![]() |
| Introduction
to the GLOBE Research Project on Leadership Worldwide
Cornelius N. Grove, 2005 GROVEWELL LLC is an early adopter of the GLOBE Project's findings, which provide insights into business leadership in 62 nations. As a service, GROVEWELL provides this article to better enable businesspeople and others to comprehend the implications of the GLOBE research. Not published elsewhere,
this article may be used freely so long attribution is given to (1) the
author, (2) GROVEWELL LLC, (3) Grovewell.com/GLOBE,
and (4) this book: Robert J. House et al., Culture, Leadership, and
Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Sage Publications,
2004. For Sage's webpage describing this book, click here.
GLOBE is the acronym for “Global
Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness,” the name of a cross-cultural
research effort that exceeds all others (including Geert Hofstede’s landmark
1980 study) in scope, depth, duration, and sophistication. The first
book-length report of the GLOBE Research Program was recently published
by Sage, and it is this book that GROVEWELL
is overviewing here. It is Robert J. House et al., Culture, Leadership,
and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Sage Publications,
2004. For Sage's webpage describing this book, click here.
The GLOBE Project's Definition of Leadership The GLOBE researchers studied leadership worldwide; they defined leadership as "...the ability of an individual to influence, motivate, and enable others to contribute toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members" [p. 15]. Introductory Overview of the GLOBE Research Effort Conceived in 1991 by Robert J. House of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and led by Professor House, the GLOBE Project directly involved 170 “country co-investigators” based in 62 of the world’s cultures as well as a 14-member group of coordinators and research associates. This international team collected data from 17,300 middle managers in 951 organizations (for details about the research sample, see Note 1). They used qualitative methods to assist their development of quantitative instruments. In order to accurately and sensitively record the nuances of local meanings, all instruments were developed in consultation with members of each target culture, and instrument translation was done with enormous care. Specific attention also was paid to the effect of "response bias" on data-gathering and -analysis (Note 2). Relevant previous literature was exhaustively reviewed and, as appropriate, applied (making the book being overviewed here a veritable bibiographic goldmine). Ultimately, 27 research hypotheses were tested. GLOBE is a research project of at
least three phases. The first two are dealt with in the recently
published book. Phase 1 involved the development of research instruments.
Phase 2 assessed nine fundamental attributes, or cultural dimensions, of
both societal and organizational cultures, and explored how these impact
leadership in 62 societal cultures. Phase 3, currently underway,
is primarily studying the effectiveness of specific leader behaviors (including
that of CEOs) on subordinates’ attitudes and performance.
GLOBE’s 62 Societal Cultures and 10 Societal Clusters The 62 “societal cultures” assessed by GLOBE range from Albania to Zimbabwe. They comprise all the business-oriented societies you might hope to find with the exceptions of Norway and Saudi Arabia, plus several you might not expect such as El Salvador, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Namibia, Qatar, Slovenia, and Zambia. These societal cultures are not
referred to as “nations” because the researchers were admirably thinking
as social anthropologists instead of political scientists. Among
the 62 are included “Canada (English-speaking),” “Germany (Former East),”
“Germany (Former West),” “South Africa (Black sample),” “South Africa (White
sample),” and finally both “Switzerland (French-speaking)” and "Switzerland"
[said on p. 725 to be German-speaking].
The Ten "Societal Clusters" and Number of Societies in Each
There are almost no surprises in terms of which societies appear within each cluster. I say "almost" because there is one: Israel is in the “Latin Europe” cluster. About this decision, the authors explain that, long ago, some Jews in Southern Europe converted to Catholicism due to religious persecution while others migrated to Eastern Europe. Members of the latter group were largely responsible for founding Israel, and they "retained their social and business ties with the Latin European region" [p. 184].
The first major question addressed by the GLOBE researchers was which measurement standards to use so that they could be precise about the similarities and differences among various societal and organizational cultures. After a thoroughgoing literature review as well as two pilot studies, the team identified nine “cultural dimensions” that would serve as their units of measurement, or (in research language) "independent variables." Cultural dimensions have been an
often-used tool of intercultural researchers for decades; readers familiar
with them will find among the GLOBE nine some that are well-known and some
that have been carefully redefined or even newly developed. Each
of these nine units of measurement receives a great deal of attention in
the book, and are discussed at length in my third interpretative article
(click here).
