1
Master Thesis
MSc. Business Studies – International Management Supervisor: Erik Dirksen
Second Reader: Michelle Westermann-Behaylo Student: Anne-Marie Renate Gisela Kochmann Student ID: 11086599
Date: 18.08.2017
THE ART OF CHINESE LEADERSHIP
-
Examining the Manifestation of Traditional Chinese
Philosophies within a Western Context
2
Statement of Originality
This document is written by student Anne-Marie Renate Gisela Kochmann, who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document is original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
3
ABSTRACT
Leadership has become of increasing scholarly interest as a study of a cross-cultural phenomenon. Yet, the plethora of leadership research is dominated by Western scholars, based on western data. Simply applying Western leadership theories within a Chinese context inhibits difficulties. For that reason, the research aims to inductively develop a leadership theory on Chinese leadership – within a culturally distinct context. A comparative qualitative research study will explore the manifestation of traditional Chinese philosophies within leadership - of Chinese subsidiaries operating in the Netherlands.
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would sincerely like to thank my supervisor, Erik Dirksen, for his continuous support, trust and patience with me. I highly appreciate his trust in me and my work. Without his guidance, I would have not been able to accomplish what I have at this point. It has been a pleasure to have had Erik Dirksen as a supervisor.
I would also like to thank my Professors at HKUST and the UvA, which have inspired and influenced me until this very day.
At last, I would also like to thank my parents, for their endless support and encouragement throughout my educational path.
5
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION………7
2. LITERATURE REVIEW………....10
2.1 The Cultural Relativity in Leadership………..….10
2.1.1The Embeddedness of Leadership Constructs within a Nation………...10
2.1.2 The Culture Concept………...13
2.1.3 The Cultural Layering ………...14
2.1.4 Challenging Hofstede´s Cross-Cultural Paradigm……….….15
2.2 Leadership………....18
2.2.1Defining Leadership………..…..18
2.2.2 Explicit and Implicit Leadership Theories……….…...19
2.2.3 Culture based Leadership vs. Organizational based Leadership………...20
2.2.4 Contextual Importance………...21
2.3 Contemporary Chinese and Western Leadership Principles………...23
2.3.1Western Leadership Principles………24
2.3.2 Chinese Leadership Principles………....25
2.3.3 Similarities and Differences within the Leadership Principles………26
2.3.4Cognitive Styles and Strategic Decision-Making………27
2.4 Research Model Development ………29
2.4.1The Cultural Gap ………...30
2.4.2 Historical Development of Philosophies ………32
2.4.3 Integration: A Chinese mix of Philosophies ………..34
2.4.4 Confucianism………35
2.4.4.1 Confucianism on Leadership………....36
2.4.4.2 Confucianism on Contemporary Leadership………..37
2.4.5 Legalism……….38
2.4.5.1 Legalism on Leadership……….39
2.4.5.2 Legalism of Contemporary Leadership ………..40
2.4.6 Daoism ……..……….41
2.4.6.1 Daoism on Leadership ……..………...42
2.4.6.2 Daoism on Contemporary Leadership……..………....43
2.4.7 Comparing the three schools of thought………..44
2.4.8 Holistic perspectives on Chinese Leadership ……….46
3. METHODOLOGY..………...…48
3.1 Ontological and Epistemological Foundations of the Research………..48
3.2 Qualitative Multiple Case Study Design………...49
3.3 Qualitative Criteria of Multiple Case Studies ………..50
3.4 The Sampling Selection – Identifying the Chinese Subsidiaries ………...51
3.5 Interview Sampling and Data Selection Method ……….55
3.6 DataAnalysis Methods………56
4. FINDINGS………..………....57
4.1 Within-CaseAnalysis ………...58
4.1.1 Case1……….………..58
6
4.1.1.2 Analysis Phase 2 – Underlying Motivations ……….63
4.1.2Case 2……….………...73
4.1.2.1 Analysis Phase 1 – Manifestation of Chinese Philosophies on Leadership………73
4.1.2.2 Analysis Phase 2 – Underlying Motivations ………77
4.1.3Case 3……….………..85
4.1.3.1 Analysis Phase 1 – Manifestation of Chinese Philosophies on Leadership………86
4.1.3.2 Analysis Phase 2 – Underlying Motivations ………90
4.2 Cross-Case Analysis and Further Discussion on Findings……..………...97
4.3 Discussion on Findings ………...98
5. CONCLUSION………..102
5.1 Social and Scientific Relevance ………...104
5.2 Future Research ………...105
5.3 Limitations ………106
6. REFERENCES………...107
7. APPENDIX………...116
7
1. INTRODUCTION
China has emerged as a burgeoning superpower and is the behemoth of the Asian and world economies of the 21st century. The country has attracted more than $450 billion of foreign direct investment since 1990. In the first three months of 2017, China attracted more than $32.91 billion in foreign direct investment. In 2016, China had a staggering trade surplus to the United States of more than $347 billion. However, Chinese companies have also began to make remarkable forays abroad. In 2015, it was estimated that Chinese companies invested up to $86 billion in foreign direct investment. The increasing importance of China in the world economy and the growing interaction with western companies has highlighted the significant cultural gap which exists between the ´West´ and China, and amplified our lack of thorough understanding of underlying mechanisms. It has never been more important for business leaders to understand the strategic behaviour of Chinese business leaders.
The research will study one of the most controversial, insightful and salient facets of management, that of leadership and the underlying cultural influence. Leadership has become of increasing scholarly interest as a study of a cross-cultural phenomenon. Rao (2008) refers to the study of leadership as a “hot topic”, Pittinsky and Zhu (2005) quote “The study of changing Chinese culture and its impact on Chinese leadership is a gold mine for leadership research”. In the academic community, business leadership research has focused on Western leadership and their underlying motivations. However, little is known about indigenous Chinese leadership and its underlying cultural influences.
The paper provides a significant step forward in understanding the complex and varied leadership styles of Chinese business leaders by examining their leadership approach in relation to traditional Chinese philosophies. The influence and manifestation of traditional Chinese philosophies on leadership will be studied within a Western setting. Management philosophies and leadership practice of Chinese managers will be examined, within Chinese subsidiaries and Chinese founded MNE´s.
Thus, the research has a two-fold approach. First, the aim is to identify the influence of traditional Chinese philosophies on leadership and determine the underlying motivation. Subsequently, the aim of the research is to determine which traditional philosophy is more influential over the others and why. The research will be set within a culturally distinct context – the Netherlands. Within the Netherlands approximately 100 new Chinese subsidiaries are established each year, competing successfully with local companies. The research aims to study an unexplored research field and add a unique perspective to the study of Chinese leadership. The aim of the research is to explore what role Chinese cultural traditions play in influencing Chinese business leaders´ management philosophies and practices, when operating in western markets. Thus, the research aims to understand what role cultural influences and contextual circumstances play within the leadership of Chinese managers.
