Twenty-first century leadership:
international imperatives
Julie-Anne Sheppard
Business and Commerce, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
James C. Sarros
Management Department, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, and
Joseph C. Santora
International School of Management, Paris, France
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to identify the core issues that organisational leaders are facing
internationally, as a result of a globalised and rapidly changing international economic environment.
Appropriate leadership competencies and skills that enable organisational leaders to effectively deal
with these core globalisation issues are examined in detail and are further explained through a
conceptual model developed for the purpose of this study.
Design/methodology/approach – Conventional content analysis of extant literature in the
leadership, management, organisational development and human resource management fields
delimited this study to the identification of three core issues, their sub-dimensions and associated
organisational leadership effectiveness strategies.
Findings – This study presents a conceptual model consolidating current scholarly understanding of
the international imperatives affecting twenty-first century organisational leaders and describes “best
practice” leadership skills, competencies and models that will enable managers to lead effectively in a
rapidly changing, globalised market-place.
Originality/value – The simplicity and explicitness of the descriptive-based conceptual model
represented in this review offers an original approach to the link between theory and practice in
international organisational leadership, while acting to simplify the perplexing array of viewpoints on
leadership approaches. A number of research alternatives are suggested that may lead to the
formation of a more predictive “international imperative” model.
Keywords Leadership challenges, Global imperatives, Ethics, Change, Crises, Leadership strategies,
Transformation, Innovation, Decision-making protocols, Leadership, Decision making
Paper type Conceptual paper
1. Introduction
The recent global financial crisis (GFC) is a tangible archetype of the outward effects of
globalisation, a phenomenon that has wrought substantial changes to the global
economic landscape. Other examples such as widespread pandemics, internet security
breaches and organisational ethical mismanagement (as displayed during the Enron
scandal, Barings Bank collapse and BP’s Deep Horizon oil spill) further demonstrate
the globalised interdependencies of social, cultural, political, environmental and
economic factors (Li and Tallman, 2006). Globalisation has intensified organisational
leadership complexity due to: shifts in the conventional balance of global power (Li
et al., 2011); the acceleration in growth of emerging and transitional economies (Beets,
2005); the creation of vast networks of interconnectedness – technologically, socially,
and economically (Li et al., 2011); and the juxtaposition of territorial, religious, political
and cultural differences (Maria and Arenas, 2009).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0025-1747.htm
Twenty-first
century
leadership
267
Management Decision
Vol. 51 No. 2, 2013ش
pp. 267-280
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0025-1747
DOI 10.1108/00251741311301812
Consequently, numerous tensions arise from this rapidly changing, globalised,
social, political and economic environment (Wang et al., 2011). Organisational leaders
are dealing with substantial ethical challenges; particularly in regard to corruption,
bribery and corporate social responsibility (Beets, 2005; Maria and Arenas, 2009).
Ideally, such challenges require compassionate, moral, authentic and ethical
cross-boundary leadership abilities with competencies in cross-cultural leadership
and diversity management (Li et al., 2011; Pirola-Merlo, 2009; Rodriguez et al., 2005).
Numerous issues concerning personal data confidentiality, infrastructure suitability,
climate change, business and environmental sustainability, and the management of
virtual teams ( Jenster and Steiler, 2011) result from the sheer speed and
interconnectedness of global technology and global business ventures. These
necessitate leaders with strategic, innovative, global mindsets, based on
transformative and creative leadership (Karp and Helgo, 2009). Furthermore, global
risks (such as terrorism, pandemics and natural disasters) threaten domestic and
international health, peace and security (Piotrowski, 2010) demanding decisive
decision makers who are proactive and vigilant in maintaining social, political and
organisational viability and sustainability (Bledow et al., 2011; Useem et al., 2005).
2. Design methodology and approach
It would be beyond the scope of a conceptual article to comprehensively cover all the
pertinent social, political, and economic factors associated with organisational
leadership in most conditions, and particularly during times of massive geopolitical
and environmental flux. Therefore this review is delimited to the identification of core
issues that organisational leaders are facing internationally and that are underpinned
and interconnected by the reality of a rapidly changing international economic
environment.
