Global Leadership and Women Leaders - Case Study Example

Question 1 The women leadership styles are similar in some dimensions but also show some differences to some extent. For instance, the women leaders in both US and Singapore display high levels of values-oriented leadership style. On the other hand, a high level of task-oriented leadership style is only portrayed among China women leaders. The U.S., Singapore, and India do not prescribe to the task-oriented leadership style. Differences in the type of leadership style used come about due to different cultural beliefs that give diverging meanings about leadership dimensions. The women leaders in US were regarded to apply value-oriented leadership style due to their individualism nature. The women leaders in China portrayed task-oriented leadership style. On the other hand, women leaders in India prescribed to the idea of nurturant-task leadership style (Bhatnagar, & Rajadhyaksha, 2001). Finally, the women leaders in Singapore displayed a high-value leadership style coupled with paternalistic leadership style (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Question 2 In the study of gender issues in cross-cultural leadership, different results will mainly come out compared to the studies disregarding gender issues. This is because gender issues are defined by the gender stereotypes in the society. Men and women are believed to have their different roles in leadership. Unfortunately, gender stereotype assumes that women lack some attributes that could allow them take some more senior positions in administration (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Different cultures differ in their beliefs about individual roles in the societies. Therefore, when gender issues become the key factor in the study of cultural leadership, different outcomes will prevail. In addition, gender issues may result in unreal results. This is due to the pressure put on the women sex in the workplace so as to demonstrate they are capable. They have to show agentic behaviors to remain relevant in leadership (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Question 3 Participative Leadership Style This style of leadership is portrayed by those who value the inputs of their subordinates and include them in decision-making. Women do well with participative leadership. On the study of female leadership, it is important to keep in mind the nature of the female gender and who they are personality. Female gender has an inclusive and accommodating character. This comes about because they are created to be mothers and people who approach matters with more softness and inclusive (Aryee, 1992). Usually, women associate with their children back at home and can also associate better with their fellow workmates. On the other hand, men always want to be at the helm of decision-making. They do not put into consideration of other people`s decisions. Men, therefore, do not fit to apply the participative leadership style (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995). Participative leadership style requires people who can overcome their ego and give attention to the people who seem to matter less to them. The leader has to compromise and try to fit in the shoes of the people at the lower positions. Women possess all these characters thus making them stand out to be the best in applying the participative leadership style (Murdock, 2015). Question 4 There are conspicuous differences on the women leadership style between the Asian countries that between the Asian countries and the US. The reason behind these differences includes the following. First, the only difference between women leadership in Asia and the US is that the US tends to focus more on individual leadership compared to the Asian countries where women leadership is more of a group oriented. This difference is not so salient since it is not easy to differentiate how these two leadership styles are applied unless a lot of attention is paid. Secondly, in the Asian countries, a lot of emphases is put on the group leadership where paternalistic and nurturant –task oriented leadership styles are prevalent. The paternalistic leader usually behaves as if he is a father to the subordinates and is sufficiently concerned about the followers and subordinates. The nurturant leaders on the hand care for their subordinates growth and well-being and also they are task oriented. In China, women leaders display paternalistic style of leadership. The culture of the Chinese people has shaped the women leaders. The Indian culture has also shaped the Indian women leader to be nurturant task oriented. These differences are so conspicuous (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Question 5 Apparently, in the US, individualism is the way of life. Every person is motivated individually and for the individual benefits (Schwartz, 1994). It is, for this reason, whereby the success factors are explained in terms of individualism. For instance, a manager is motivated by seeing something or even hearing from another individual. He or she is not motivated by the help of another since in the US it is all about individualism. According to Peus, Braun & Knipfer (2014), the success factors in the US were for individual purposes. For instance, many of the US women managers stressed that they had to read the book find something new and also gather information individually so as to advance (Geert, 2001). The leadership nature in the US also contributes to the occurrence of individualism since every individual has to work hard for their individual advancement. In the US, since childhood, the culture of individualism is created, which grows within a child up to the level of working. This translates to the reason everyone will only succeed if they remain to be individualistic(Geert, 2001). On the other hand, the success factors in China are explained in terms of collectiveness. The society in China has created a culture of collectiveness and everything is done for the benefit of a certain group and everyone is incorporated in decision-making(Fan, 2000). Because of these reasons, success factors are always associated with collectiveness. For instance, in China due to lack of learned role models, women got motivated by their mother`s inputs. The mothers played a significant role in coaching and helping their daughters rise in the helm of leadership. The trained leaders also translate them the same spirit of collectiveness to their next generations. Also, everyone in China wants to be associated with a success of a group. The spirit of collectivism has completely dominated the Chinese culture whereby they discourage individualism. To motivate this clarification, the American dream states “this is the Americans’ hope for a better quality of life and a higher standard of living than their parents” (“Individualism”, 2009). This means that every person in US has to work hard on their own so as to reap the benefits, individual. On the other hand, China has had a long tradition of collectiveness. Individuals are encouraged to identify themselves with the society and only do what is the best to the society. The Chinese citizens are also discouraged to attack the Chinese society publicly. Question 6 Glass ceilings are the unseen barriers that bar women from going up the corporate ladder despite their achievement either in education or corporate results (Jogulu, 2010). The most glass ceilings that barred women from progress were mostly gender based on the stereotypes the society is made up of about the female gender (Van der Boon, 2003). In the United States, the glass ceilings included the expectations of negative performance by the women