A Whole Lot on Leadership
Peter G. Northouse, professor emeritus of leadership, interpersonal, and organizational communication, wrote “Leadership: Theory and Practice” for students of leadership in the academy and an array of workplaces.[1] His book is classified under Social Sciences as a Sociology text focused on Leadership. But that classification seems too common to describe what Northouse seeks to accomplish in this edition of “Leadership,” let alone what he has accomplished in the previous eight editions. First published in 1997, Northouse has written updates every few years, deepening the research base on foundational leadership constructs and exploring new leadership theories and practices relevant to the era of each update.
He has kept the structure of his books and chapters the same throughout the different editions: an opening that summarizes a specific leadership theory’s historical development, the research supporting the theory, and a discussion of its strengths and its criticisms. This is followed by a practical section that addresses application of a particular theory in today’s leadership contexts, along with case studies, figures and tables that illustrate different facets of the theory, and questionnaires for the reader to assess their facility with a particular theoretical framework. He concludes each chapter with a helpful summary. Edition nine has sixteen chapters, references, and both an author and subject index. The chapters move from an initial focus on leadership as a trait to leadership as a process. New to this edition is a chapter on inclusive leadership and an in-depth discussion on leadership and ethics—both very timely additions given the USA social discourse and challenges facing organizations and leaders in the past few years.
But missing from this edition is his chapter on Leadership and Culture. Summaries of earlier editions (6th-8th for sure) cite this critical chapter—critical to my leadership work across cultures and to my NPO.[2] Now I am left with the challenge of tracking down an earlier edition to accompany my current edition. In this chapter on Leadership and Culture, Northouse cites the seminal work of House, et.al. (1991)[3] and their GLOBE study (research that has continued since then).[4] Their 1991 research focused on measuring the beliefs and values of managers in 62 countries. They discovered that the countries studied grouped together into ten distinct patterns, mostly following geographical and cultural alignments. They further analyzed the values embedded in these patterns and discovered nine cultural scaled dimensions to these values. Six of them are: uncertainty avoidance, power distance, in-group collectivism, gender egalitarianism, performance orientation, humane orientation. The GLOBE study also identified six different sets of leadership behaviors that vary in importance to different cultures: charismatic/value-based, team-oriented, participative, humane-oriented, autonomous, and self- and group-protective.
I found these valued (or not so valued) leadership behaviors especially interesting considering the different distinct cultural patterns they identified. As I write this, I’m thinking especially of the self- and group-protective behavior. This is leadership that is concerned with protecting themselves and what they consider the in-group from any external threats. In the 1991 study, they observed this behavior as having low value to the Anglo cultural pattern (which includes the USA) and as having higher value to the Latin American cultural pattern. My observation from having lived in Beirut for nearly nine years is that this is also a valued leadership behavior in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. What I am questioning, and curious to discover what the most recent GLOBE study has found, is whether they see any shifts in what a cultural-pattern values. And if there are shifts, what is it that contributes to those shifts? Part of why I am curious is because it seems that over the past five to six years in a USA context it has become more important, at least to parts of the USA population, to value leadership behavior of self- and group-protective behavior. I base this on my informal conversations with many family members and friends who were drawn to former President Trump’s willingness to, in their words, “fight for them and their cultural values.” I am curious what my fellow DLGP Cohort 11 colleagues make of these observations.
As I continue to develop my NPO initiative, this chapter from Northouse, and the research done by the GLOBE study will be helpful to how I understand cultural competency and competent leadership practices across cultural contexts.
[1] Northouse, Peter Guy. 2021. Leadership: Theory and Practice. Ninth Edition. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publishing.
[2] Squires, Vicki. 2018. “Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,” Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 185, 91-94.
[3] David Dunaetz. 2018. Culture and Leadership (Chap 16) Leadership by Northouse, 8th Ed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLNeEw109gc.
[4] https://globeproject.com/study_2004_2007
About the Author
Elmarie Parker
10 responses to “A Whole Lot on Leadership”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Elmarie, thank you for sharing the cross-cultural perspective contained in this great post. You state: “it seems that over the past five to six years in a USA context it has become more important, at least to parts of the USA population, to value leadership behavior of self- and group-protective behavior.” That is such an interesting comparison. Can you say more about that? As far as President Trump goes – my quick $.02 cents is: in Friedman’s terms, an undifferentiated, anxious national culture latched onto someone appearing strong. Black and white answers to complex issues and problems offers a quick fix and a stop to the anxiety. Oh, that it were so simple.