8
The research topic is highly complex in nature and acknowledges the potential influence of various sources, in order to avoid bias.
RQ: What is the relevance of traditional Chinese philosophies on influencing the leadership strategies of Chinese managers, who operate in a western context?
The research question is a broad approach to study an unexplored research area. In order to better address and analyse the research question, working propositions will be established throughout the literature review. The working propositions are derived from the following sub-questions, which correspond to the main research question.
1) Which traditional Chinese philosophy dominantly influences leadership of Chinese managers, in a Western context?
2) Are certain philosophies more influential on various aspects of leadership, eg. Human leadership vs. organizational management?
3) What significance do Western sources of influence hold? Why?
4) Are we able to observe convergence of culturally distinct leadership strategies?
The study of management has attracted a significant amount of scholarly attention from multiple disciplines. However, management research has been predominantly driven by western scholars with western data (Littrell, 2002). Only a small amount of research has focused on the management behaviour of Chinese business leaders and their sources of influence. The research responds to the calls for more Asian leadership research (Ghemawat, 2008) to counterbalance the predominantly western perspective. Thus, a critical issue facing researchers concerns contextualizing Chinese management research. It raises the question for researchers to what extent existing management theories, which have been developed in a western context, should be applied to the Chinese context. Ma & Tsui (2015) argues that there are two distinct solutions to the problem, namely the theory application and theory creation. The former approach advocates direct application of existing theory to a Chinese context. The latter is in its nature a grounded theory approach, building theories based on a unique Chinese management phenomena. The research will attempt to create theory from an inductive perspective. Chinese management is a unique phenomenon, with a large spectrum of influences. Capturing these with Western management theories will inhibit difficulties. Furthermore, the aim is not to study whether Chinese management follows Western thought, but rather to determine a unique Chinese leadership strategy in a Western context and the elements of such.
East Asian philosophies and Asian-based religions are beginning to be studied in attempt to understand non-Christian management. Pioneering scholars have begun to link ancient Chinese philosophies to that
9
of Chinese management, as sources of influence (Scarborough, 1998; Hill, 2006; McDonald 2012; Zhu, 1995).
Management philosophies and leadership values are, in essence a set of beliefs of an individual in a leadership position, used to guide decision and leadership making process. Beliefs are strongly rooted in the cultural roots of a nation (Hofstede 1988). As one of the oldest civilizations, with the largest populations and a booming economy, China is highly unique country which demands more culture sensitive leadership research. For instance, Chinese people lean towards a more holistic, systematic, non-linear, fatalistic world view. The culture is one of high-context communication and collectivism. Trompenaars (1994) describes the Chinese society to be driven by the relationship and not tasks, comfortable with change yet oriented towards the past. It is in stark contrast to western societies which are characterized to be particularistic, rule-based, short-term oriented and highly individualistic. Increasing trade and foreign direct investment between China and western countries has amplified the tremendous differences between the cultures and leadership. We require a deeper understanding how these cultural differences have been shaped over centuries. Yet, only a small amount of studies have ever addressed the cultural underpinnings of Chinese leadership.
The paper provides a significant step forward in understanding the complex and varied management practices of Chinese business leaders, by examining the underlining management philosophies and leadership values, in relation to traditional Chinese philosophies.
Chinese leadership is embedded in centuries of cultural development, shaped by distinct philosophical and ideological influences. In order to understand the thoughts and values of Chinese managers, one must be aware of the cultural depth of China. Many schools of thought have blossomed over the centuries. Yet, there is a serious lack of appreciation for the diversity and dynamism of Chinese philosophies and ideologies: Confucianism is for most scholars the short-cut to understanding Chinese culture. The Chinese leadership of the 21st is not well understood by most of the outside world, which has contributed to an increase in tension between business leaders and failed co-operation.
The three most dominant philosophies – namely Confucianism, Daoism1 and Legalism - within the contemporary Chinese society are explored in greater depth and connected to contemporary
leadership. An archetypal business leader of each dominant philosophy will be established. The aim is to allow the reader to better understand the dictates of each philosophy and understand how these are reflected in contemporary leadership.
Although contemporary China is strongly influenced by Communism and its underlying values, it will not be studied within the context of this research. Communism, compared to the traditional Chinese
1 The spelling of Daoism deviates from the Western spelling of Taoism. This is deliberately done, because the
10
philosophies, is a rather new philosophical thinking, which strongly focuses on economic and political variables. Within this research, the focus will be on the influence of philosophical thought on the values and behaviour of individuals. Furthermore, the research argues that the value systems and cultural traits are shaped by thousands of years of evolution (Williamson 2000), which will not be drastically changed by a political transition. At last, philosophies such as Confucianism and Daoism have gained increasing momentum once again, since the turn of the century. It highlights the significance of traditional philosophies and their underlying influence on cultural traits.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 The Cultural Relativity in Leadership
2.1.1 The Embeddedness of Leadership Constructs within a Nation
Most people who have visited or worked in other countries would readily agree that cultural differences exist. However, in the 1950´s and 1960´s the dominant belief within Europe and the U.S has been that management was something universal. Principles of sound management existed, which were independent of the national environment. If local practices deviated from the norm, it was expected that these would be adjusted to fit the universal strategy of management. The universality of sound management would lead to nation’s converging in terms of their business strategies and leadership. This theory applied to less developed nations as well, who would in theory assimilate their management strategies to that of developed nations (Hofstede 1983). During the 1970´s, the ultimate convergence of management began to wane. At the same time, the supranational organizations such as the European Common Market, which was found on the basis of convergence, began to realize the stubbornness of nations (Hofstede 1983). National and even regional differences will be persistent – and will arguably remain one of the most challenging and crucial aspects to management, particularly in leadership. The concept of a nation and a distinct culture, is significant for leadership for at least three reasons (Hofstede 1983). The first reason has sociological roots. The concept of a nation, or nationality, has symbolic meaning to individuals. We all derive part of our identity from it: it creates a distinct self-image and common identify with others. Second, a nationality, or cultural belonging, is important psychologically. The thinking process of individuals is partly conditioned by national culture factors (Hofstede 1983), such as early life experience within the family and later in educational experiences within schools and organizations. Such exposure differs across national borders and distinctly shapes the behaviour of individuals. Third, nations are political units which are rooted in history, with distinct institutions: legal systems, forms of government, educational systems, and labour associations. Both formal and informal institutions differ among nations.
