The Leadership and Management Styles by Cross-Culture
The leadership and management styles by cross-culture is a discourse that interest many researchers and scholars. Culture presents a clear leadership and management approach although it has deteriorated due to westernization, globalization, and education (Talaghani, Salmani and Taatian, 2010).
Gender Perspective and Culture
A study conducted on Filipina managers in Metro Manila found that managerial behavior and leadership were embedded in gender perspective and culture (House et al., 2013). Also, they related masculinity culture values to gender roles in leadership. Also, they found out that culture such as in the Philippines where masculinity is relatively high tend to have fewer women in managerial and leadership positions.
Uy (2011) confirms this claim and asserts that senior seats are reserved for men and women take minor titles. However, Hechanova and Cementina-opoc (2013) noted that Filipino women possess un-official power which is culturally acceptable. Additionally, research on Filipino businesswomen revealed how they integrate gender roles and cultural dynamics with leadership practices. House et al (2013) adds to the literature of women involved and noted an increase in their awareness and now they are occupying higher ranks in public and private sectors in the Philippines. The prominent managerial style practice by Filipina businesspeople is authoritative-benevolent. Such evidence is in line with Uy observation indicating that paternalism is a culture in the Philippines (2011). Authoritarian managerial behavior is acceptable as workers expect paternal care in exchange for unquestionable loyalty. Similarly, paternalistic leadership is also most dominant in China. Zlang, Tsui, and Wang found out that followers who are traditionalists, paternalistic had a positive influence on the outcome but harmful to modernists (2011). Hechanova and Cementina-opoc revealed how Philippines managers use different powers including direct, indirect, and legitimate to achieve strategic objectives.
Achievement-Oriented Leadership
A cross-culture research covering both the Filipinos and Chinese leaders revealed that both are achievement-oriented and use participative leadership style (House et al., 2013). According to Li, Leung Chen and Luo (2012), leaders in Chinese must display distinctive and effectiveness in handling negotiations in complex environments. In Chinese culture, harmony is a primary concept in managerial behavior (Zlang et al., 2011). Confucianism postulates relationship that govern society and displays a clear cut between parties like ruler and minister. In an organization, everyone holds a specific position and relationship dictates the true collaboration with each other. Chinese businesspeople use strong norms that determine communication channels and job description. Filipino businesspeople use pakikisama that implies conformity with the group decision (Talaghani, Salmani and Taatian, 2010). Consequently, it calls for smooth interpersonal relationships which serve to promote self-respect. Due to the drastic environmental changes, House et al proposes that leaders develop an organizational culture that can synchronize both leadership and management (2013).
Important Findings
The leadership and management discourse of Filipino-Chinese revolve around certain perspectives. In both cultures, women hold a lesser role in management and leadership position, but that paradigm is shifting rapidly. Traditionalists use an authoritarian form of leadership and management, and to those with the similar mindset, it yields positive results. However, it has an adverse outcome to modernists and as a result form of leadership employed by Filipino-Chinese businessmen is also shifting to incorporate westernized leadership styles such as transformational and participative styles. Chinese leadership philosophies such as Confucianism has played a significant role in shaping organizational behavior and also setting relationships. For instance, a culture of harmony is common in many work setting, and negotiations take a direction that sees everyone is satisfied. Also, Filipino businesspeople have a culture that incorporates members' contribution. There are a lot of similarities between China and the Philippines leadership and management styles, but no fair comparison has been achieved so far and therefore present an avenue for research.
Research Methodology
The primary design for carrying out this research is a quantitative method. It is more appealing to use quantitative method due to available theoretical approaches such as path-goal theory and situational approach that have ready leadership testing questionnaires. It is therefore easy to generate a measurable outcome, which is necessary to compare the two cultures. The methods of data collection will come mostly through the issuing of questionnaires through emails or printed material depending on the availability and geographical separation. The target will be leaders and followers. Also, secondary means such as articles, national records and statistic will be used for comparison purposes.
A purposive sampling technique will be employed in issuing questionnaires to the leaders while a random sampling will be used for the subordinates. The reason behind this strategy is due to few leaders that are easy to identify with, but workers are many. A sample size of 20 leaders and 200 followers will be used. The study will run across the Filipino-Chinese businesses found in Manila, and the ratio will be 10 leaders from the Philippines and 10 from China. The same ratio applies to the followers.
In data analyzing, descriptive statistics primarily measuring the central tendencies and dispersion will be applied. A graphical rendering such as bar graphs, border plots and charts will be used to represent the data. SPSS software will also find use in the analysis to find the t values and generation of graphs. A T-test will be used to determine the validity of the null hypotheses with a confidence level of 95%.
References
Hechanova, R. M., " Cementina-Olpoc, R. (2013). Transformational leadership, change management, and commitment to change: A comparison of academic and business organizations. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(1), 11-19.
House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. J., " de Luque, M. F. S. (2013). Strategic leadership across cultures: GLOBE study of CEO leadership behavior and effectiveness in 24 countries. Sage Publications.
Li, P. P., Leung, K., Chen, C. C., " Luo, J. D. (2012). Indigenous research on Chinese management: What and how. Management and Organization Review, 8(1), 7-24.
Taleghani, G., Salmani, D., " Taatian, A. (2010). Survey of leadership styles in different cultures. Iranian Journal of management studies, 3(3), 91-111.
Uy, A. O. O. (2011). What Motivates Entrepreneurs? A Study of the Value Systems of Filipino Entrepreneur. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 15.
Zhang, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., " Wang, D. X. (2011). Leadership behaviors and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 851-862.