The initial questions framing this review were:
. In what manner do international economic complexities challenge organisational
leadership, now and in the future?
. Are domestic organisational leaders also markedly affected by globalisation
pressures?
. What leadership attributes, competencies, styles and models are and will be,
most effective in dealing with these globalisation complexities?
Articles identifying current international issues impacting on organisational
leadership from the rapidly changing international economic landscape were
targeted in a preliminary literature search. The qualitative data gathering and
evidence collection technique known as conventional content analysis (Hsieh and
Shannon, 2005) was then applied to the relevant leadership, management,
organisational development and human resource management literature. As the
textual information was analysed, interpretive decisions were made as to specific
themes or insights arising from parallels in literature research findings.
It became evident that the interrelated three core themes of – global ethics, global
tempo and global risk – were highly indicative of the complexities organisations and
their leaders are facing in the twenty-first century (Beets, 2005; Piotrowski, 2010;
Zimmermann et al., 2008) during a decade book-ended by large-scale economic and
political crises such as the Asian Crisis, the GFC and the Arab Spring. Further content
MD
51,2
268
analysis of the literature revealed a number of sub-dimensions underscoring these
three core issues.
The following section explores these three core themes associated with twenty-first
century leadership:
(1) global ethics;
(2) global tempo; and
(3) global risk.
Appropriate leadership skills, competencies and models that increase leadership
effectiveness in dealing with these issues and their sub-dimensions, are also
considered.
3. Consequences of a rapidly changing global economic landscape
3.1 Global ethics
Cross-border mergers and acquisitions, global information technologies, free-market
capitalism (Ralston et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2011) and the soft convergence of
management and economic ideologies have led to rapid growth in transitional and
emerging economies (Beets, 2005; Ralston et al., 2008; Warner, 2002). Unfortunately,
economic cross-fertilisation has also led to increasing corruption and bribery,
especially where corruption is a rampant national norm (Gugler and Shi, 2009) and
where nations lack the legal resources to compel commercially ethical behaviour or
human rights compliance (Beets, 2005). However, Useem et al. (2005) posit that
corruption emanates as much from the institutional characteristics and emerging
economic conditions of the national culture of a developing nation as from the actions
of international businesses operating in the emerging economic market, where often
contravening standard operating procedures is valued as highly as a tactic as is
compliance with them. In their severest forms, unethical practices and corruption limit
international expansion, social improvement and legitimate business growth
(Rodriguez et al., 2005). Political leaders exploiting their authority for personal gain,
and leaders of non-government organisations are not exempt from corruption. In fact,
corruption is often linked in developing countries with poor governance and
compliance practices (Maria and Arenas, 2009). In such countries, abject poverty leads
to forms of behaviour predicted by attribution theory: in other words, behaviour
underscored by survival instincts rather than ethically-based consequences (Beets,
2005). Corrupt practices may concomitantly aggravate this poverty, depriving
vulnerable emerging populations of their lawful resources, generating political
instability and worsening environmental damage (Beets, 2005). This is especially the
case where organisations operate in multiple global locations and issues of complex
cultural fit are juxtaposed (Ralston et al., 2008). For some organisations, condoning
corrupt practices has resulted in irreparable organisational and leadership reputational
damage (Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011).
Successful leadership competencies in addressing these concerns have been
displayed by advanced market economy business leaders (and politicians) who
consider corporate social responsibility (CSR) factors, apply ethical principles during
business transactions and take a longer term strategic view (Gugler and Shi, 2009).
Leaders from developing and transition economies are also realising advantages to the
environmental, ethical and business case for CSR, in some cases becoming trendsetters
Twenty-first
century
leadership
269
as they internationalise into advance market economies in order to increase their
competitive advantage (Gugler and Shi, 2009). Another trend is businesses, both
globally and domestically, employing the accounting philosophy of the triple bottom
line – financial, environmental and social (Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011). These
strategies serve to not only decrease corrupt practices and the prospects of branding
reputational damage, but increase global competitiveness, sustainability and long-term
organisational viability (House et al., 2002) in a proactive and ethical manner.