11
Fundamental differences in national systems can be explained by the social analysis construct by Williamson (2000) (fig. 1), which highlights the interconnections and influences of each level within countries. The framework demonstrates how the higher levels impose constraints on the lower levels. The top level is the social embeddedness, where the national norms, mores, traditions, customs and beliefs are shaped. Level 1 is taken as a constant by most economists, because it changes very slowly – on the order of centuries or millennials. Which Douglas North (1991) writes upon “What is it about informal constraints that gives them such pervasive influence upon the long-run character of economies?”. The following levels, such as the institutional level and the governance level, are strongly influenced and shaped by the social embeddedness of the nation – namely the traditions, norms and religion. Because contemporary leadership is shaped by the beliefs, values and norms of individuals, the cultural embeddedness plays a significant role in studying the leadership philosophies and practices of nations (Hofstede & Bond, 1998).
12
Source: Williamson 2000
13
2.1.2 The Culture Concept
Culture is a highly complex and multidimensional phenomenon. It is in fact a long disputed and highly relevant research topic, especially in the field of leadership. The world has become “flat” (Friedman, 2005), fuelled by the rapid pace of globalisation. With the profound increase in international interactions between companies and individuals, cultural differences have been amplified, leading to a rapid rise on culture-specific leadership research.
Culture is in fact too complex to find a simple and commonly agreed upon definition. Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952) identified over 160 different definitions of culture. By 2017, this number is likely to have doubled. One of the earliest definitions on leadership has been established by Tyler (1881), who defines culture as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society”. Other commonly cited definitions of culture includes:
All the historically created design for living, explicit and implicit, rational, irrational, and no rational, which exist at any given time as potential guides for the behaviour of men (Kluckhohn & Kelly, 1945)
The integrated sum total of learned behavioural traits that are shared by members of a society (Hoeble, 1960)
Culture compromises the values and unwritten rules that guide behaviour in a corporation (Hussey & Yip, 1992)
The most cited definition on culture has been written by Hofstede (1980), who defines the phenomenon as “….culture is precisely that its essence is collective mental programming: it is that part of our conditioning that we share with other members of our nation, region, or group but not with members of other nations, regions or groups” (Hofstede 1984)
Such cultural programs are difficult to change, unless the individual may be detached from his or her culture. As mentioned earlier, within a nation, culture changes slowly, embedded in centuries of developments (Williamson, 2000). As Hofstede (1984) states, “This is crystallized in the institutions mentioned earlier: government, legal systems, educational systems, industrial relations systems, family structures, religious organizations …. and even scientific theories”.
Based on the insights of Williamson (2000), the research will study traditional Chinese philosophies, as opposed to newly introduced philosophical thoughts. The aim is to determine what role the social embeddedness – namely traditional philosophies, play in shaping the leadership philosophies and practices of Chinese business leaders in different cultural settings.
To reflect on the aforementioned definitions, it is highly evident that culture is correlated with the behaviour of individuals, which is shared with other members within the society. It dictates the thoughts
14
and actions, through underlining mental programing. Leadership revolves around human interactions and behaviour, whether it is individuals or groups, defined as “the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how it can be done effectively, and the process of facilitating individuals and collective efforts to accomplish the shared objectives” (Hassan et al., 2013). Leaders around the globe face similar problems within organizations – how to motivate, influence and organize others to achieve specific goals. How business leaders approach leadership varies significantly, largely influenced by intrinsic beliefs and external stimuli. Thus, it is highly evident that leadership is a highly culture specific phenomenon requiring culture sensitive research.
2.1.3 The Cultural Layering
Hoecklin (1995) argues that each individual carries multiple layers of cultural programming. Basic values are taught to children, defining what is right and wrong, good or bad, logical and illogical. The first level of culture are the fundamental assumptions what it is to be a human being, dictating how to interact with people within the same group and with others. The other layers of culture, such as the professional and organizational culture, are programmed through education and professional training in organizations. Religious values and professional ethics further shape an individual. Thus, different layers of culture teach how things or practices should be done, and determine the fundamental assumptions about existence. Leadership strategies, through their philosophies and practices, are shaped by both the fundamental assumptions of what is right or wrong, good and bad, as well as further layers such as education and organizational training. Leadership strategies of Chinese business leaders operating in developed nations are likely to be influenced by both the fundamental assumptions and religious values, taught early on in life, such as traditional Chinese philosophies. However, at the same time, Chinese managers are exposed to local corporate practice and training in the Netherlands, which may exert an influence on the leadership strategies.
Research of Hofstede (1991) has shown that cultural differences between nations can be captured in four distinct layers – with the core being the value systems, growing out of this core are habits, heroes and symbols. In fact, differences between cultures can be most accurately explained by the value system. A national culture is best embodied by the values individuals hold. Cultural values play a significant role, because they shape people´s beliefs and attitudes, and guide behaviour. Rokeach (1973) defines cultural values as enduring beliefs that certain codes of conduct or states of existence are socially more accepted or preferred, than their opposite. A value system, is portrayed as the core of a culture because it is a relatively permanent perceptual framework that influences individuals’ behaviour Rokeach (1973). Norms and standards within a society are established by the cultural values, by which everything is judged upon. Not every individual will hold the same value systems, yet it resembles what is expected or hoped for within a society (Hofstede 1984). Modern Mainland China is strongly influenced by traditional Chinese thought and teachings. Many schools of thought have blossomed over the centuries
15
within China, ideas that still influence the perception and behaviour of Chinese managers today. Each philosophical systems lays out unique ethical dictates and moral precepts, shaping the value system the Chinese culture and are manifested in contemporary leadership strategies.
2.1.4 Challenging Hofstede’s Cross-Cultural Paradigm
Fang (2010) inspires the readers and researchers alike, to re-evaluate what we know about culture and how it affects managements. He begins be citing Hofstede’s research: “The nature of management skills is such that they are culturally specific: a management technique or philosophy that is appropriate in one national culture is not necessarily appropriate in another (2007: 413) Different societies in the world have different histories and they maintain different values: there is no universal values system (2007 :415)”.
Fang (2010) points out that ultimately within the research of cultural differences, there are commonly occurring facts: (1) A continuity of management problems exists over time, (2) Differences in management problems in different countries and (3) the question of what is Asian management. Thus, ultimately cultural differences, cultural clashes and cultural collisions are viewed as a problem. Such a perspective has had tremendous influence on various fields, such as consultancy and research.
