12.07.2015 Views

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd Edition

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd Edition

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd Edition

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

182 <strong>ORGANIZATIONAL</strong> <strong>CULTURE</strong> AND LEADERSHIPsuperiors <strong>and</strong> subordinates than do people in low-power-distancecountries, such as Denmark, Israel, <strong>and</strong> Austria. If one looks at thesame index by occupation, one finds higher power distance amongunskilled <strong>and</strong> semiskilled workers than among professional <strong>and</strong>managerial workers, as would be expected.These dimensions also reflect even deeper cultural assumptionsabout the nature of the self. For example, Redding <strong>and</strong> Martyn-Johns (1979) point out that Western <strong>and</strong> Asian societies have strikinglydifferent core concepts of the self. Asians are less focused ondifferentiating the individual from the group <strong>and</strong> therefore put lessemphasis on self-actualization as a core personality process, whereasWesterners have developed strong concepts of the individual <strong>and</strong>the self as something potentially quite distinct from the group <strong>and</strong>something to be developed in its own right. In some cultures theself is compartmentalized, so that work, family, <strong>and</strong> leisure involvedifferent aspects of the self; in other cultures the self is more of awhole, <strong>and</strong> even the idea of separating work from family does notmake any sense. The core question of identity <strong>and</strong> role is thus answeredin very different ways in different cultures.At the organizational level, assumptions about relationshipswill, of course, reflect the assumptions of the wider culture, but theybecome elaborated <strong>and</strong> differentiated. The founder/leader maybelieve that the only way to run an organization is to assign individualtasks, hold individuals accountable for performance, <strong>and</strong>minimize group <strong>and</strong> cooperative work because that would only leadto lowest-common-denominator group solutions or, worse, diffusionof responsibility. Another leader might emphasize cooperation <strong>and</strong>communication among subordinates as the best means of solvingproblems <strong>and</strong> implementing solutions because that would lead tothe level of teamwork that task accomplishment requires. Thesetwo leaders would develop quite different working styles, whichwould be reflected ultimately in the organization’s processes, rewardsystems, <strong>and</strong> control systems.DEC reduced the power distance between superiors <strong>and</strong> subordinatesas much as possible, building on the assumption that good ideas

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!