3.2 Global tempo
The pace or tempo of change as a result of globalisation is unprecedented, creating a
number of emerging tensions, including declining environmental sustainability,
personal confidentiality and national security concerns, and managerial risks
associated with the coordination and control of virtual teams (Li et al., 2011).
Countries and societies (particularly in emerging and transitional economies)
experiencing an uncompromising impetus for economic profit are facing chronic
change-imposed environmental sustainability dangers (Karp and Helgo, 2009). These
hazards include infrastructure deficiencies in food, water, energy, health, transport,
and sustainable urban development (Tatoglu and Demirbag, 2008), hazards that can be
doubly injurious in times of global crises (for example, natural disasters and terrorism).
Additionally, a disquieting increase in environmental degradation has exacerbated the
demands on the efficacy of industries such as agriculture and fisheries, particularly in
those countries whose economic well-being is mainly dependent on primary commerce
(Li et al., 2011).
Organisations experiencing rapid international growth and competitiveness also
need to balance the tensions of global control and coordination, with local
responsiveness and knowledge sharing (Dowling et al., 2008). Coordination and
control are often achieved through knowledge management technologies that are
evolving more rapidly than appropriate intellectual property and legal protections,
raising questions over confidentiality of personal details, intellectual property
ownership, and organisational and national security (Griffith et al., 2008).
At the same time, organisations are realising that long-term business sustainability
is heavily dependent on the strategic recruitment and retention of globally innovative,
“out-of-the-box” thinkers, particularly in an environment of global skills shortages
(Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011) and new forms of interdependent, collaborative and
collective leadership (Doz and Kosonen, 2007). However, this can be undermined by
another tension resulting from the unprecedented tempo of global change: the need for
virtual interaction and collaboration – due to the spread of temporal and
geographically dispersed business units – between team members using
computer-aided communication technology (Jenster and Steiler, 2011). The presence
of these virtual communication technologies such as email, Skype, video-conferencing
and instant messaging (Brake, 2006; Zimmermann et al., 2008) presents leadership
challenges including 24-hour operational availability ( Jenster and Steiler, 2011) and the
respectful management of cultural and language diversity (Li et al., 2011). Effective
leadership skills during rapid change include the ability to maintain careful
individualised management (often through sufficient face-to-face contact) of virtual
staff. This prevents both an isolating sense of lack of community ( Jenster and Steiler,
2011; Li et al., 2011) and communication confusion, as seen in ambiguities in e-mail and
MD
51,2
270
other written messages, without the added benefit of auditory and visual clues
(Zimmermann et al., 2008). This is especially important where virtual team
membership is either growing, constantly changing or is highly culturally diverse
(Brake, 2006).
3.3 Global risk
Global risks are diverse and may be: financially orientated, as in the global financial
crisis (Li et al., 2011); security related, such as terrorism and cyber security (Kondrasuk
et al., 2005); natural disasters, for example, tornados, tsunamis, fires and earthquakes
(Piotrowski, 2010; Waugh and Streib, 2006); and health related, such as the SARS and
H1N1 pandemics.
These global risks can have wide-reaching, even catastrophic consequences (Li and
Tallman, 2006). Recent global pandemics and natural disasters have highlighted the
“messiness” of collaborative responses to such crises, mainly due to ambiguous
leadership hierarchies in control and decision-making (Piotrowski, 2010). Difficulties
can also arise from shared leadership responsibilities, strategies and inter-agency
coordination (O’Dempsey, 2009), and inappropriate emergency management plans and
disaster preparedness (Waugh and Streib, 2006). Global terrorism plays to uncertainty,
occurs in multiple locations, is difficult to predict and often relies on the educated
guesses of leaders, as to where terrorist attacks may occur, whom the terrorists are and
their goals, the cultural underpinnings of particular forms of terrorism, and
appropriate response mechanisms in the face of a terrorist attack (Kondrasuk et al.,
2005).
Leaders need to demonstrate definitive decision-making in the face of global
adversity and it is imperative that cross-border business and risk leadership
approaches are innovative and proactive (Useem et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2011).
4. Implications for managers
In summary, the adverse effects of globalisation can threaten social, political,
organisational and cultural health, well-being and security (Li and Tallman, 2006).