Here I will list them by name only:
For readers who are not familiar with cultural dimensions, I will explain that each of these is conceptualized and depicted as a continuum between two extreme poles. For example, people in a society or an organization might be extremely non-assertive, extremely assertive, or anywhere in between. As visually portrayed in my third article (click here), the GLOBE researchers used a 7-step rating scale. Continuing with assertiveness as our example, “1” is greatly non-assertive, “4” is neither non-assertive nor assertive, and “7” is greatly assertive. If you are new to cultural dimensions, it is essential that you avoid thinking of them, implicitly or explicitly, as dichotomies. Another significant fact about GLOBE’s nine cultural dimensions is that each one was conceptualized in two ways: practices or “as is,” and values or “should be.” Continuing with the example above, people in a society or an organization could rate themselves in actual practice as “6” or somewhat assertive, but simultaneously could rate themselves as valuing, or preferring, a state of affairs that is “3” or slightly non-assertive. Some of GLOBE’s most fascinating findings come to light because the team consistently sought to compare respondents’ values with their practices. To summarize, within each of the
nine cultural dimensions, the GLOBE researchers probed respondents about
both practices and values, and did so within both the larger
society
and the specific organization:
A Major Research Question about Leadership One of the most important questions
addressed by the GLOBE research team concerned the extent to which the
practices and values associated with leadership are universal (i.e., are
similar worldwide), and the extent to which they are specific to just a
few societies. To probe this issue, the team began with a large number
of possible leader "attributes." As a result of their findings
from the 17,300 respondents worldwide regarding all these attributes, the
team was able to identify 21 “primary leadership dimensions” or “first
order factors” that in all societal cultures are viewed as, to some extent,
contributing to a leader's effectiveness or lack of effectiveness.
(To view an illustration in my second article depicting the overall research
design, click here.)
The 21 primary leadership dimensions are:
Each of the 21 primary leadership dimensions comprises two to four of the original “attributes.” For example, the first of the 21, Administratively Competent, comprises four attributes: orderly, administratively skilled, organized, and good administrator. The last of the 21, Team Integrator, likewise comprises four attributes: communicative, team builder, informed, and integrator. The full list of 21 dimesions, each with its set of attributes, is found in the book in Table 8.4 [p. 131]. Returning for a moment to the level of the numerous component “attributes,” three major research questions were these (the wording below is mine): 1. Are one or more attributes universally viewed as contributing to outstanding leadership? If "yes," they are termed “universal positive leader attributes.” 2. Are one or more attributes universally viewed as inhibiting outstanding leadership? If "yes," these are termed “universal negative leader attributes.” (For information about the meaning above of “universal,” consult the final section of this article, “A Word About GLOBE’s Research Design.”) 3. Are one or more attributes culturally specific, viewed as contributing to outstanding leadership in some societies and as inhibiting outstanding leadership in other societies? If "yes," these are termed “culturally contingent leadership attributes.” If you would like a foretaste of GLOBE’s findings, you should know that there are attributes in all three lists, and that the longest list is the culturally contingent one.
A principal outcome of this huge research effort was the development of six universally shared conceptions of leadership, known most often as "culturally endorsed leadership theory dimensions," also known as "global leadership dimensions" and by several other names (Note 4). It is of critical importance to keep in mind that these six are dimensions, or continua, and as such are not statements of what is outstanding leadership. Rather, they are about the ways in which people worldwide distinguish between leaders who are effective and ineffective. These six culturally endorsed leadership
theory dimensions are a direct outgrowth of the research within all 62
societal cultures. The six are described using the 21 “primary leadership
dimensions” or “first order factors” from the table immediately above.
The six are listed below [based on Table 21.1, p. 676]:
Much of the analysis in the book
is focused on explaining how the nine cultural dimensions (e.g., “performance
orientation,” “assertiveness,” and seven others) as independent variables
relate to the six culturally endorsed leadership theory dimensions (e.g.,
“charismatic / value-based,” “team-oriented,” and four others) as dependent
variables across the 10 societal clusters. Constantly referenced
in all analyses are the findings at the societal and organizational
levels, and the findings in terms of practices (as-is) and values
(should-be).
A Few Words About GLOBE’s Research Design The book includes extended, highly technical discussions of the project’s research design and statistical analyses; in fact, the 140-page Part III is entitled “Research Methodology.” Although I have a basic understanding of statistics and research procedures and have personally been involved with rigorously designed research, I am not qualified to pass judgment on the excellence of these admittedly critical features of the GLOBE Project. However, I would like to note two matters that may be of interest to the general reader. CLIMATIC
DETERMINISM:
As mentioned above under the heading “GLOBE’s 62 Societal Cultures and
10 Societal Clusters,” the book includes a compelling chapter (Chapter
10, within Part III) on the clustering of the 62 societies. What
I did not mention previously is that this chapter also includes an extended
consideration of the extent to which physical climate can be a basis
for the clustering of societies. As the co-authors point out, many
scholars have argued that climate influences culture, a recent example
being Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel (1997). If climate
does determine culture to a significant extent, then GLOBE’s research team
clearly wanted climate to be a factor that they properly took into account.
