Cross-Cultural Management Research in Global Leadership Analysis

This essay delves into the critical role of cross-cultural management research in shaping global leadership, drawing on the work of Bird and Mendenhall, and others. It defines cross-cultural management, exploring its evolution and various research approaches, including unicultural, comparative, and intercultural studies. The essay highlights the significance of cultural intelligence and the challenges faced by global leaders in managing diverse teams. It examines the strengths, such as aiding organizations in integrating effective cross-cultural management systems, and limitations, including the dominance of Western perspectives and a lack of depth in certain studies, impacting the field of global leadership. The essay stresses the importance of understanding cultural dimensions, as proposed by Hofstede, and the need for cultural competency in multinational corporations to navigate diverse cultural backgrounds effectively, supporting the development of successful global leaders.

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

1CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Table of Contents
Introduction........................................................................................................................2
Cross-cultural management researches and definition.....................................................2
Cross-cultural management research and its role in global leadership............................4
Strengths and limitations of cross-cultural management studies......................................6
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................8

2CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Introduction
The article titled “From cross-cultural management to global leadership: Evolution
and adaptation” authored by Allan Bird and Mark E Mendenhall shows the ways global
leadership trends have transformed in cross cultural management. The authors also
address the topic as to how these changes build new global leadership literature.
Gelfand et al. (2017) are of the view that it is possible to understand cross-cultural
leadership by utilizing cultural intelligence. The authors further state that the cultural
intelligence can accommodate comparing and selecting adaptations that need to be
applied in novel leadership plans. Likewise, Bird and Mendenhall (2016) have identified
certain activities and abilities of global readers with cross-cultural management
research.
This essay will scrutinize the role of cross-cultural management in assessing
global leadership and illustrate the challenges and labors of cross-cultural management
research in diverse areas. In addition, the essay will discuss the strengths and
limitations of the new approaches that have been developed to adapt to recurring
changes resulting from increased research on cross-cultural management explaining
trends in global leadership.
Cross-cultural management researches and definition
Cross-cultural management in as defined by the main authors refers to the
understanding of variations in cultural practices. The term is used to define the
framework of international business that differentiates customer choices, practices and
cultural priorities. Cross-cultural management also gives focus towards explaining the
organizational behavior across cultures. The article by Bird and Mendenhall explains
the different kinds of cross-cultural management research to estimate global leadership.
It can be intercultural, comparative and unicultural as well.
Whilst indulging on the topic of cross-cultural management research, the authors
of the main article highlighted the importance of this field during the early years of the
20th century. Cross-cultural management studies evolved side by side to the evolvement
of common fields of management and organizational behavior. Initially the journals

3CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
included the study of management and behavior in organizations and psychology. The
trend continued until the contemporary times as studies on management and
organizational behavior still abound along with cross-cultural researches. During the
1950s, it was seen for the first time that journals focusing on organizational psychology
and management began to be published. The authors thus claim that interest in cross-
cultural management studies have been present from the time interest in general
management was there.
While mentioning the three categories of cross-cultural management research,
the authors point out the work of Adler (1983), who had first introduced the three terms.
According to the author, unicultural research was carried out to focus on the
management of organization within a single country. an instance of this could be given
of German organizations where organizational commitment was the main aim of
management. In the views of Sarala et al. (2016), the mergers and acquisitions of
businesses that take place today, leaders are required to amalgamate the businesses
as well as the cultures of the countries where the business operates or aims to operate.
Numerous instances can be provided of such amalgamations and acquisitions where
two very separate cultures were merged in order to gain competitive edge in business.
This posed a huge test to global leaders. Cross-cultural management studies have
investigated this issue as well and offered explanations, although limited, that assisted
leaders obtain capability in dealing with such issues.
Comparative research on the other hand examined management in two or more
countries and outlined the visible comparisons. Example was given of countries like
Mexico, Turkey and India in terms of their norms of conflict resolutions. Lastly,
intercultural research aimed at conversation between members of organizations
belonging to different countries. The effective communication between employees of
Philippines and Danish executive expatriates was presented as an example. The study
by Adler revealed that cross-cultural management research focused largely on
intercultural management and other two areas had only a limited share of research.
Cooke, Veen and Wood (2017) however point out that modern literature on cross-
cultural management tends to emphasize the adversities of the field rather than focus
on the positives. The author notes that the dominance of studies focusing on the

4CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
negative side of cross-culturalism in international business led to an obstacle in people’s
understanding of the process that assist organizations reap the benefits of cultural
differences.
Cross-cultural management research and its role in global leadership
The role of cross-cultural management research in preparing global leaders to
confront the modern business challenges cannot be denied. Researchers working on
cross-cultural management have found that mutual collaboration on providing training
and course with assistance from competencies of lively cross-cultural management
could help in achieving leaders for the future. Many universities teaching business
management subjects have also incorporated a separate topic on cross-cultural training
and management. Programs like exchange of students on an international platform also
focused on imparting cross-cultural competency training to students through real-world
experiences. In the article authored by Bird and Mendenhall (2016), the focus has been
on cross-cultural management notion and its role within the arena of global leadership.
The key issue or topic addressed in the article that global leadership, as a concept in
international business is a result of continued researches in cross-cultural management
field.
Modern leaders are required to manage workers from diverse cultures effectively.
In the field of cross-cultural management studies, the later years 20th century saw
comparative researches being carried out that on one hand appreciated cultural
differences and on the other leaned more towards the overriding Western viewpoint.
The chief article clearly explains this. In details, cross-cultural management studies
influenced global leadership definition. As Reiche et al. (2017) argued, global leaders
must possess the potential to appreciate the intrinsic nature of any nation and assess
the prevalence of cross-cultural management in that nation. The author mentioned the
six perceptions about cross-cultural management that leaders must make use of in
order to be competent. Six perspectives including classical approach, psychological
approach, anthropological approach, knowledge management approach, stereotypical
approach and systems thinking approach form the cross-cultural management research,

5CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
states the authors. Few other theorists have also investigated the matter of cross-
cultural management and its contribution towards making the leaders of the present and
the future. While highlighting the importance of cross-cultural management, it is
important to mention the name of one Dutch philosopher and sociologist who provided a
framework for understanding cultural differences in different countries – Geert Hofstede.
He was most likely the first thinker and scholar who offered a structure for companies to
classify the disparity in culture of different nations. According to him, cultural separation
between countries can be identified by relating the six cultural dimensions (Calvin,
Beale and Moore 2017).The cultural dimensions comprised elements like power
distance index, individualism and collectivism, uncertainty avoidance index, masculinity
and femininity, long-term orientation and short-term orientation and lastly, indulgence
and restraint. Multinational organizations were largely benefitted by the introduction and
use of these cultural dimensions as it helped them understand and prepare for the
challenges posed by different countries with different cultures.
Highlighting the challenges that confront multinational companies (MNCs), they
deal with such issues more frequently than they deal with the national or local
companies. The reason following this is the frequent requirement of MNCs to interact
with different people belonging to diverse cultural backgrounds for business purposes.
MNCs however can be on an advantageous position if the employees are given training
on the ways to deal with clients and customers of different cultures. Tenzer and Pudelko
(2015) are of the view that cultural skill is the most significant prerequisite for MNC
employees because trading or interacting with people from diverse cultural backdrops is
a susceptible issue. Workers must have the aptitude to interact with customers and
make sure that they do not hurt their cultural sentiments. Kostova, Marano and Tallman
(2016) argue that the key element that makes some MNCs successful and others not is
their ability to realize the need for cultural competency. The authors comment on the
role of cross-cultural researches that focused on managing organizations across
countries and indentified the dilemma if national cultures coincided with the culture of
MNCs or it lagged behind. Their research found that the culture dominant within
multinationals form and govern the organizational culture common within the company.

6CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Bird and Mendenhall (2016) studied the origins of global leadership literature and
revealed that the field is versatile and mirrors multiple contributions from the emigrant,
comparative leadership and streams of global management research. The literature on
global leadership has also been instrumental in understanding the complex link between
managers and leaders. The authors state that the 21st century management is
characterized by the increasing role of managers as leaders. This also can be attributed
to cross-cultural management researches that entailed the work and nature of both
international mangers and leaders.
Strengths and limitations of cross-cultural management studies
It is however imperative to find out the strengths and limitations of cross-cultural
management research and its role in analyzing global leadership. At first, the
advantages or strengths of the researches on cross-cultural management should be put
forward. Cross-cultural management studies for long periods have intended at means to
expand management capacities of organizations globally. The studies have enabled
companies to integrate systems of efficient cross-cultural management into the
organizational system. Schedlitzki et al. (2017) claim that studies in cross-cultural
management have made it possible for both companies and governments to plan for the
welfare of both workers and citizens. Bird and Mendenhall (2016) in the article mention
cross-cultural management usage as a “more specific subset of international
management” that values the cultural differences. The authors supported the notion that
international managers in the contemporary business environment have attained the
role of leaders making strategic decisions. This has largely occurred due to the cross-
cultural management study that identified the shifting roles for the first time. The
greatest advantage of Cross-cultural management research is its ability to handle global
leadership issues since its inception in the 1960s until now. To state further,
globalization has been a phenomenon that changed the course of international
business. Globalization put load of stress on managers to preserve constancy in
business (Meyer 2017). The main article has considered globalization as an important
element of cross-cultural management research. The 1990s, state the authors, saw
business leaders crossing boundaries throughout all aspects of business management

7CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
and even government. The process was more rapid, more frequent and steadier
compared to previous decades. However, this phenomenon brought increased pressure
on business leaders. They were struggling to find quick solutions to the problems
created by this sudden change. Cross-cultural management research that also saw an
upsurge of studies dedicated to the global concept provided some sort of relief to the
leaders. It led to the origin of researches on global leadership that added vitality to the
various streams of global leadership including intercultural communication, expatriates,
global management research and comparative leadership.
However, with the consistent growth in demands for flexibility, cross-cultural
management studies displayed numerous weaknesses. As Li (2014) points out, “only a
certain range of perspectives were taken into consideration while incorporating cross-
cultural management researches in top business institutions around the world and this
seems now as a lethal limitation”. According to the authors, contemporary cross-cultural
management researches account only for the norms prescribed by the dominant West.
The statement is true as it can be seen that the dominant western management team
has imposed its own views to the rest of the world. Further, it also has to be mentioned
that research on global leadership that stemmed from the cross-cultural management
researches still lacks clarity. The reason is a lack of depth in the studies conducted for
cross-cultural management. This turned out to be a weakness in global leadership
because the suppositions put forth by cross- researchers of cultural management
provided contradictory pragmatic evidence or failed to address them empirically (Dinh et
al. 2014). An example can be given of the contradiction where the cultural differences in
a nation are supposed to be small compared to the differences between other nations.
Scholars in the past just focused on expatriates as the subject of their study and their
consequent findings were mostly generalized. However, it turned out to be otherwise
and hence cross-cultural management research failed to provide any concrete evidence
on how to manage differences in culture.

8CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be said that cross-cultural management researches unveiled
the increasing shift in the role of managers and leaders in the global business
environment. Managers in the 21st century took on the role of leaders in the sense that
they began making strategic decisions for the organizations they worked in. although
experts undertook leadership studies from a perspective of expert cognition,
competencies, job analysis and developmental approaches, it could have more impact if
it was studied from other theoretical perspectives. The essay undertook a critical
analysis of the main article in order to provide insights into the role of cross-cultural
management research to evaluate global leadership. In doing so, the essay unearthed
certain other facts that led to the beginning of studies in global leadership. Further, the
essay included views from other scholars on the issue and revealed that the studies on
cross-cultural management lacked depth especially in the contemporary setting. the
advantages and limitations of cross-cultural management studies were also discussed
thoroughly in the essay.

9CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
References:
Adler, N.J., 1983. Cross-cultural management research: The ostrich and the
trend. Academy of management Review, 8(2), pp.226-232.
Bird, A. and Mendenhall, M.E., 2016. From cross-cultural management to global
leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51(1), pp.115-126.
Calvin, J.R., Beale, R.L. and Moore, K., 2017. Acculturation and Allied Contributing
Factors That Further Advance Cross-Cultural Management Learning and Education: A
Conceptual Approach. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communications and
Conflict, 21(2), pp.1-11.
Cooke, F.L., Veen, A. and Wood, G., 2017. What do we know about cross-country
comparative studies in HRM? A critical review of literature in the period of 2000-
2014. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), pp.196-233.
Dinh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, W.L., Meuser, J.D., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014.
Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and
changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), pp.36-62.
Gelfand, M.J., Aycan, Z., Erez, M. and Leung, K., 2017. Cross-cultural industrial
organizational psychology and organizational behavior: A hundred-year journey. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 102(3), p.514.
Kostova, T., Marano, V. and Tallman, S., 2016. Headquarters–subsidiary relationships
in MNCs: Fifty years of evolving research. Journal of World Business, 51(1), pp.176-
184.
Li, M., 2014. Cross-cultural tourist research: A meta-analysis. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 38(1), pp.40-77.
Meyer, K.E., 2017. International business in an era of anti-globalization. Multinational
Business Review, 25(2), pp.78-90.

10CROSS-CULTURAL MANAGEMENT RESEARCH IN GLOBAL LEADERSHIP
Reiche, B.S., Bird, A., Mendenhall, M.E. and Osland, J.S., 2017. Contextualizing
leadership: a typology of global leadership roles. Journal of International Business
Studies, 48(5), pp.552-572.
Sarala, R.M., Junni, P., Cooper, C.L. and Tarba, S.Y., 2016. A sociocultural perspective
on knowledge transfer in mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Management, 42(5),
pp.1230-1249.
Schedlitzki, D., Ahonen, P., Wankhade, P., Edwards, G. and Gaggiotti, H., 2017.
Working with language: A refocused research agenda for cultural leadership
studies. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19(2), pp.237-257.