Hence, it is crucial that managers recognise the detrimental, interconnected effects of
globalisation issues, and identify effective methods of dealing with these issues.
4.1 Global ethics
Given these multiple interwoven issues, just what types of leadership skills and models
can be gleaned from the extant literature, and that are appropriate for managers in
fighting corruption and adhering to corporate social responsibility? First,
compassionate consideration for the well-being of employees, society and the
environment needs to underpin intelligent stewardship of organisational and national
resources in complex, pressured and ambiguous settings (Li et al., 2011; Useem et al.,
2005). Such stewardship should also encourage by-partisan solutions to socioeconomic
issues (especially of vulnerable population groups) based on ethical collaborative
partnerships (Maria and Arenas, 2009), and the building of trust to accomplish shared
vision and goals (Chao and Tian, 2011). Managers should aspire to intelligent
stewardship as a relevant, long-term objective, especially as, in general, short-term
political decisions often underpin the way business is performed and managed.
Twenty-first
century
leadership
271
Second, the moral conduct of leaders can be crucial and wide-reaching in reducing
corruption (Pirola-Merlo, 2009), even more so than any organisational policies, national
laws or ethical compliance procedures underpinning anti-corruption endeavours
(Beets, 2005) can hope to achieve. Moral, ethical, authentic leaders are able to improve
organisations, economies and thus livelihoods when they employ ethical business
practices and engage with cultural diversity in creative and innovative ways (Li et al.,
2011). The practice and process of authentic leadership (Avolio and Gardner, 2005)
instils “hope, trust and positive emotions” in followers and develops significant
relationships with stakeholders (Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011, p. 387). Moreover,
the effects of political and organisational authentic leadership enables individuals to
develop other-focused values, including social justice (Avolio and Gardner, 2005),
builds individual change capacity, and increases well-being and productivity
(Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011).
Javidan et al. (2006) believe a third leadership key to preventing corruption is to
understand what cultural dimensions are the most divergent in international
relationships. Li et al. (2011, p. 3) also identify effective global leadership as consisting
of attributes such as cultural intelligence, “open mindedness, patience and
adaptability”. Developing cultural intelligence, therefore, results in understanding
the institutional and cultural motivational philosophies and propensity for corruption
(Beets, 2005), and the effectiveness and suitability of particular leadership styles (for
example, participative leadership) crossing from one culture to another (Scandura and
Dorfman, 2004). Such cross-cultural leadership competencies enable leaders to ethically
respond to corrupt environmental demands (Bueno et al., 2004); responses that Bledow
et al. (2011) claim should be proactive, flexible, innovative and contextually
appropriate.
Fourth, Useem et al. (2005) advocate well-constructed and principled leadership
development programs based on action-based or in situ learning on a global scale as a
means to develop socially responsible leadership competencies that are self-reflective
and encourage community capacity building and long term human development.
However, it should be noted that scholars such as Li et al. (2011, p. 8) caution that at
present, there is insufficient research into “appropriate criteria for evaluating
effectiveness” of global leadership programs.
Thus, in dealing with corruption and bribery, it appears that leaders who are
immersed in a geocentric leadership viewpoint – and one which underpins
organisational strategies and goals from a world-wide perspective (Dowling et al.,
2008) – are better able to secure organisational internal and external legitimacy, and
are better placed to be globally (and corporately) socially responsible (Rodriguez et al.,
2005). In summary, political and organisational altruistic endeavours, combined with
measurable value creation, articulated through a socially responsible business model,
will improve bottom lines and gain trust from multiple stakeholders (Doz and Kosonen,
2007; Li et al., 2011).
4.2 Global tempo
It could be said that in a fast-moving marketplace, “managing people amid chaos,
uncertainty, and complexity has become the main challenge for organisations of every
kind” (Karp and Helgo, 2009, p. 81), creating the need for collaborative leadership
attributes combining social qualities, technical competencies (Zimmermann et al., 2008)
MD
51,2
272
and the fostering of frank dialogue, trust and self-worth (Casimir et al., 2006). Essential
also, is a leader’s own self-reflection as a role model for organisational values and
behaviours, as well as an ability to manage personal uncertainty anxiety (Karp and
Helgo, 2009; Li et al., 2011). Doz and Kosonen (2007) state that leaders in uncertain and
rapidly changing conditions must be experienced “all-rounders” who collaboratively
encourage others to become collectively responsible for decision making and change
leadership. Karp and Helgo (2009) further add that loosening control and
micro-management of change will challenge organisational mental models and allow
self-governing traits and more positive forms of communication to emerge.
