure that the work is as good as possible. That being said, Americans view time as more scarce. 

The last dilemma that I have noticed a big difference in between Europe and the United States is the “Response to Ambiguity” dilemma (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). This is the extent that uncertainty is tolerated (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 2012). In Europe people tend to be very dynamic in their job situations. It is very common to go work in another European country for a project or a temporary assignment. Europe countries are very close to each other which helps that cause. However, I have always thought that people are more open to jobs that are dynamic and might require them to relocate. Europeans seem to be better at dealing with uncertainty with their jobs. In the United States it is more common to stay within the country. I also think that Americans tend to prefer staying in the same state for work where they have lived for a while. For example, many students at Penn State are from Pennsylvania, and look for jobs in Pennsylvania when they graduate. There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting stability, but it is a difference that I have noticed. Americans tend to value stability higher in their jobs than Europeans. 

There are many cultural differences between the United States and Europe. I consider myself extremely lucky to have been able to experience two completely different cultures. How people see themselves and their identity was a big difference that I initially noticed when moving here. Here people want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. They want to contribute to society and to whatever groups they belong to. Europeans on the other hand, tend to be more individualistic. They value individual interests and goals more. The perspective of time was the second dilemma on the list that resonated with me. I have noticed that here, people value their time more. In many cases, people emphasize a lot on getting a goal done quickly. Time is perceived as more valuable than in Europe. In Europe it is more important to do things the right way and make sure that things are not done in a rush. Time is considered valuable as well, but not to the same extent as in the United States. The last and possibly the clearest dilemma on the list was the difference of how uncertainty is tolerated. Especially in the working world I have noticed how Americans value stability. Europeans are very dynamic in relocating and adjusting to different projects. I would consider myself more dynamic as well, I did after all move to the United States at a fairly young age to pursue my dream of going to college here. I do not think that any of the aspects of culture that I spoke about are right or wrong. I think that it is fascinating how different cultures are and how it affects our lives. I do resonate with the European culture more but have learned to understand how Americans think and perceive things, especially in their professional lives. 

References: 

Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2012). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of experience. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies. 

Hamel, R. (2021). Lesson 13: Leadership and Diversity 

Globalization, Culture and Leadership Challenges

by

Globalization is defined as “the increased interdependence between nations” on economic, social, technical and political fronts (Northouse, 2016, p. 427).”  Increased globalization in recent years has created new leadership challenges as well as the need for leaders to increase their understanding of different cultures and diverse work forces.  Overseas assignments and working abroad has been happening for decades, however.  De la Garza (2009) indicated that the 1980s saw many studies focused on identifying the characteristics of leaders and business executives best suited to lead in multicultural contexts.  This lead to a term in international business known as cultural intelligence.  Cultural intelligence is defined as being skilled and flexible in understanding cultures, learning from multicultural interactions and then adjusting personal thinking and behavior to interact appropriately with other people from different cultures (Thomas & Inkson, 2004 as cited in De la Garza et al, 2009).

Cultural intelligence is critical now more than ever with increased globalization.  According to Northouse (2016), leaders also have to become more competent in diverse, cross-cultural awareness and practice.  Adler and Bartholomew (1992, as cited in Northouse, 2016) suggested that leaders had to develop five cross-cultural competencies.  Amongst them was the need to be highly skilled in working with people from many cultures, as well as being able to adapt to living, communicating and relating with people from other cultures from “a position of equality rather than cultural superiority (Adler & Bartholomew, 1992 as cited in Northouse, 2016, p. 428)”.

Research on cultural intelligence indicated that it has three components: cognitive, motivational, and behavioral components. Trevino (2017) summarizes this and provides a version with two parts: the cognitive part, which relates to the person’s knowledge about the new culture, and the action part, which is the ability to translate that knowledge and motivation into an action.  This supports what Northouse suggests in saying that leaders need to be more competent in both behaviors and practice.  These cross-cultural competencies, however, are not only critical for leaders, they are also important for spouses and families who accompany them to assignments abroad.

We see this all too often in the military; in fact, it is essentially a way of life for many of our military families.  Studies indicate that diversity and cross-cultural training for spouses and partners of employees working abroad is equally important for them as it is for the employee.  Trevino (2017) suggests that the higher the position of the employee, the more likely it is that their partner also has functions or roles of “ambassador” for the company. This suggests that adapting to a new culture is critical for everyone, including families in global positions or jobs.  Fortunately, our families do receive the necessary training to assist in overcoming potential cultural barriers when we move to locations overseas.

Research indicates that there are some barriers, however, that are not explicitly presented and that there are factors that affect intercultural communication. This is particularly relevant in negotiation processes or between implicit and explicit communication.  For example, in countries like the United States, it is very common for people to say what they think explicitly, clearly and unambiguously.  On the other hand, in other countries such as Japan, people use more implicit languages and communications that are less clear.  For example, a person can answer the following to an unacceptable offer, “Thank you … I will consider your request very carefully.” For an American, this can easily mean that the discussion will continue and that the matter will be reconsidered in the future.  However, in Japanese culture (and in other cultures in which it is a common practice to avoid direct conflict), the message is clearly a “NO”.  My spouse and I received cross-cultural training when we first arrived in Japan, and I vividly remember when our host said, “In Japan, we don’t say NO, we just don’t tell you YES”.  We all laughed as she smiled modestly.