Hofstede utilizes an “onion” to depict and compare cultures. The “onion” is made up of several layer of cultural programming, namely the symbols, heroes, rituals and values. While the outer layers can be penetrated and changed, the inner layer remain constant – the values. Thus, the value system shapes the outer layers, which may change, but the software of culture remains.
The strength of paradigm established by Hofstede, as well as the previously mentioned cultural programming theories by Hoeklin, lie in their clarity and consistency. It allows cultural differences to be identified, which ultimately facilitates cross-cultural comparison. However, increasing critique has been exercised on Hofstede´s models (Fang, 2010; Holden, 2002; McSweeney, 2002). The established paradigm is criticized for offering little insight into the dynamic process of cross-cultural management which is strongly influenced by change and paradox. Factors such as knowledge transfer, synchronized information sharing and borderless learning shape cross-cultural management. Various researchers have begun to claim that a dynamic vision of culture is overdue, which has led to various new approaches to culture. Examples include “multiple cultural identity” (Sackmann and Phillips, 2004) and “cultural dialectics and paradoxes” (Fang, 2003).
Asia is rich in history, philosophy and tradition – rapidly undergoing institutional transformation and cultural change in globalizations (Lu, Tsang & Peng, 2008). Ultimately, these rapidly changing variables can be used as a source of inspiration for cross-cultural theory building.
Chinese thought and management is commonly captured as being “both-and” dialectic thinking, which strongly embraces a change mentality (Chen, 2001; Peng & Nisbett, 1999). On the contrary, in a Western
16
perspective, issues are commonly seen as “either-or”. Juxtaposing one culture with another is commonly exercised, as it neatly fits with the Western concepts of clarity, consistency and parsimony (Fang, 2010). However, such a procedure does not reflect Chinese notions of tolerance of ambiguity, inconsistency and paradox (Fang, 2010).
Fang (2010) argues that change and paradox are deep-seated Chinese values, which challenges the entire concept of the “onion”. “Yin and Yang, water and fire, the moon and the sun, and so forth, are waning and waxing, coming and going, opening and closing, all in the process of ceaseless change and transformation” (Fang, 2010).
China has undergone a remarkable transformation within the last three decades – institutionally and economically. China has transformed from Mao to Market, from isolation to integration. The economy has emerged from a backward economy to an economic superpower. Approximately thirty years ago, China possessed almost no foreign direct investment. At present, China is the single largest recipient of FDI. “China now exports in a single day more than it sold abroad during the entire year of 1978” (Meredith, 2006). Thus, during these thirty years of rapid economic growth and change, symbols, heroes and rituals have drastically shifted. Has this had any impact on Chinese values? Hofstede’s paradigm chooses to disagree with such a perspective.
Bem´s (1972) psychological research found out that belief follows behaviour. Thus, the relationship between values (beliefs and norms) and behaviour (symbols, heroes and rituals) should be regarded as dynamic, in which both sides have the ability to influence the other. China´s rapid economic expansion and increasing openness has had its impact upon the society. Within the Chinese society, multiple value orientations are gradually becoming integrated within the nation. The transition from Mao to Market has seen a tremendous shift in values and beliefs within a short period of time. What once was desirable, no longer hold importance. Rokeach (1973) claims that no values are time free. Thus, according to him, culture is a dynamic concept full of paradoxes, which cannot be understood “without cultural values being placed in a broader political, institutional, economic, and social context” (Fang, 2010). At the same time, a value transition or change that does not mean that old values are disregarded. Rather, they are able to co-exist with newly emerging value systems. Paradoxical value orientations are currently coexisting in China. Traditional value orientations commonly discussed within China are guanxi, importance of face, family importance, group orientation, age and hierarchy, long-term orientation and traditional creeds. However, at the same time, opposite value orientations are emerging, such as materialism and ostentatious consumption, short-term orientation, individualism, self-expression and directness. New value orientations arose from China´s invited collision with foreign systems and cultures, which hold different values and lifestyles. Yet, at the same time, both traditional and new value orientations coexist.
17
Chinese companies expanding to Western markets are again likely to be confronted with significantly different culture, with different values and systems. Such a cultural collision is most likely leading to the formation of a new hybrid culture, in which different cultural values radiate and penetrate into each other. The value system of Chinese managers operating in Chinese companies, in a culturally different context, will most likely see their value system not only being influenced by traditional Chinese culture, but also by Western culture and management philosophies.
Value orientations can be observed through leadership. Traditional Chinese philosophies have had significant influence on shaping value systems, which have ultimately influenced leadership behaviour. At the same time, various philosophies can be found within the leadership of Chinese managers, which at times may be contradictory to one another. However, due to the “both-and” dialectic thinking approach of Chinese people, these various philosophies and their teachings can coexist and influence value systems simultaneously.
Thus, the research aims to follow the ideas of researchers such as Fang (2010) and Peng & Nisbett (1999), viewing culture and its values as a dynamic and paradoxical process. The aim is to determine the significance of traditional Chinese culture and philosophies hold in a western context, on Chinese managers operating in Chinese companies. The aim is to understand how the various philosophies are reflected in leadership and why. Confucianism is commonly attributed to be the main source of influence on values and behaviour. However, in culturally distinct context, such a relationship may not hold. At the same time, it is unlikely that western sources of influence will be not be present for Chinese managers operating in the Netherlands. The influence of western sources will be taken into consideration to determine if a so-called hybrid culture or leadership can be found – which unites with traditional Chinese thought with contemporary western ideas.
Thus, the researcher proposes that:
WP1A: Western culture and management philosophies will have an influence on the leadership of Chinese managers.
WP1B: A hybrid cultural leadership style will be found, in which both Western and Chinese philosophies influence the value system of Chinese managers – and ultimately leadership. Perhaps there is no right or wrong answer to the matter of culture and whether it is a static paradigm as proposed by Hofstede or a dynamic relationship. Rather there is the possibility of the existence of multiple possibilities, which may be contradictory to each other – Daoism.
18
2.2 Leadership
The research is dedicated to the study of one of the most controversial, insightful and salient facets of management, that of leadership. Business, nongovernmental organizations, non-profit organizations, academic institutions and organizations of all kind are in dire need of effective leaders to successfully guide people. But what constitutes an effective leader in the 21st century?
The following section aims to explore the multitude of definitions regarding leadership and the constitutions of effective leadership. Furthermore, the objective is to discuss leadership research in greater detail and explore the cultural relevance within leadership research. The ultimate aim is to guide the reader towards a more thorough analysis of Chinese leadership and its cultural underpinnings in later sections.