With respect to climate, the authors' conclusions are these: It is
true that “…extremity of thermoclimate (temperature) has a particularly
important influence on the societal behaviors” [p. 211]. However,
“On the whole, the societies [in the GLOBE sample] showed a capacity to
develop practices and values that eschew climatic determinism” [p. 215].
Universal Positive: To be “universally endorsed” as contributing to effective leadership, an attribute had to meet both of two criteria: (a) 95% of the societal averages had to exceed a mean of 5 on a 1-to-7 scale (on which 7 is high), and (b) the worldwide grand mean score for that attribute (considering all 62 cultures together) had to exceed 6 on a 1-to-7 scale. Universal Negative:
To be “universally endorsed” as an impediment to effective leadership,
an attribute had to meet similar criteria: (a) 95% of the societal averages
had to be less than a mean of 3 on a 1-to-7 scale, and (b)
the worldwide grand mean score for that attribute (considering all 62 cultures
together) had to be less than 3 on a 1-to-7 scale.
Other Articles in This Interpretative Series Two additional articles, two short précis, and an interactive quiz based on GLOBE, all by GROVEWELL partner Dr. Cornelius Grove, are instantly available on this website. Links to everything in his interpretative series are found at www.grovewell.com/GLOBE.
Genuinely Global Leadership Global Executive Coaching GLOBE Leadership Research Overviews Professional Women in a Global Economy Expatriate Effectiveness Best Practices Effective Presentations Worldwide Globalization of U.S. Diversity United States Culture Insights People-to-People Exchange About Intercultural Consulting - GROVEWELL's most repeatedly-published article - Top of Page | Contact Us | Home | About | Comprehensive Site Map |
| -
NOTE 1: About the research sample, the GLOBE team reports that "...sampling strategy required that data from each society met the following criteria: (a) respondents had to be middle managers, (b) multiple respondents had to be obtained from organizations, (c) two or more organizations had to be obtained from two of three types of industries (financial, food processing, and telecommunication), and (d) at least two industries had to be obtained for each society. Half of the respondents from a given organization completed one version of the GLOBE culture and leadership questionnaire. The other half completed a second version of the [same] questionnaire. By administering these questionnaires to separate samples of middle managers from the same organization or society, we minimized or even eliminated common source response bias.... "A total of 17,370 middle managers from 951 organizations in three industries completed the culture and leadership questionnaires in both Phases 1 and 2 of GLOBE. Specifically, 1,943 respondents participated in the Phase 1 pilot studies and 15,427 respondents participated in Phase 2. The number of respondents by country ranged from 27 to 1,790 with an average per country of 251 respondents. "Approximately 74.8% of our respondents were men." [Note: This percentage is approximate due to cultural sensitivities in the collection of demographic information.] "Respondents had an average full-time work experience of 19.2 years, of which an average of 10.5 years were spent as managers. They had worked for their current organizations an average of 12.2 years. "Phase 2 data were obtained from middle managers employed in 951 separate organizations. Only corporations headquartered in the host cultures were included in our sample. Therefore, we deliberately excluded from our sample foreign multinational corporations. Multinational corporations were excluded because their members would be from multiple cultures and their responses would not be indicative of [their] societal culture..." [p. 96, italics added]. Please use BACK
to return
-
- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - NOTE 2: Response bias occurs when a group of respondents tends to use a generally positive, or generally negative, response set; or when group members tend to use only end-points (e.g., 1, 2, 6, 7) or only mid-points (e.g., 3, 4, 5) of a scale. Existing research has shown that there are societal-wide tendencies in individuals' responses to scaled questionnaire items. The research team "went to extraordinary lengths" to avoid, detect, and statistically correct for, response bias [pp. 680-1]. Please use BACK
to return
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - NOTE 3: The GLOBE research report usually refers to 62 societies. There are only 61 societies in this table, which is based on the book's Table 10.1 [p. 191]. The reason appears to be that the Czech Republic has been excluded from some measures due to "pervasive response bias" (see page 27, Note 1, in the book). Also worth noting is that, in the
book being overviewed here, there is little information about specific
societal cultures. Leadership profiles of specific societal cultures
are presented and discussed in Jagdeep S. Chhokar et al., Culture and
Leadership Across the World: The GLOBE Book of In-Depth Studies of 25 Societies,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2007. Obtain this book by clicking here.
Please use BACK
to return
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NOTE 4: The various names applied to these six key dimensions are...
Please use BACK
to return
-
- - - - - - - - - |