However, a model which appears to be somewhat universal across cultures, and one
that appears suitable in situations of complexity and change, is that of
transformational, value-based leadership, though cultural undertones moderate how
the leadership behaviour is both displayed and received (Bass, 1997; Scandura and
Dorfman, 2004). In fact, humble, authentic, ethical, transformational, innovative,
ambidextrous leadership, a geocentric globalised mind set and decisive
decision-making appear to be universal phenomena across cultures that are effective
at dealing with globalised complexity (Bledow et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2011). On the
other hand, recent studies have also shown both transactional and transformational
leadership to be fundamental to the effectiveness and cohesion of global virtual teams
(Jenster and Steiler, 2011), which are a combination of task-orientated (or transactional)
and relationally-orientated (inspirationally building community through cultural
intelligence and developing shared norms and mental models) leadership approaches
(Zimmermann et al., 2008). Task-oriented leadership behaviours develop team
membership trust further (Casimir et al., 2006), by encouraging collaborative discourse
between team members to define tasks and problem-solve (Lloyd-Walker and Walker,
2011), providing structured goal setting and rewarding knowledge sharing
(Zimmermann et al., 2008), and clarifying the cultural assumptions underlying
words (Brake, 2006). Relational-orientated leadership behaviours are interpersonal and
inclusive and rely on leadership attributes such as “compassion” (individualised care,
consideration and empathy) and “passion” (using inspirational behaviours to increase
team member participation, relationship building and shared values) (Li et al., 2011,
p. 5). Leaders who develop these behaviours are more likely to assist their
organisations as they adapt to global change imperatives.
4.3 Global risk
Without doubt, courageous meaning-making during global crises such as natural
disasters, terrorism or pandemics, is a crucial role of leadership ( Jepson, 2009), as is
striving for effective decision making that examines the most plausible options and
allocation of resources to deal with the crises in order to reduce risk (Piotrowski, 2010).
The impact of leadership decisions can have profound consequences for individuals,
the organisation and the wider community (Useem et al., 2005). But in actuality, sound
decision-making ability should be a leadership prerequisite long before crises and
global risk occur (Useem et al., 2005). This is a leadership skill that is partly learnt in
response to the counsel and influence of empowered and informed others (Wang et al.,
2011) and in the empowering of frank and direct challenges to leadership mindsets
(Doz and Kosonen, 2007) as well as in leadership development programs (Useem et al.,
2005) and through powerful mentoring and coaching (Li et al., 2011). Thus, in building
Twenty-first
century
leadership
273
the global risk management skills of leaders, leadership development programs must
be based on action learning that is so vivid it invokes ethical, astute, informed and
judicious decision making under conditions of extreme duress (Backus et al., 2010).
Unpredictability also calls for innovative solutions and sensitive management of
conflicting cultural norms (Bathurst and Monin, 2010). Leadership qualities that
Bledow et al. (2011, p. 65) advocate for crisis leadership include “sensibility, adaptation,
changeability, experimentation, cultural awareness... and the willingness to be
surprised by complexity”. Useem et al. (2005, p. 474) list the qualities of “preparedness,
ability to mobilise (people and resources), strategic thinker (acquiring and analysing
information), ability to execute (planning), personal selflessness (for collective purpose)
and unequivocal authority”. However, it is interesting to note that Stelter (2002) found
descriptions of leadership traits or behaviours not predictive enough for actual
leadership effectiveness, finding that leadership was moderated by contextual and
situational factors that may impact on leadership decisions and individual leaders to
differing degrees. Useem et al. (2005) also produce a leadership attribute list with
caution, stating that mere possession of attributes can be misleading when referring to
leadership decision-making ability in risk situations.