2.2.1 Defining Leadership
The study of leadership has been topic of high popularity and research interest among different disciplines, since the late 19th century (Galton, 1869). As a results, over the centuries, numerous and competing theories have been established, attempting to define leadership and model leaders´ skills and traits. Today, it is generally agreed that leadership can be defined as “the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how it can be done effectively, and the process of facilitating individuals and collective efforts to accomplish the shared objectives” (Hassan et al., 2013). Leadership revolves around human interactions and behaviour, whether it is individuals or groups. Leaders around the globe face similar problems within organizations – how to motivate, influence and organize others to achieve specific goals. How business leaders approach leadership varies significantly, largely influenced by intrinsic beliefs and external stimuli. The research will focus on leadership strategies, which are reflected in both leadership practices and philosophies – a guiding principle for behaviour and attitudes.
A distinct stream of research argues that certain individual are born to lead and genetically possess attributes that facilitate the development of leadership qualities (Popper & Mayseless, 2002). However, other research opposes this opinion whether leadership is genetic per se (Kouzes & Posner, 2003). Leadership qualities in its totality cannot be attributed fully to genetics, because effective leadership requires training – training is culturally based (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2009).
A desirable attribute of effective leaders is the ability to evaluate a value proposition, and if necessary change it. An effective business leader is required to possess a vision and plan, on how to effective analyse value propositions (Krapfl & Kruja, 2015). Communication and execution skills are undeniably important features of the effective business leadership process. Research has shown that effective communication skills can be a key difference to other highly intelligent individuals.
19
Furthermore, ethical values are of tremendous importance. First, integrity is essential for others to follow a leader (Krapfl & Kruja, 2015). Second, a leaders´ commitment to all of the organizational constituencies. It is important to keep in mind that ethical and moral standards are highly culture dependent. What is socially and morally desirable in one country, may not be in another context. Traditional Chinese philosophies which lay out moral and ethical dictates, have been proven to exert significant influence upon the Chinese culture and its people (Yao, 1999). Whether these hold in a different culture, will be explored in further detail.
More recently, social competence and emotional intelligence have been described as success factors of effective leaders (Goleman, 1995). Such traits are highly culture sensitive and what is expected of a leader in terms of emotional intelligence, may differ to what is expected for instance in a Western context. To give a small example, the concept of losing face is highly unique to Asian societies and requires cultural sensitivity.
Thus, leadership can be sub-divided into the management of people, concerned with elements such as the motivation, satisfaction and development of employees, and the management of organizational practices, reaching targets and establishing a framework. This division is an important distinction for the research and the influence of traditional Chinese philosophies. Varying ideas and philosophies are likely to be drawn on to accomplish different leadership tasks. Thus, the research proposes that different philosophical influences will influence different leadership tasks, revolving around either humane considerations or task focus.
2.2.2 Explicit and Implicit Leadership Theories
Leadership has been examined in explicit and implicit theories. Explicit theories are concerned with the overt behaviour of leaders, based on observation and evaluation. The implicit leadership theory explores the covert conceptual structure of leadership. The latter approach assumes that a conceptual structure exists, regarding the definition of a leader and what he ought to do (Kraus & Gemmill). Consequently, one´s implicit leadership theory greatly influences how a leader is evaluated, experienced and described. The personal characteristics and attributes that are expected of leaders determine implicit leadership traits. Such traits are reflected as cognitive structures and represent a potential for leadership and behaviour (Bresnen, 1995; Kraus & Gemmill, 1990). Offermann et al. (1994) suggest that implicit theories can serve as foundations for explicit theories to build upon. Past research which has been based on U.S participants has identified eight factors within implicit leadership: Dedication, Charisma, Tyranny, Attractiveness, Masculinity, Intelligence and Strength (Offermann et al. 1994).
A lot of attention has been paid to the generalizability of implicit leadership theories (Bryman, 1987), especially exploring the role of culture in leadership. As mentioned earlier, Hofstede (1984) has pointed
20
out that differences between leadership style, employee motivation, organizational structure and so forth can be explained through the phenomenon of mental programing within different cultures. Bass and Stogdill (1990) further add that cultural differences exist in a multitude of ways, such as leaders´ goals and limits, as well as in leadership styles and the conditions necessary for leadership. Further research has concluded that the evaluation of leadership behaviour is not only a function of overt leadership, but is also dependent on the evaluator’s cultural background (Ayman & Chemers, 1983). Thus, applying western leadership theories, measures and research designs to other cultural settings and influences, may lead to misleading and inaccurate results.
The social-cultural environment in which business leaders have grown up and lead, has a profound impact on leadership. Implicit leadership theories highlight the importance to study the cultural influences on leadership strategies. The content and factors of implicit Chinese leadership are likely to differ to those of Western theories. Interestingly, the research aims to explore the leadership strategies of Chinese business leaders within a Western setting.
The research aims to close this significant research gap, by studying what role traditional Chinese philosophies play in shaping leadership strategies of Chinese business leaders, who operate in Western countries.
2.2.3 Culture based Leadership vs. Organizational based leadership
Interestingly, Quantz et al. (2016) have recently published research which divides most leadership research into two categories, those that put organizational theory at the centre of their approach to leadership vs. those that centre a cultural theory instead. Culture based leadership theory includes any leadership theory that builds itself on a foundational cultural theory. The author’s state the field of leadership research is dominated by organizational based leadership theories. This centring of organization in leadership has many consequences, particularly for cross-cultural research. Leadership has become of increasing scholarly interest as a study of a cross-cultural phenomenon. However, leadership research has been predominantly driven by western scholars with western data. Only a small amount of research has focused on the Asian, particularly Chinese leadership behaviour and its influences. East Asian philosophies and Asian-based religions are beginning to be studied in attempt to understand non-Christian leadership. Thus, the research aims to address this major gap within contemporary leadership research and contribute to the culture based leadership research stream. 2.2.4 Contextual Importance
The omnipresent drive towards globalization has created its own set of challenges. As McDonald (2012) states “Will our future be such that issues of national and regional differences pale in comparison to the
21
homogenising universalism of global corporate behemoths?”. The research takes on the position that cultural differences will remain both relevant and insightful.
WP2a: The leadership strategies of Chinese business leaders operating in the Netherlands, reflected in both their leadership philosophy and practice, will be strongly influenced by traditional Chinese philosophies and teachings.
The assumption of cultural relevance agrees with the renowned researcher Geert Hofstede. Hofstede (2007, p. 419) commented on Asian-Management in the 21st century as follows: “My viewpoint that management problems remain the same over time, but their solutions differ from country to country is politically incorrect in an age in which business is supposed to be globalizing”. He continues to cite Tung (2005) and states that a reversal is on the horizon, in which Asian business leaders will require culture awareness training, in order to better understand Western subordinates.