Hi Roy. Thank you so very much for your comment and for taking up my question. Your reference to Friedman and the role of anxiety in the US context is a helpful lens. It leads me to wonder how anxiety interacts with valued leadership behaviors. When feeling threatened (and anxiety is one emotional response to feeling threatened), are we more likely to value leadership that is concerned with protecting what they consider the in-group from any external threats? It would be interesting and valuable to explore any available research on this intersection. It seems to me, again based on informal conversations with some family members and friends, that they are part of segment of the US population that does feel under threat and so are very anxious. The sense of threat I have heard in these conversations include: economic (so immigrants become the scapegoat), values–especially regarding ‘traditional’ family values, traditionally understood gender identity; and influence/status–political power, legislation that upholds the previously mentioned values.
Of course, I’ve also heard a feeling of threat/anxiety expressed by friends who would self-identify as progressive. These same areas are mentioned, but their ‘solutions’ for these areas of concern are part of what generates the feeling of threat/anxiety for those I know who would self-identify as conservative. What I haven’t seen on the more progressive side of the conversation is a zeroing in on one leader who can ‘protect’ them.
In Lebanon (and the wider region), this value in a leader who is concerned with protecting what they consider the in-group from any external threats has deep and long historical roots. So its source seems different to me that what may be happening in a US context.
Do you have any additional thoughts after reading this? I’m mulling all of this over.
Elmarie: I also noticed the lack of chapter on Leadership and Culture referenced to in previous additions and am wondering the decision process for removing or revising it over the editions.
It may be interesting to compare the GLOBE study with readings on honor/shame cultures to see how those characteristics would differ within different cultural contexts.
Hi Kayli. Thank you for your comment. Indeed, it would be interesting to know more about the decision-making process of what is included and removed from each successive edition.
Your suggestion about comparing shame/honor (and I would add guilt/innocence and power/fear) cultures to the dimensions of leadership behavior explored by the GLOBE study is helpful.
I integrate these cultural spectrum continuums into the orientation I give to teams from the USA coming to visit with partners in Lebanon, Iraq, and/or Syria. Those teams have found this lens very helpful as they begin to develop relationships with partners in the Middle East. This, I think, is part of becoming aware of our unconscious/implicit bias about what is important and why it is important.
It will be of much value in my developing NPO initiative to see how GLOBE researchers understand the interaction between these cultural continuums and valued leadership behaviors.
What ‘ahas’ have your teams experienced when introduced to these continuums?
The ‘ahas’ tend to vary, but the most common are the basic realizations that not everyone has a western perspective of authority, gender, education, family systems, etc. as they do. Confronted with these in person rather than just talking about them during training sessions takes on new dimensions of understanding and learning.
Elmarie: I found the section of the book about valued leadership behaviors interesting, too. It is so very applicable for leaders in all positions and contexts to understand this aspect of leadership. How have you employed this understanding in your leadership position?
Hi Troy. It sounds like you must have an earlier edition of Northouse’s book (6, 7, or 8th edition)?
I was only able to access summaries of this chapter on valued leadership behaviors. What struck you the most from this chapter for your context?
Based on the summaries I read/listened to, I found the contrast between the Anglo values cluster and Latin American values cluster (which I think are similar to the Middle East, but I need to dig into the GLOBE studies further to verify this) of great interest. The draw to Charismatic leadership behavior is ranked high in both contexts, but the self-protective leadership is ranked high in Latin American contexts, and low in Anglo contexts. What I’m wondering is whether or not this is shifting in a USA context (USA is on the Anglo list)? So, I’ll see what the more recent GLOBE research indicates about this.
For my context, I’ve been intuitively aware of these contrasts and similarities in valued leadership behaviors, but now I have language for it. For my NPO, as I develop the leadership component, my hypothesis is that this kind of information will be of value to participants in better understanding their own implicit biases (Agarwal/Sway) and those of other cultures they may be engaging.
Elmarie, wow! So interesting regarding the absence of the cultural aspect of leadership. I must confess, had you not mentioned that, I would have failed to see that gap. If you do track down any more information on the earlier editions and that topic, please share!
If you were to outline the chapter on leadership from a cultural perspective, what would your bullet points be?
Hi Eric. Thank you for your comment. I will definitely be looking into this topic area in further depth! Stay tuned for more :).
Thank you for asking about bullet points for a culture and leadership chapter. I’m pondering this for what develops down the road from my NPO. At this time, I would want to include:
* exploring shame/honor, guilt/innocence, power/fear cultural continuums as a way of helping participants become aware of their own implicit biases (Agarwal/Sway) about what is important to them and why and how a culture different from their own would have different biases.
* valued leadership behaviors that flow from the above (I need to further research this)
* skills for working with difference and gaining cultural navigation competency
* impact of socio-economic contexts on values and implicit biases
What have you experienced in your context regarding cultural impacts on leadership?
Elmarie, you did a great job summarizing the culture chapter without having it. Have you located a chapter, yet? I will be interested to hear more about this culture chapter and the self-protective behavior. I am curious if there were any studies about the effects of Communism and post-communism cultures.