Overall, it appears that leadership “as a system” is most effective in turbulent and
adverse conditions (DeChurch et al., 2011). Business leaders then, must be respectful
and cognisant of the interaction of leadership processes occurring at all levels of an
organisation, as well as across organisational boundaries (Bathurst and Monin, 210;
DeChurch et al., 2010). Leaders must also network and boundary span outside their
own system to create accurate pictures of threats, and to develop meaningful ties that
can be easily coordinated if required (DeChurch et al., 2011).
5. Conceptual model: application in theory and practice
Figure 1 presents the conceptual model for the study, which incorporates the core
issues (global ethics, global tempo and global risk) and their associated
sub-dimensions. The model illustrates the manner in which each of these three core
issues are interrelated (denoted as separate entities at the triangle vertices but each are
still part of the larger body of the triangle). The model also explains how each of the
core issues magnifies each of the others, as the vertices can be metaphorically folded
onto each other to form a new, more compact triangle.
The conceptual model also demonstrates how the globalised leadership capabilities,
skills and competencies highlighted in this review are central to each of the core issues
and can either be taken as a whole, or “turned” to each vertex in order to examine their
usefulness for each individual issue.
6. Research implications
As shown in Figure 1, the conceptual model of the study represents current
globalisation leadership concerns, issues and competencies, and may be a useful
operational tool for managers and leaders to help them come to terms with current
social, economic, environmental and political imperatives. However, a limitation lies in
the model’s inability to predict future leadership trends and requirements in the areas
of global ethics, global tempo, and global risk.
MD
51,2
274
6.1 Global ethics
The following research on leadership in the twenty-first century as an ethical and
cross-cultural practice is warranted:
. Longitudinal studies of “Best Practice” corporations operating in both
developing and transitional economies, with a specific focus on their overall
effect on transitional economies; the degree to which these companies do
business ethically as well as an examination of the efficacy and the value of any
bi-partisan partnerships in which they may be involved.
. A multi-perspective exploration of ethical leadership in business practices (for
example from philosophical, psychological and social perspectives), particularly
given that senior leadership in large businesses tends to be short-lived and
subject to high turnover rates. In addition, the effect of “long-term leadership”
(i.e. one person or leadership team being involved for more than three years) on
the ethical running of a global corporation versus short-term leadership merits
investigative attention.
. Evidence that ethical/authentic leadership may reach a “glass-ceiling” in the
extent to which it reaches the upper echelons of decision making.
. Examination of the extent to which compliance and regulatory laws really work.
. Examination of whether a transitional economy can be “made ready” for free
market capitalism.
Figure 1.
Conceptual model of the
study: globalisation and
twenty-first century
leadership issues
Twenty-first
century
leadership
275
. Validation of the premise that cultural divergence is seen as a major issue in
International business, although the dedication of budget to training and
development in this area is miniscule.
. Longitudinal studies of geocentric employees and the creation of valid and
measurable criteria in geocentric leadership development programs to
investigate the impact of relocations on moral character and to address issues
such as: identification of the long term effects (psychologically, socially,
interpersonally) of relocating workers multiple times across countries in an
attempt to expand geocentric understanding; the extent to which relocations
cause geocentric employees to lack a solid foundation and therefore make
workers more open to corrupt practices.
6.2 Global tempo
The following research on leadership in the twenty-first century as a globally strategic
and transformative practice in dealing with rapidly changing business environments
and practices is warranted:
. The extent to which cross-cultural leadership practices impact leadership
development programs; i.e. are leadership development programs incorporating
appropriate cross-cultural practices.
. Examination of the consequences of the juxtaposition of flexible and agile work
practices on a global scale with maintaining local responsiveness and
understanding local cultural requirements.
. Evidence to show that employees are empowered by management to solve
challenges posed by virtual teams and global management issues generally.
. Exploration of the extent to which businesses apply strategic objectives to their
leadership recruitment practices, with a specific emphasis on: whether leaders
fully understand the strategic nature of their recruitment practices, especially in
choosing managers with the ability to effectively lead team members in disparate
geographical areas; test the notion that organisations devote a disproportionate
amount of care to recruitment at senior management levels, when in fact a
strategic focus should be applied and maintained for all workers across all
organisational levels.