Research from Dorfmann et al. (1997) and Fukumaya (2011), has suggested that leadership is a universal phenomenon. However the effectiveness of leadership itself is context dependent. Furthermore, successful leadership practices in one cultural context, are unlikely to be successful in another, if cultural differences are not considered (Gao et al., 2011).
In sum, when the behavioural repertoire of individuals, coincides with features and structure of the environment, leaders emerge (Fiedler, 1964). Leadership is defined as the ability to influence and lead others, which is dependent upon both the skill set of the individual and the environment upon which these skills are applied to. Thus, differing circumstances and differing backgrounds can produce successful leaders within one context and not within other (Bass & Stogdill, 1990). On a similar notion, Chinese business leaders who have been exposed to traditional Chinese teachings, are likely to incorporate ideas and thoughts within their leadership strategy. Research has shown, that teachings of various philosophies, such as Confucianism, have been successfully manifested in leadership, within China (Jacobs et al.,. 1995). The question arises, do these teachings prove to be effective within a different context?
WP2b: Traditional Chinese Philosophies are incorporated within leadership strategies, because they prove to be successful for the given context.
Between selected cases, the influence/significance of traditional Chinese philosophies will be explored, in order to potentially draw inferences.
2.2.5 Leadership as a Competitive Advantage
Researchers have determined that effective leadership can create a competitive advantage for a company (Hofstede, 1984). A competitive advantage is defined as: “When two or more firms compete within the
22
same market, one firm possesses a competitive advantage over its rivals when it earns a persistently higher rate of profit (or has the potential to earn a persistently higher rate of profit)” (Porter, 1990). The resource-based view as a basis for the competitive advantage, is primarily concerned with the application of a bundle of valuable tangible and intangible assets of a firm (Penrose, 1959; Rumelt, 1984). For a competitive advantage to be sustained, it requires resources to be heterogeneous in nature and may not be perfectly mobile (Peteraf, 1993). Ultimately, this would lead to resources to be neither perfectly imitable nor substitutable, without great effort (Barney, 1991).
The importance of culture within leadership is undeniable. Culture defines how things are approached and executed in practice. Leadership is highly culture dependant and for that reason is not easily imitable and transferrable.
For instance, transformational leaders possess the ability to shape an organizational culture and create an adaptive culture to suit the fast paced business environment. An adaptive mind-set will encourage employees to engage in activities such as innovation, continual improvement and seek external opportunities. Furthermore, leaders within a certain culture may employ differing motivational strategies. These in turn may lead to higher retention rates and higher motivational levels.
Several researchers have pointed out the strengths of Chinese leadership principles over the years. Hofstede (2007) states “Few economists predicted the staggering economic rise of the East Asian countries, and many failed to recognize it even when it was well under way”. The author claims that the leadership strategies of East Asian nations have been significant contributors to the economic growth. Kahn (1990) hypothesizes that the countries of East Asia have common cultural roots, which predominantly lie in Confucianism and Buddhism. Under the world-market conditions of the past thirty years, this cultural inheritance has constituted a competitive advantage. Haley (2013) identified that Chinese leadership is able to adapt quicker to situational changes, due to it´s so called “under-management”. The “over-management” of western leaders can create strategic torpidity, tactical slowness and the inability to adapt to rapidly changing situations.
Interestingly, traditional Chinese philosophies, which can be felt in many facets of Chinese life, can also negatively influence an organization. It is commonly agreed that traditional thought is deeply ingrained within the Chinese society and manifested with leadership. Within Chinese organizations, a strong sense of hierarchy exists, which may hinder the willingness to participate and share ideas, of lower levels. Furthermore, seniority and experience in leadership is still a major factor, which may induce stagnation and the inability to promote younger employees into a leadership position (Guopei et al., 1995). Furthermore, traditional philosophies advocate putting righteousness before profit and may be regarded as a sin. This may have led to a gradual elimination of a profit motive.
23
At this point in time, we know too little about how Chinese philosophies are reflected in Chinese leadership and the underlying motivations. As aforementioned, commonly Confucianism is attributed to be the main source of influence upon the Chinese culture and their values. Yet, the Chinese cultural fabric is made up of various influences and philosophies. Thus, to gain a deeper understanding into Chinese leadership and their underlying motivations, the research will embrace an exploratory research strategy.
Chinese companies are increasingly competing successfully in international markets. However, what is their ingredient to success? What are the underlying influences and motivations on leadership? Exactly these questions will be addressed by examining how various philosophies are reflected in their management strategy and why.
2.3 Contemporary Chinese and Western Leadership Principles
Chinese companies have begun to make remarkable forays abroad. In 2015, it was estimated that Chinese companies invested up to $86 billion in foreign direct investment. The increasing importance of China in the world economy and the growing interaction with western companies has highlighted the significant cultural gap which exists between the ´West´ and China, and amplified our lack of thorough understanding of underlying mechanisms. At a time where China is becoming more central in a globalizing world economy, international business leaders and scholars have begun to feel an increasing need to understand the views and thoughts by Chinese professionals on leadership. With a staggering increase of Chinese companies in western markets, it is even more urgent to progress our understanding and explore whether the long-established Chinese culture is manifested in the leadership strategy of Chinese business leaders, within Chinese subsidiaries in the Netherlands.
The following section aims to explore the current leadership research in greater detail and discuss varying leadership models that have developed in recent years. The aim is to give the reader an overview of the varying leadership models which will be related to Chinese philosophies in the model development section.
To comprehend why differences in leadership behaviour arise, the fundamental western and Chinese leadership are discussed. The aim is to discuss both differences and similarities between them, attempting to explore why i.e. competitive advantages arise or why certain types of leadership are more accepted than others. After an in depth analysis of the distinct attributes of each, the topic of convergence will be addressed.
The ultimate aim of this section is to guide the reader to the method development section, in which philosophical underpinnings will be discussed in greater depths and connected to leadership. Inferences
24
will be drawn to well-established Western leadership models, based on the philosophical influences on leadership.
2.3.1 Western Leadership Principles
Western leadership consists of both American and European features, and thus varies to some degree across these cultures. However, an extensive literature research has highlighted general agreement on specific leadership practices, with differences mainly included in the degrees of importance attached to certain features (Martin et al.,2009). On further examination of the work of Martin et al. (2009), it is determined that the differences are not significant enough to disaggregate leadership principles. Thus, generalizations are applied obtained from a literature review.
