“Multicultural Shared Leadership: A Conceptual Model of Shared Leadership in Culturally Diverse Teams discusses the concept of multicultural leadership of different corporation related instances. The aspect of shared leadership is observed; in terms of the effects that cultural diversity has on this very concept. Therefore, it concludes upon the presence of a multicultural leadership that is prevalent in many societies.
Another crucial point targeted in the article by Ramthun and Matkin is the fact that the hierarchical structure of organizations makes it easier to coordinate and collaborate on a collective basis, rather than solely working as a leader. However, Wighton in the Times disagrees with this perspective, stating that if there is an existence of good quality and steady leadership within an organization, it is possible for the company on a whole to progress, remain efficient and thus, be successful . Moreover, Ramthun and Matkin form the basis for culturally diverse leadership, by declaring that the need for communication actually brings an increase in shared leadership. This article goes beyond the conventional opinion that leaders aren’t focused on asserting their authority on those below them, but also interested in upward and lateral types of leadership actions. On the other hand, one of the downsides of leadership mentioned in Organizational Behavior is actually the presence of misuse of power. Those who are granted positions of leadership tend to overuse power, to get tasks done. It’s not necessary that power may be exerted through fair means .
The being scrutinized further progresses on to explicitly state the various definitions for culture, or cultural diversity. In essence it concludes the definitions in different regions have proven to be normative, mainly circulating around nationality, race, ethnicity, economic status and if extended, it even applies to association with organizations. When people from different cultures interact amongst one another, it can be extremely common for miscommunication and confusion to prevail, provided that not enough knowledge exists on the part of those involved. This may lead to organizational inefficiency. Obviously, it would be impossible for tasks to be completed and problems to be solved if there are inhibitions in communication. That is exactly why this problem becomes a source of discussion according to the authors. On the other hand, the book Organizational Behavior, focused more on an approach that declared efficient leaders to be charismatic, enthusiastic and courageous, and an additional number of 20 to 80 traits have been identified by researchers . Most of these traits don’t include any mention of cultural knowledge, or the importance of it, and that is a critical aspect of analyzing the article.
Ramthun and Matkin define intercultural competence as the exceptional ability to interact effectively with people from different cultures, understand them, and form a mutual basis for compliance. Moreover, it also includes the ability to adjust in different cultural surroundings with ease and understanding the perspectives of others, agreeing upon them, even if they might seem illogical. It is apparent that the authors believe this to be an essential aspect that can make or break multi-cultural leadership. However, it is important to consider the sole fact that people working as leaders in organizations do not base their interactions amongst one another, through personal means. The interactions are almost always professional . Therefore, does not give rise to any disputes over differed worldly views. However, the authors are right on target in stating that, intercultural competence must enable one to adjust in culturally different surroundings. But, that again, is not an aspect of leadership, and focuses more on changing jobs.
Furthermore, the authors discuss the multi-behavior leadership typology, vertical leadership and shared leadership. Five typical leadership behaviors have been mentioned in detail under the typology classification, and these are directive, transactional, transformational, empowerment and aversive in nature. In contrast, Organizational Behavior observes some basic categories of defining characteristics of leadership. In addition to those mentioned previously, The Big Five Personality Approach and Emotional Intelligence . All these determinations assign high levels of significance to understanding those below you and catering to their needs, rather than simply act as a dictator, which could be possibly demotivational. On the other hand, vertical leadership is more common in organizations. It is carrying out and implementing a downward influence on all those working under the leader in an organization. This is apt for projects where the supervisor might be responsible for deadlines, of those working under him. Shared leadership is more of a collective effort, where one person is held responsible. A team where one person represents the efforts of the entire package could be an appropriate example. Shared leadership specifically plays an integral role in multicultural interactions of leadership. According to the authors, the reality based examples of this situation prove to be more important than the theoretical implications. Therefore, they have stated that multicultural diversity doesn’t have an impact on vertical leadership, or even the basic typologies of leadership, but in essence the effect of shared leadership is important. One does not have to be entirely submissive towards a whole lot of team members. People coordinate and work on a daily basis, and this might lead to personal interactions as well. Any disruptions between relationships could send the whole team work to waste. For this it’s important to be culturally competent, as aforementioned.
Many organizations have been carrying out training for leadership. But, this has proved to be rather ineffective, because of the structure being classroom based. Practical application tests would be more fitting, in these dire cases, as observed by the Irish Times . The shared leadership model, according to the authors of the Journal Article, is increasingly being exposed to change due to globalization. This increased amount of globalization results in cultural diversity, causing the problem cases in shared leadership . According to the authors, in these cases, to improve organizational efficiency and to effectively target improvisation on the part of leaders, it’s necessary to evoke cognitive training, and improve social behavioral methods of interactions. These are a step further from the typical PowerPoint slides, and basic lectures that are given for training, and will probably bring some relief to the problem of cultural inference.
Fielder’s model has been discussed on the topic of leadership. In this situation Fiedler assumes that the quality of style of leadership in a group tends to be fixed, rather than constantly changing, by analyzing task structure, position power, and member leader relations . Therefore, the suggestion by the authors in denied, that training could bring any changes to the style of shared leadership. This problem brought to the forefront, is probably not as crucial as it appears to be, because the purpose of leadership in fact does center on ensuring task completion, and is not determined by communication between different cultures. Had it been focused on difference it language, that would have posed to be a critical issue.
Works Cited
Jones, Jacky. "A Case of Too Much Training, Too Little Leadership." 1 May 2012. Irish Times.
Millenium Forum of the United Nations. Cultural Diversity and Globablization. Resolution. Geneva: United Nations, 2000.
Robbins, S. P. and T. A. Judge. Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001.
Tizard, John. "Good public service leadership means not always being fashionable." 21 March 2012. The Guardian.
Wighton, David. "Investors agree that quality of leadership is crucial for high performance." 12 June 2012. The Times.
