International Differences in Motivation and Leadership Practices - Term Paper Example

International Differences in Motivation and Leadership Practices al Affiliation Table of Contents 0 Introduction 3 2.0 Identification of the differences in the motivational skills and leadership skills between USA, China and UAE 3 3.0 The differences and the similarities in the motivation and leadership skills in Saudi Arabia, China and USA 5 4.0 Motivation methods and/or leadership practices or views Americans can adopt. 7 5.0 The practices which would not work well in the U.S. 8 6.0 Lessons managers could learn from the two other countries from the U.S. 8 7.0 Conclusion 9 Work cited 11 1.0 Introduction Motivation and leadership practices differ across nations, some as a result pedagogy, cultural, legal, and physical amongst a host of factors. The manifestations on these differences in motivation and leadership practices globally are the challenge in the fields of business management. According to Alderfer (24), managers find motivational strategies that work for one group does not work for another group. The dilemma of the motivation is that all cannot be motivated in the same way. Presently, motivational theories riding on the back of companies and institutions across different countries have one major drawback: the theories lean on studies conducted in the west. Dessler (53) remarks that companies that are based in far flung countries, for instance, Qatar (Mid East) or even Japan (Far East) run the risk of dose Misappropriation. That is applying theories developed in the west to locally available motivation situations. This is the same kind of problem that is observed in case where the patient is administered the wrong dosage. The effect is either rejection of the approach taken to motivate the employees or the end result of the motivation approach become different from what is expected. This discussion endeavors to prepare a critical review of the leadership and motivational theories followed in USA, China and Saudi Arabia. 2.0 Identification of the differences in the motivational skills and leadership skills between USA, China and UAE There are vast differences between the leadership and motivational practices of USA, China and UAE, particularly in the cultural difference. The American culture influences individual to be go getter, to stand out from the general population, to be individualistic. The concept of team player is vague in the American leadership and motivational practices. This is the reason individuals cannot perform well when they are put in teams. The same individual can perform really well in an individual basis (Funder 42). On the other hand, a typical culture of a Chinese worker or even a worker from the UAE defines a person who is oriented to the productive on a group. Perhaps arising from the communists and the socialists political societies that these societies have been built upon over the years, China in particular. There are three very particular factors in the work motivation and leadership styles; they are stress on market processes, stress on individuals, and giving more focus on managers rather than the employees or the workers. Moreover the American motivational and leadership traits are more focused on the individualistic performance rather than the focus on the collectivism. The other types of traits are giving more focus on the responsibilities of the follower than the rights. Rather than focusing on increasing the commitment to duty, the focus is directed to hedonism. Other assumptions made give more importance to centrality of work and democratic value. It is less inclined or not inclined at all in linking business with asceticism, religion, or superstition. The birthplaces of the motivational and leaderships skills are in the west. The Eastern and the Middle Eastern countries have adopted the western originated leadership skills and practices and tried to mould it in their own way. This is the main reason that the western originated leadership and motivational skills sometimes does not fit well with the Chinese culture. The Chinese culture or the Eastern cultures, does not preach individualism as in western cultures. The Chinese culture revolves around collectivism, rather than individualism. The identity of the group is more important, than the identity of the individual (Hackman 260). An example will help to articulate the point more clearly. In Western culture the idea is all about individualism, individual performance and individual achievement. If an individual decides to stand apart and taller in the group, the individual is praised and glorified. The group to which the individual belonged does not reap the credit of the individual. In the Chinese culture the focus in on collectivism. The major focus is that of increasing the performance of the group than the performance of the individual. If any individual is performing exceptionally well then the face value of the whole group is improved. Likewise if the individual performs unsatisfactorily, then the whole group is discredited for that performance (Haire 110). The rapid rate of globalization has caught up with business and academic practices as Chinese organizations have started adopting the western-originated motivational and leadership practices. The adoption of the western oriented leadership and motivational skills by the Chinese organizations is not without any kind of problems. The motivational and the leadership skills in Saudi Arabia in comparison of the countries like the USA and China are adopting a middle path between collectivism and individualism. 3.0 The differences and the similarities in the motivation and leadership skills in Saudi Arabia, China and USA The differences in the motivation and the leadership skills for Saudi Arabia, China and USA can be explained in the respect for hierarchy, orientation towards groups, preservation of face, and importance of relationship. Motivations to excel and to perform better at functions allocated from the senior members are often not dictated with the aim to derive materialistic gain. Advantages that accrue from such mentalities are enormous, for example, superiors in organizations at times provide sympathetic help related to personal problems of the employees. This increases the bond between the employees and their superiors and the loyalty of the employees towards the organization, a feature uncommon in organizations that are American oriented. Unlike the two instances mentioned in the text above, the leaders of the Saudi Arabia follow a middle path (House 20). The culture of Saudi Arabia is not really like the West and then not again like the Far East. The culture of Saudi Arabia has deep religious influence, as the country is a deep Islamic monarchial nation. Unlike the western motivational and leadership skills where there is a myriad of motivational and leadership theories, the Chinese have all the different types of leadership and motivational theories emanating from one basic entity, which is called Confucianism. Confucianism revolves around the Chinese culture. The Chinese are slowly warming up the ideas of western motivational and leadership skills, but the vast majority of the organizations are still clinging on to the Confucian principle (Johns 64). There are three distinct features of the Confucian principles, one is that the ruler guides the subject, father guides the son and the husband guides the wife. Although the modern followers deny the existence of the Confucian influence over the leadership and motivations skills and practices but there is no denying of the fact that the Chinese still believe that the roles played by the female and the male are different. That evidently points out that the motivational and leadership skills followed by the Chinese are distinct for the men and women (Maslow 89), an unfamiliar case in the Western nations, the USA in particular. The western cultures have already become accustomed to the fact that the women just like the men have equal role to play. This difference is even more evident in case of Saudi Arabia; the women are kept segregated from decision taking roles. 