The plethora of Western leadership principles have focused on profit generation (Wren, 2005). This has led to the establishment of specialist rather than generalist leadership practices (Hesselbein &Goldsmith, 2005; Pitcher, 1995). Examples of specialist practices include the ability to articulate mission of the future to followers (Beddell et al., 2006; Pitcher, 1995; Scharmer, 2009), to manage innovation (O´Sullivan & Dooley, 2009), promote human relations (Kassing, 2007) and strategic planning (Quinn & Ghoshal, 2003). Within this process, subordinates are viewed as impersonal components of production (Wren, 2005). Following the analysis of a plethora of Western leadership publications, discussion of objectives has been given the highest priority (Drucker, 2003), followed up command (Amernic et al., 2007) tactics and strategy (Mintzberg et al., 2003), and personnel.
Western leadership research has also produced detailed insights into what effective leadership behaviour constitutes. A leaders is expected to display ethical behaviour (Cadwell et al., 2008; Chen & Lee, 2008), integrity (Loeser, 2008) and build trust (Gosling & Huang, 2009). The three antecedents of trust are benevolence, integrity and the ability (Mayer et al., 1995).
In the 21st century, leaders are expected to respect their subordinates (Cadwell & Canuto-Carranco, 2010). However, humane considerations of respect did not appear until the last decade of the 20th century. Furthermore, polite interactions, involvement of subordinates in communication, value the contribution of subordinates and the promotion of career development have become central elements of effective leadership (Caldwell et al., 2008; Hui et al., 2007).
2.3.2 Chinese Leadership Principles
Chinese business leadership research is a relatively new phenomenon and has started approximately thirty years ago (Wu, 2009; Yang, 2009). Current literature suggests however, that Chinese leadership follows long established traditions (Chen &Lee, 2008). Chinese leadership is described as moral leadership (Wong, 2001) – rooted in traditional Chinese philosophies.
25
Modern Mainland China is strongly influenced by traditional Chinese thought and teachings. Many schools of thought have blossomed over the centuries within China, ideas that still influence the perception and behaviour of Chinese managers today. Based on an extensive literature review, evidence of four ancient schools of thought are identified: Confucianism, Daoism, Legalism and Mohism. Each philosophical systems lays out unique ethical dictates and moral precepts. Mohism has not been included within the scope of the research, because it disappeared at an independent school of thought.
The Chinese leadership principles build on a philosophical framework, in which humanistic approaches are the focus. The development of followers is an important aspect (Chen & Lee, 2008). Leaders are differentiated from one another by designations, where ling xiu stands for leaders who have achieved a vision and ling dao, for those who act in stewardship role in which managers’ focus on getting the job done (Vilkinas et al., 2009).
Sheh (2001) and Redding (1990) characterize the Chinese leadership to be paternalistic, with employees being treated as family and the use of family involvement in employee motivation. In line with paternalistic leadership, follows a strong sense for hierarchy, emphasis on seniority and centralized decision-making (Sheh 2001). Power is used benevolently and leaders are expected to look after employees, commonly in the form of health insurance, housing, education and pension planning. Self-interest and disagreements are strenuously avoided (Silin 1976). Harmony and conflict avoidance is a high priority (Fan 2004). Individual attributes of reliability, trustworthiness and team orientation are governing internal operations. “Guanxi”, the emphasis on relationship building, is a widely known phenomenon of Chinese cultural traits, also reflected in leadership. Characteristic of Chinese leadership fall back on a diverse range of philosophical influences, some originating from Confucian teachings, whilst others may have legalist roots.
Recently, communism has had influences upon the Chinese society. However, research suggests that Chinese leadership is predominantly rooted in their long established spiritual heritage. However, Chinese philosophical underpinnings are not the sole source of influence. Western management philosophies and practices are increasingly accepted in the Chinese society, since the opening up in 1979. Chinese leaders are seeking inspiration and guidance from western leadership philosophies. In the late nineteenth century, western philosophies have been translated and introduced to China (Elvin 1985). Elvin (1985) argues that with more highly educated young workforce, it is believed that they are more receptive to western philosophies. Also, the rise of overseas educate Chinese leaders is likely to influence their leadership strategy. However, Child (1994) argues that Chinese management follows a logic of its own within a cultural and economic context, which cannot be compared to other countries. Thus, a change in the Chinese mode of management will require time and the changes in people’s attitudes and cultural norms (Elvin, 1985).
26
Yet, we do not know whether Chinese leadership in western markets, differs to the leadership behaviour within the domestic market. External stimuli could influence the leadership, such as local training, social norms and western employees within the subsidiary. GLOBE researchers discovered that each nation has Culturally Endorsed Leadership Theories which create societal expectations of leadership behaviour. Therefore, touching back upon the context dependence, Chinese Managers who operate in the Netherlands could potentially be influenced by certain leadership expectations of their employees. Such, may to shift or change from previous leadership strategies.
WP3: Expectations of employees will influence the leadership of Chinese managers.
Thus, potentially due to external and international constraints, the leadership of Chinese business leaders may be significantly influenced. With the increasing foray of Chinese companies to western markets, it is becoming more urgent to understand what role traditional philosophies play in shaping leadership of Chinese leaders who operate in western markets and understand the significance of western sources. Further overlapping of traditional Chinese philosophies with modern management theories, will be elaborated on in the method development section. Inferences will be drawn to western leadership, whilst highlighting unique leadership thoughts.
2.3.3 Similarities and Differences within the Leadership Principles
The western leadership research can be pre-dominantly placed in organizational based leadership research, with a strong focus on the organization and technical rationality. The plethora of Chinese leadership principles has begun to place culture as a central element within research. Thus, Chinese leadership research can be predominantly categorized as culture based leadership research, focusing on underlying values and cultures (Quantz, 2016).
Within the leadership research streams, Westerners focus on the leader itself, while Chinese people focus on the collective activities of followers (Conte & Novello, 2008). While both cultures are result driven, the delivery of such differs – which is specifically a managerial function in China. In terms of leadership styles, significant differences have emerged. Authoritarian leadership is commonly accepted in China, yet seen as counterproductive in Western leadership research (Cheng et al., 2004). Furthermore, the concept of a paternalistic leadership is the most dominant leadership style within Chinese organizations of the 21st century and not commonly exercised in Western organizations, who predominately pursue decentralized leadership styles. However, Chinese leadership research has also recognized the distinctions between transformational and transactional leadership styles, via the designations of ling dao and ling xue (Bass, 1985).
Chen and Lee (2008) suggest that Chines leaders approach leadership as an art and centralize interdependent, humanistic and situational aspects. On the other hand, western leaders view leadership
27
as a science and focus on objective organizational results and impersonal processes, supported by logic (Wang, 2006).
