Global Leadership and Cross-Cultural Management

Running head: GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AND CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT
GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AND CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1
GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AND CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT
The article named “From cross-cultural management to global leadership:
Evolution and adaptation” published by ‘Bird, A. and Mendenhall, M.’ in April 18, 2016
shows how the global leadership trends has changed in cross cultural management and
how these changes construct new global leadership literature. According to Alon and
Higgins, (2005), the cross- cultural leadership can be understood thoroughly with the
use of cultural intelligence and it can also prove helpful to compare and choose new
adaptations that need to be implemented in new-fangled leadership plans. Similarly,
Bird and Mendenhall (2016) identified some skills and activities of global readers
through the use of cross-cultural management research. For example, one of the key
activities (boundary spanning) of global leaders was identified during the research. This
essay will examine the role of cross-cultural management in evaluating global
leadership and describe the challenges and efforts of cross-cultural management
research in different fields. It will also discuss the weakness and strength of approaches
to adapt new changes resulted from cross- cultural management in global leadership
trends.
Cross-cultural management refers to a term, which helps to manage teamwork
by differentiating customer preferences, practices and cultural priorities in global or
international business framework. Describing the organizational behavior across the
culture and countries is another focus of cross-cultural management. The main article
explains the various types of cross-cultural management research to evaluate global
leadership. The cross-cultural research can be unicultural, comparative and
intercultural.
In order to understand the unicultural nature of cross-cultural research of
management, it is important to understand the term. Unicultural, as the name suggests
refers to a single dominant culture that is prevalent across nations. Uniculture may also
be defined as universal culture where there is no distinction between cultures of
different countries. In evaluating the role of cross-cultural research, it is significant to
focus on the unicultural nature of management in today’s world. According to Sarala et
al. (2016), mergers happening in today’s business environment requires leaders to
merge not only the businesses but also the cultures of different countries. Many
examples can be given of such mergers and acquisitions where two completely distinct

2
GLOBAL LEADERSHIP AND CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT
cultures had to be merged in order to gain powerful positions in business. This provided
a great challenge to global leaders. Cross-cultural management studies have delved
into this issue as well and provided solutions, although limited, that helped managers
acquire competency in dealing with such issues.
Leadership in the global business environment demands effective management
of workers from diverse cultures. In the field of cross-cultural management research
during the early late 20th century, comparative studies were undertaken that although
values cultural differences, but had a subtle inclination towards the more dominant
class. This has been described clearly in the main article. Global leadership’s definition
itself was influenced by the studies in cross-cultural management. Fontaine (2007)
argues that global leaders must have the capability to understand the inherent nature of
a country and evaluate the incidences of cross-cultural management in that country.
The authors provided six perspectives on cross-cultural management that leaders could
utilize in order to be efficient. According to him, classical approach, anthropological
approach, psychological approach, stereotypical approach, knowledge management
approach and systems thinking approach could are the six perspectives that helps
evaluate the role of global leaders. Many other scholars have also delved upon the
issue of cross-cultural management and its role in producing leaders of the future. Geert
Hofstede was probably the first scholar and philosopher who provided a framework for
companies to identify the difference in culture in different nations. According to
Hofstede, six cultural dimensions are there that demarcate the culture of different
nations (Engle and Nash 2015). These include power distance index, individualism and
collectivism, uncertainty avoidance index, masculinity and femininity, long-term
orientation and short-term orientation and lastly, indulgence and restraint. These
dimensions are largely helpful to multinational organizations in order to assess the
cultural differences in different nations.
According to the authors of the main article, national cultures have asserted a
strong influence on business negotiations internationally because “each culture is
unique and applies different style”. A failure to recognize the uniqueness of national
cultures might cost heavily on the business. Instances of countries like those in Asia
including Japan and China that uphold teamwork and cooperation as important to