4.0 Motivation methods and/or leadership practices or views Americans can adopt. China, USA and UAE, vary in their leadership practices. Despite the fact that most of the motivational and leaderships theories and practices have originated in the west, there are still few things that the west can adopt from their counterparts. The recent financial debacle can provide some indications of the types of motivational and leadership practices that can be adopted by USA. The financial debacle can be blamed partly on the culture of USA (Haire 110), this is the leading capitalist in the world. It is in the nature of the western culture that makes people put their own interest in front of the interest of the other people. This same nature gave the nation some of the world business men. This same nature also drove some of the financial institutions to take uncalculated risks, since it is in nature of the Americans to take risk and turn it into a profit. The objective was to gain power, position and recognition. This need was not on an individual base and it emanated from a collective basis, from the need of the group (McClelland 45). The financial institutions did not think of the consequences that may fall upon them and affect the others since the whole idea is based upon individualism. The Chinese on the other hand sailed past smoothly amidst all the financial troubles since the whole idea is based on collectivism and not on individualism. The motto is safeguarding the objectives and the interests of the group as a whole rather than interests of the individuals. So America can adopt a more collective characteristic rather than adopting an individualistic characteristic. 5.0 The practices which would not work well in the U.S. Practices that would not work for USA primarily rest on the premise that suggests that putting the interest of the group above the interests of the individual. Researchers in international motivation and leadership practices in argue that China and Saudi Arabia use the dominant model, and it is a leader centered model, and the former means following a leader. Instead of adopting a dominant model a more holistic model need to be embraced. The holistic model makes the leaders and followers to be seen at the same level. This kind of model is used in far-east and the middle-eastern countries like the China and Saudi Arabia. The same kind of model may not be applicable in USA. This is because of the reasons that in America, the whole motivational and leadership practices and theories indicate the need to form a great and outstanding leader, to stand apart from the pack, to be pack leaders or to lead the pack. Or in other words, it is a strict dominant model, or a leader centered model. It is a common practice that the high performing organizations link the leadership strategy to business strategy. In China it is a lot different picture (Vroom 36). The high performance of the firm are not related to the leadership strategy of the CEO, but gets related to group effort. If the same kind of recognition is being adopted in USA, then it may not work out since it has always been practice to link the performance of the organization with the effort of an untiring visionary leader. 6.0 Lessons managers could learn from the two other countries from the U.S. China and Saudi Arabia can both adopt some of the motivational theories and leadership theories like the instinct theory of motivation. This kind of motivation depends upon the evolutionary pattern of the people. The Chinese and Saudi Arabian cultures do not support aggressive and risk taking behaviors like practices in America, so adoption of this kind of motivational approach may prove to be not effective. Other than this approach, there are various kinds of approaches that can be applied like the incentive theory of motivation. The incentive theory of motivation is very much prevalent in America. This kind of motivation can be used to improve the work output of the employees or increase the efficiency of the employees. This kind of motivation fulfills the basic needs as stated in the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The drive theory of motivation can also be adopted by China and Saudi Arabia. The drive theory of motivation is not culture dependent; this motivation drives people to take pre emptive actions. The pre emptive actions are like precautionary actions taken before the incident happens. The arousal theory of motivation is culture independent and not limited by any factors like psychological profile and characteristics of the individuals (Hackman 260). The individuals are provided with mental stimulant or mental arousal by showcasing cases or video or stating exemplary figures as examples. The stimulants act as providers of motivation. For example the managers at any Chinese company or Abu Dhabi based company, can provide motivational books or motivational video of employees who have proved to be exceptionally brilliant in their line of work. 7.0 Conclusion Most of the leadership and motivational theories have their origination in USA. The western counties have used applied and made further changes to the motivational and leadership strategies. The practices suited their culture and way of life. The American motivational and leadership practices have always endeavored to produce a great player rather than to become a great team player. The Chinese and the Abu Dhabi companies have adopted the Western styled motivational and leadership styles. This adoption has not been without problem. This is because of the reason both the Chinese and Saudi Arabian cultures differ significantly than the American culture. The adoptions of the American leadership and motivational values have interfered with the value rooted deep inside the individuals of the eastern and Middle Eastern countries. For this reason the people sometimes have problem with the adoption of the American value system. Work cited Alderfer, Peterson. Existence, Relatedness and Growth: Human Needs in Organizational Settings. New York, The Free Press, 1972.Print. Dessler, Gary. Management of Leadership and Motivation. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 2011. Print. Funder, David. The Personality Puzzle. New York, Norton & Company. 2008. Print. Hackman, Jackson. “Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 1.6 (2010): 250-279. Print. Haire, Moore. “Cultural patterns in the role of the manager.” Industrial Relations, 2.2 (2002): 95-117.Print. House, Robert. “Path-Goal Theory of Leadership.” Journal of Contemporary Business 7.4 (2006):12-23.Print. Johns, Gary. Theories of Work Motivation. Michigan, Harper Collins College Publishers, 2010.Print. Maslow, Abraham. Motivation and Personality. New York, Harper & Row, 1970.Print. McClelland, Dickinson. Human Motivation. Illionis, Foresman, 2000.Print. Vroom, Jago. The New Leadership: Managing Participation in Organizations. Prentice-Hall, 1988. Print. Read More