An Evaluation of Cross-Cultural Leadership: Lewis and Hofstede Models

This presentation provides an in-depth analysis of cross-cultural leadership, focusing on two prominent models: the Lewis Model and the Hofstede Model. The Lewis Model categorizes cultures into linear-active, multi-active, and reactive types, highlighting how these cultural inclinations influence business interactions. The Hofstede Model, on the other hand, explores five cultural dimensions: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term orientation, and how these dimensions shape corporate culture and leadership approaches. The presentation examines how these models can be applied to understand and navigate the complexities of leading in diverse global environments. It provides a comparative analysis of the two models, including an introductory slide, descriptions of the theories, and a concluding summary, making it a valuable resource for understanding the fundamentals of cross-cultural leadership.

CROSS CULTURAL
LEADERSHIP

 The focus is towards understanding the need for cross-
cultural leadership in the rapidly developing global corporate
environments
 Two essential models have been considered in the research.
The models being considered are the Lewis Model and the
Hofstede model of cross cultural leadership
 The corporate culture of a country determines the way in
which businesses are conducted in these countries
 Lewis model focuses on dividing cultures into three specific
cultural inclinations
 Hofstead model puts forward five cultural dimensions of
corporate organizations across the world
 Power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty
avoidance and long term orientation
Introduction

 The Lewis model can be used to determine the cross cultural contexts that govern
the corporate environments of various countries
 According to the Lewis model cultures can be divided into linear active, multi
active and reactive corporate cultures
 Leadership is based on individualistic management, collective management and
management based on respect in the three processes
 The interaction between linear active and multi-active cultures are very difficult
 The interaction between the linear and reactive cultures are satisfactory and
greatly effective
 The interactions between the reactive and multi-active cultures tend to be time
consuming
Cross Cultural Leadership:
Lewis Model

 Based on five cultural dimensions of corporate culture
 Power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long term
orientation
 Leadership is based on inclinations towards these traits
 The power distance factor refers to the perception of the less powerful members
of the organization
 Individualism means the extent to which individuals engage in group integration
 Masculinity refers to the distribution of organizational roles between the sexes
 Uncertainty avoidance means how much the culture of a given organization
tolerates the presence of unstructured business aspects
 Long term or short term orientation is the fifth dimension
Cross Cultural Leadership:
Hofstede model

 Lewis model divides culture into linear active, multi active and reactive
corporate cultures
 linear active cultures tend to be more organized, task oriented and
planning based
 Multi-active cultures tend to be relationship oriented, interrelating and
loquacious
 Reactive culture that is marked by the traits of respect oriented and
introverts listening
 Hofstede’s model based on power distance, individualism, masculinity,
uncertainty avoidance and long term orientation
 Culture based on more power distance or less power distance
 Culture based on individualism or collectivism
 Culture is based on the roles played by the genders
 Culture is based on whether there is more or less tolerance for uncertainty
 Culture based on long term or short term orientation
Summary

 In conclusion, it can be said that cultural differences
between the various organizations working in various parts
of the world govern their productive functions
 As enterprises get more global, the context of cultural
differences get more relevant
 The more culturally inclusive an organization tends to be
the better for it to understand the various cultural
perspectives that can exist in various corporate
environments
Conclusion

 Bird, A., & Mendenhall, M. E. (2016). From cross-cultural management to
global leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51(1),
115-126.
 De Mooij, M. (2015). Cross-cultural research in international marketing:
clearing up some of the confusion. International Marketing Review, 32(6), 646-
662.
 Gollin, D. (2014). The Lewis model: A 60-year retrospective. Journal of
Economic Perspectives, 28(3), 71-88.
 Vogel, R. M., Mitchell, M. S., Tepper, B. J., Restubog, S. L., Hu, C., Hua, W., &
Huang, J. C. (2015). A cross‐cultural examination of subordinates' perceptions
of and reactions to abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
36(5), 720-745.
 Shiraev, E. B., & Levy, D. A. (2016). Cross-cultural psychology: Critical thinking
and contemporary applications. Routledge.
 Tabibi, S. J., Nasiripour, A. A., Kazemzadeh, R. B., & Ebrahimi, P. (2015). The
role of organizational culture according to Hofstede model on information
technology acceptance in hospital environment. Journal of Health
Management, 17(1), 42-50.
Bibliography