leaders and the double bind (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). The male gender always expected the women leaders to make mistakes their leadership and result in negative performance. They did not believe in women, and thus women had to work hard and go an extra mile so as to prove the society that they could still deliver as good as the male gender. Women, therefore, remained restricted from assuming significant leadership roles in the corporate world while men were always preferred. Another barrier that was found with women achieving leadership in the United States was the caregiver and responsibilities women have been bestowed on by the society. Women are expected to bear children, extend motherly care to them and on the other pursue their dreams of going up the corporate ladder. In the United States, women could not find it easy to cope with all the roles bestowed on them. This barrier has always kept men ahead of women and taking up all the corporate positions (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). In China also, women in leadership are affected by the roles and responsibilities the Chinese society has traditionally been following. Women are expected to sacrifice themselves to take care of the families thus posing difficulties in delivering at their capacities in their jobs (Leung, 2003). They are therefore left out any time promotion is scheduled. In India, the women believe they must be married by default and have children. They have a feeling that the family is the source of support, and they must, therefore, focus their full attention on it. The family has therefore barred them from progressing in the corporate ladder. Finally, in Singapore, the women believed that it was family keeping them working. They could not be working if they had no family. They assumed their caregiver and support family roles and responsibilities. They could therefore not focus much of their attention on the jobs. They had no real interests ongoing higher the corporate ladder. In only women could go beyond the barriers mentioned above they can clinch the most top positions on the corporate ladder (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Question 7 There are four levels used to analyze the success factors of individuals. They include individual level, interpersonal level, organisational level and the social systems level (Peus, & Traut-Mattausch, 2007). The four levels are to some extent mutually dependent on each other. Every level is necessary for the other level to be achieved properly and for success to be achieved. Also, every individual finds success when all the four levels are successfully achieved. For instance, the individual level and interpersonal level are interdependent. The individual level focuses on the individual resources such as achievement orientations or career aspirations while the interpersonal level focuses on the relationship of the individual with the peers, subordinates, and the supervisors. For the person to achieve the individual level he or she has to create a good relationship with his workmates and the subordinates. It is not possible to achieve the career goals if he or she is not in terms with the subordinates(Peus, & Traut-Mattausch, 2007). On the hand, the achievement of an individual determines his or her relationship with the subordinates. If the manager is a nonperformer, he or she will have a training relationship with his or her subordinates because they expect the manager to set the examples and lead for them to follow. The organisational level is also interdependence with the individual level. The organisational level involves the practices related to selection and promotion. Individuals have to work extra hard for them to be selected for promotion or even for better roles. The existence of promotions in an organisation acts as a morale booster to workers, and they will always be motivated to work hard. Consequently, they end up achieving exemplary. Finally, the organisational level is interdependent with social systems. The practices of selection in workplace and promotions are done in a manner that they avoid gender stereotypes (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). Question 8 The title `on becoming a leader in Asia and America: Empirical evidence from women managers` is not the most appropriate title for this article. This is because the article is not about becoming a leader, but rather it talks about the women leaders in Asia and America. It explains their success factors and their barrier factors to higher positions. It also expounds on the leadership styles that are evident prevalent with these women. The article mostly concentrates on showing the similarities or the differences among the Asian and American women on issues of success factors, barrier factors and the leadership styles they use in their leadership capacities. The appropriate title for this article should have been, `the contrast of the Asian and American women leaders`. The title could have given the reader a general concept of what the article talks about. This title is appropriate because the article only talks about the similarities and differences between the situations the women leaders in Asia and America go through and the different leadership styles they use. The data presented in this article shows comparisons between the different countries named in the article. An inclusive title was, therefore, the most appropriate (Peus, Braun & Knipfer, 2014). References Adler, N. J., 1997. Global leadership: Women leaders. MIR: Management International Review, 171-196. Aryee, S. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of work-family conflict among married professional women: Evidence from Singapore. Human relations, 45(8), 813-837. Bhatnagar, D., & Rajadhyaksha, U. (2001). Attitudes towards work and family roles and their implications for career growth of women: A report from India. Sex Roles, 45(7-8), 549-565. Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G., 1995. Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: a meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 117(1), 125. Fan, Y., 2000. A classification of Chinese culture. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 7(2), 3-10. Geert H. Hofstede. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organisations across nations. Geert Hofstede (Ed.). Sage. Individualism | Clearly Cultural. (2009). Available at: http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-cultural-dimensions/individualism/ [Accessed 1 May 2015]. Jogulu, U. D., 2010. Culturally-linked leadership styles. Leadership &Organisation Development Journal, 31(8), 705-719. Leung, A. S., 2003. Feminism in transition: Chinese culture, ideology and the development of the women's movement in China. Asia Pacific journal of management, 20(3), 359-374. Murdock, K., 2015. Participative Leadership: What it Is and When it Works Best. [online] Blog.udemy.com. Available at: https://blog.udemy.com/participative-leadership/ [Accessed 1 May 2015]. Peus, C., & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2007). Factors influencing women managers' success. In C. Wankel (Ed.), Handbook of 21st century management (pp. 157–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Peus, C., Braun, S., & Knipfer, K., 2014. On becoming a leader in Asia and America: Empirical evidence from women managers. The Leadership Quarterly. Schwartz, S. H., 1994. Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. Sage Publications, Inc. Van der Boon, M., 2003. Women in international management: an international perspective on women's ways of leadership. Women in Management Review, 18(3), 132-146. Read More