Australian leadership is distinct because of its emphasis on egalitarianism and individualism, and Australian leaders are expected to maintain the perception of equality with their followers. Collectivists, such as the Japanese, tend to sacrifice individual needs for the whole group.
It is apparent that the roles and responsibilities of leaders vary with hierarchical level. Leadership is a major component of the social fabric of many organization Lord et al. What allowances must be made when outlining organisational culture.
Though these cultures are wildly diverse, geographically and in their religions, beliefs and values, they can be categorised as a group, as behaviourally they follow the same pattern with the following traits and commonalities: Courageous, diplomatic, innovative, inspirational, and visionary are seen as more important for high-level leaders than for low-level leaders, while traits associated with daily operations and interacting with followers e.
The findings indicate that the perceived importance of specific leadership traits is determined partly by culturally endorsed interpersonal norms and partly by the requirements of the leadership role. Along these lines, beliefs of Chinese managers have been found to be more autocratic countries, especially regarding sharing information with subordinates and participative decision-making Redding and Casey, The largest study thus ar, project GLOBE, involved data from approximately 17, managers from organizations in 62 countries around the world.
Cross cultural similarities in leadership prototypes were also found by Gerstner and Day For example, Australian student have been shown to prefer an assertive style e.
Australiamanagers typically create job-based work designs founded on individual initiative and responsibility. For example, a leader who adopts an autocratic style may be more accepted and effective in a high power distance culture e. A charismatic leader establishes an organization with dedicated followers who believe in his mission.
People who act to maximize their personal gain behave as individualists. China than in a low power distance culture e. Some knowledge of the subject was helpful in our travels abroad or when welcoming foreign guests to our shores. There are additional reasons to expect differences between Australians and Chinese in terms of the importance placed on different leadership traits.
In short, there may be sound reasons to expect the Chinese to endorse a different set of leadership traits to that of other cultures.
Australian leadership is distinct because of its emphasis on egalitarianism and individualism, and Australian leaders are expected to maintain the perception of equality with their followers. Third, there is evidence that Chinese managers do not view communication as especially important for effective leadership.
The Reactive group is located in all major countries in Asia, except the Indian sub-continent, which is hybrid. Leaders from these countries tend to be less autocratic and more sensitive to employee needs. For example, Australian student have been shown to prefer an assertive style e.
Typically, this results in high rates of low morale, absenteeism and employee turnover. Team members feel like they have control over their work. In collectivist cultures, employees expect leaders to focus on tasks but also show concern toward people.
Collectivists, on the other hand, are expected to act to help the community. Perceptions of leadership are what followers act on and, therefore such perceptions can impact the outcomes of the leadership process Bennett, ; Gerstner and Day, Given that leaders at different hierarchical levels perform different functions, followers are likely to expect different things from them.
According to Hofstede and Bondone of the key principles of Confucianism is that social stability is dependent on unequal relationships. There is evidence that traits associated with transformational leadership e.
These personnel, especially expatriate managers, need to be aware of cultural differences and similarities in leadership prototypes in offer to perform effectively. Dorfman and Howell, ; Ralston et al.
According to the research, cognitive prototypes appear to be a central component of implicit leadership theories Lord et al.
The increase in trade between China and developed A Cross Cultural Comparison of the Importance of Leadership Traits for Effective Low-level and High-level Leaders Australia and China Gian Casimir Newcastle Graduate School of Business, Australia David A.
Waldman School of Global Management and Leadership, Arizona State University, USA ABSTRACT. Request PDF on ResearchGate | A Cross Cultural Comparison of the Importance of Leadership Traits for Effective Low-level and High-level LeadersAustralia and China | This study compares perceptions of the importance of 18 traits for effective low-level leaders and high-level leaders.
a cross-cultural comparison of leadership choices: commonalities and differences among female leaders in the united states, kazakhstan and sweden. A Cross Cultural Comparison of the Importance of Leadership Traits for Effective Low-level and High-level Leaders: Australia and China Gian Casimir Newcastle Graduate School of Business, Australia David A.
Waldman School of Global Management and Leadership, Arizona State University, USA. The complexities of merging corporate cultures, issues of leadership, planning, decision-making, recruitment and task assignment are all compromised by the nation-traits of the people involved.
What allowances must be made when outlining organisational culture? Management students of both sexes from three different countries—Australia, Germany, and India—estimated the percentage to which one of three stimulus groups, that is, executives-in-general (no gender specification), male executives, or female executives, possesses person-orientedand task-oriented leadership traits.
Participants also rated .Cross culture comparison of leadership traits