Chen and Lee (2008) further analyse, using The Art of War by Sunzi, priorities within leadership. The researchers suggest that the priority in Chinese leadership is given to personnel, followed by tactics and then results. It highlights the importance of human interactions and considerations within Chinese leadership. Western leadership literature has highlighted that results are prioritized, followed by tactics and third, people (Bass et al., 987; Beddell et al., 2006; Mintzberg et al., 2003).
Chen and Lee (2008) identified that of seven values which are significant to Chinese leaders, four of them were less important to Western business leaders: propriety, righteousness, incorruptibility and a sense of shame. Because of these significant differences in values, certain leadership models may not be applicable in practice, to Chinese business leaders. For instance, the five practices of exemplary leadership by Kouzes and Posner (2003) may not be applicable to Chinese leaders, without modification (Gallo, 2008).
After reviewing the large literature stream on both Western and Chinese leadership, it became evident that both streams focus on the achievement of economic benefits. However, western leadership and values still view people in a largely dehumanized manner, as components of production. Chinese leadership on the other hand, highly values employees and regards them in a more humanistic manner. They are seen as assets to the organization, who can contribute tremendously to the organization. For that reason, paternalistic leadership and with employees being treated as family and the use of family involvement in employee motivation.
2.3.4 Cognitive Styles and Strategic decision making
Several researchers (eg. Haley et al., 1998; Nisbett et al. 2001; Redding, 1986) have further identified differences between Chinese and Western leaders, which can be classified in cognitive and strategic decision making procedures.
When processing information, Chinese business leaders are said to employ a holistic perspective, as opposed to a particularistic perspective adopted by Western leaders. Chinese leaders emphasize interdependent relationships between different variables, seeking to find relationships surrounding problems to generate possible solutions. On the other hand, Western business leaders detach the problem from its surroundings and generate possible solutions (Haley, 2006). Further distinctions can be made regarding validities – the measurement and acceptance of realities and truths. Chinese business leaders accept and embrace multiple realities, while western leaders tend to focus on one.
Furthermore, Chinese business leaders tend to utilize their experience and empirical evidence, over formal explanatory models, which are predominantly used by western business leaders. Haley (2006) argues that Chinese leaders are able to find uniquely tailored solutions for problems encountered, due
28
to their reasoning based decision making. Western business leaders, through the use of explanatory models, can develop rigorous decision rules to aid the strategic decision making process. However, this behaviour tends to establish universal solutions, which need to be adapted to varying situations. 2.3.5 Convergence of leadership principles?
Companies which have expanded to the promising Chinese market have experienced managerial difficulties early on. Managing in China has required foreign multinationals to modify the management models to those they have followed in domestic markets. While operating in China, Western companies have adopted effective leadership strategies which resonate with the local culture. Similarly, Chinese companies expanding to Western markets, are likely to face managerial difficulties, due to contextual differences. Thus, convergence embodies several characteristics. First, the adaptation in leadership strategies reflects the environmental influences from where the company originates (Ralston, 1993). Together with domestic influences, managers adopt leadership strategies of the market they serve. Managerial convergence is likely to occur when two or more business cultures´ underlying managerial philosophies clash in competition, each possessing strengths in certain situations. One may display general superiority over the other.
Second, managerial convergence is likely to occur when companies must seek to serve each other’s market, after having acquired expertise in domestic markets (Haley, 2006). Thus, rationalizing production costs through out-sourcing, while maintain traditional markets, is not likely to lead to convergence of leadership practices.
Several Western researchers have attempted to determine possible cohabitations of Western and Chinese leadership models in developing new leadership concepts (eg. Connor et al., 2013; Gadiesh et al., 2007; Gao et al., 2011). Incorporating the leadership practices of one culture within another, has the potential to improve leadership practices in another culture (Connor et al., 2013; Chow, 2005). For instance, Farh et al. (1997) found that within the Chinese society, it is possible to combine both traditional and modern attitudinal perspectives in organizational citizenship behaviour. Leadership is culturally dependent and subject to influences form other cultures (Law, 2012). However, current leadership research has not posited a possible universal leadership strategy which constitutes of a merger between the two practices (Chen & Lee, 2008; Jogulu, 2010; Conte & Novello, 2008).
As mentioned earlier, Chinese managers have become increasingly exposed to Western leadership practices and scientific management principles. Yet, such specialist management activities do not constitute Western leadership per se. Rather, these practices are commonly advocated and exercised by Western managers. As Chinese business leaders increasingly incorporate scientific management within their leadership strategies, these become a part of their existing leadership strategy (Chen & Lee, 2006).
29
Further evidence of convergence has been discussed by Farh et al. (1997). The authors discuss the blending of tradition with modernity and state that there should be evidence of cross-cultural assimilation. The authors give as an example the incorporation of traditional Chinese humanistic principles, within modern western principles. However, the extent of such principles is limited to existing knowledge.
Closing Words
Pre-dominantly, the aim of the research is to determine what role/significance traditional Chinese philosophies play within the leadership strategies of Chinese managers, who operate in Western markets. The research seeks to explore the manifestation of traditional Chinese thought in leadership, by further exploring which particular philosophy is dominant and perhaps find differences in people and task leadership.
The context plays an important part within this research, as the research aims to determine why certain philosophies hold a greater influence than others. The influence on leadership has commonly been attributed to the influence of Confucianism. Does this hold in a different context?
At the same time, the contextual influence may lead to a cultural collision. Thus, the researcher will allow for the influence of western sources on leadership. As mentioned earlier, the values of individuals is what defines behaviour – such as leadership. Under cultural collision, a hybrid model of leadership may emerge in which we may be able to observe the convergence of culturally distinct values.
2.4 Research Model Development
The following section will explore the various philosophies in greater detail, in order to allow the researcher to make pre-assumptions on their influence on leadership. The section will allow the reader to better understand the underlying motivation and teachings of each philosophy studied, and how these may be reflected in leadership. This will allow the reader to better comprehend within the findings section, why certain philosophies may be found in leadership and why.
Leadership has become of increasing scholarly interest as a study of a cross-cultural phenomenon. Leadership is a highly culture specific phenomenon. Yet, the plethora of leadership research is dominated by Western scholars, based on western data. Thus, a critical issue facing researchers concerns contextualizing Chinese management research. It raises the question for researchers to what extent existing management theories, which have been developed in a western context, should be applied to the Chinese context. Tsui (2006) argues that there are two distinct solutions to the problem, namely the theory application and theory creation. The former approach advocates direct application of existing theory to a Chinese context. The latter is in its nature a grounded theory approach, building theories based on a unique Chinese management phenomena.