I would suggest that as leaders, we have to be familiar with the cultures, countries and places we operate in, but we must also be highly skilled in interacting with diverse groups.  According to Northouse (2016, p. 430), “a skilled leader needs to find ways to negotiate with followers from various cultural backgrounds.”  With increased globalization, this is critical now more than ever, and we must ensure that our organizations are implementing the right training strategies to assist us, other employees and families in overcoming diversity and cultural challenges.

References

De la Garza, M., Guzmán-Soria, E., Hernández-Soto, D. (2009). Cultural and personal considerations in international negotiations.  Journal of Globalization, Competitiveness & Governability, vol. 3, pp. 64-89

Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Trevino, L. (2017). Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do it Right (7th edition). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The cyclic creation of Air Force servant leaders

by

The military produces much more than death and destruction – it produces leaders – and it does so through the principles of servant leadership. Unlike many civilian industries, the “military industry” has a very defined career lifecycle. For all intents and purposes, this lifecycle only lasts about 6.7 years for enlisted service members and 10.9 years for officers, according to the Pew Research Center (2011). For the sake of ease, we will use the life cycle of an enlisted Air Force Airman for this discussion, since there are 251,310 total active, Air Force enlisted Airmen, who compromise about 79 percent of the total force, (Air Force Magazine, 2016).

Airmen enter basic training at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. They will then move onto their technical school to learn their jobs. After graduation, they will move onto their first duty assignment, where they will receive on the job training. It is at this point the young Airmen enters into what can be considered the “servant leader lifecycle.” The goal of military leaders is to be as replaceable as possible. It’s woven into the fabric of their culture. If and when they are killed in battle, their subordinates must be trained and ready to pick up the flag and carry it to victory. Since military careers are so short (on average), the leadership development cycle must be short as well. So, over the years, the Air Force has become very adept at taking these young Airmen and turning them into leaders very quickly.

Today, Airmen are promoted to staff sergeant in about 4.39 years, on average (Bailey, 2017). This all means the Air Force will keep people as front line supervisors for about 2 years before they leave the service.  The result is a leadership machine capable of indoctrinating civilians and in 6.7 years outputting leaders – and doing so in the tens of thousands per year. This is not even touching on how many of these young men and women go straight from military service to post-high school education opportunities, which enhances their human capital even further.

General David Goldfein

The magic happens insides of the Air Force’s leadership machine though. General David Goldfein, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, discussed in his first letter to Airmen, how Airmen of all types are “absolutely committed to servant leadership” (Goldfein, 2016). He made servant leadership a regular point in his talks, when I worked on the Joint Staff and he was our director of staff. Servant leadership is key to airpower and the key to servant leadership is for leaders to commit to putting their followers first, and treating them fairly (Northouse, 2016, p. 239). As Northouse (2016), citing Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson discussed, servant leadership requires the right antecedent conditions, and leader behaviors to result in the right outcomes (p. 231).

Building and maintaining the right culture is a key antecedent condition, which is why Goldfein (2016) discusses the importance of re-invigorating the squadron, the foundational and cultural building block of the Air Force. He acknowledges the culture has weakened and has set the goal of improving it. Leader attributes and follower receptivity are also key antecedent conditions as well, which is why studying them is built into professional development courses required throughout an Airman’s career.

Servant leader behaviors are equally as important as the antecedent conditions. Northouse (2016) references seven, specifically: Conceptualization, emotional healing, putting followers first, helping followers grow and succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the community (p. 232). Although each of these behaviors deserves a blog all to itself, I will touch on four that are very applicable to the Air Force. Helping followers grow and succeed is a key component for Air Force leaders because as mentioned previously, it is their mission. Airmen are not in competition with one another, they are a team, and they are only as strong as the weakest link. For young Airmen to grow into competent sergeants, they must be trusted and empowered with responsibilities designed to stretch their limits to help them build the self-confidence required to lead and train others. This is the cyclical nature of military service. Ethical behavior is at the core of military service. Air Force Airmen are held to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which places restrictions on them above and beyond normal state and federal laws. Finally, community service is built into the foundation of Airmenship. Creating value for their communities does not stop at simply protecting freedoms, but includes leaving the base and volunteering.

The outcome of servant leadership does not only include improving the Airmen’s performance to positively impact organizational performance – but to improve society as a whole (Northouse, 2016, p. 236, 237). To succeed, the process needs to be self-replicating because the turnover of Airmen is so quick. The Air Force simply does not have the time to be patient with leadership development – and servant leadership exemplifies the environment and behaviors required to accomplishing this mission.

References
Bailey, K. (2017, August 24). Air Force releases staff sergeant 17E5 promotion cycle statistics. Air Force’s Personnel Center. Retrieved November 5, 2017 from https://goo.gl/Xjq7rQ
Goldfein, D. L. (2016, August 9). CSAF Letter to Airmen. United States Air Force. Retrieved November 5, 2017 from https://goo.gl/GeGMuT
Chapter 6: A Profile of the Modern Military. (2011, October 5). Pew Research Center. Retrieved November 5, 2017 from https://goo.gl/byTYCZ
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: theory and practice (7th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2017). PSYCH 485 Lesson 11: Servant leadership. Retrieved November 5, 2017 from https://goo.gl/cyBhDK
USAF Total Force. (2016, May). Air Force Magazine, 9(5). Retrieved November 5, 2017 from https://goo.gl/hTmRmj

Skip to toolbar