6.3 Global risk
The following research on leadership in the twenty-first century as a proactive and
decisive activity as a suitable response to global risk is warranted:
. evaluation of the appropriateness of action-based leadership development
programs designed for specific contexts and situations;
. examination of the extent to which psychometric or psychological testing can
help determine the efficacy, morality, ethicalness and authenticity of particularly
leaders in demanding situations;
. further evidence on the extent to which leadership development programs teach
managers to: value and respect the abilities of employees; enable employees to
become autonomous and independent thinking; examine the benefit of dialogue
MD
51,2
276
when dealing with difficult issues; embrace complexity and deal with ambiguity;
develop moral character; and
. identification of the behavioural changes required, both individually and
organisationally, in developing “leadership as a system” as recommended by
DeChurch et al. (2011).
7. Conclusion
The significant issues and concerns organisational leaders are facing during the early
part of the twenty-first century such as global crises, rapidly changing economic
landscapes, and the sheer speed of global change are creating ethical dilemmas,
complexity and unpredictability for twenty-first century international leaders
(Rodriguez et al., 2005; Tatoglu and Demirbag, 2008; Walker, 2006). Whether
domestically or internationally, organisations are grappling with capriciously shifting
external hurdles (customer demands, unpredictable markets, expansion into new
economies, constantly changing strategic alliances, sustainable growth and viability)
and internal issues (skills shortages, talent retention, flexible work forcing,
organisational structural adaptations) (Wang et al., 2011). Thus, maintaining
national, social and organisational resilience, security and viability in turbulent and
uncertain international conditions should be top priorities for international leaders
(Bledow et al., 2011; Karp and Helgo, 2009; Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011; Rogers,
2011). Also relevant is the notion that political leaders must put partisan politics aside
and collaborate with social, community and business leaders to encourage human
development and capacity building for resilience in the face of corruption,
environmental degradation, and global threats, especially as there is no single,
globally enforcing, political or economic body holding leaders accountable for their
actions (Walker, 2006).
However, endeavours to discover an appropriate leadership approach relevant for
all international leaders have typically been blurred by a perplexing array of
fragmentary and opposing viewpoints, cultural biases in interpretation, and an
“eclectic variety of leadership perspectives [that] define the essence of leadership”
(DeChurch et al., 2010, p. 1071). Additionally, these approaches are often based on a
predominantly Western, Anglo-Saxon social constructivist viewpoint, which is
focussed on leadership as imparted by an individual rather than leadership models as
“process” ( Jepson, 2009).
The conceptual model presented in this article aims to simplify and consolidate
much of this research by focussing on three key globalisation issues resulting from a
rapidly changing global economic environment and detailing “best practice”
leadership skills, competencies and models that are applicable to effectively dealing
with all three core issues. Attention to these “best practice” skills should enable
business leaders to apply what Wang et al. (2011) suggest are more sophisticated
leadership capabilities. It is these capabilities that should proactively underpin
corporate strategy with an influential socially responsible business model focusing on
long-term outcomes, a wide-range of stakeholders (not just shareholders), and the
obliteration of corruption and bribery (Li et al., 2011; Lloyd-Walker and Walker, 2011;
Useem et al., 2005). It is to be hoped that such a course of action will go some way to
prevent the reoccurrence of global disasters that seem to appear with increasing
frequency and heightened levels of ongoing threat.
Twenty-first
century
leadership
277
References
Avolio, B.J. and Gardner, W.L. (2005), “Authentic leadership development: getting to the root of
positive forms of leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp. 315-38.
Backus, C., Keegan, K., Gluck, C. and Gulick, L.M.V. (2010), “Accelerating leadership
development via immersive learning and cognitive apprenticeship”, International Journal
of Training and Development, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 144-8.
Bass, B. (1997), “Does the transactional–transformational leadership paradigm transcend
organizational and national boundaries?”, American Psychologist, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 130-9.
Bathurst, R. and Monin, N. (2010), “Shaping leadership for today: Mary Parker Follett’s
aesthetic”, Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 115-31.
Beets, S.D. (2005), “Understanding the demand-side issues of international corruption”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 57, pp. 65-81.
Bledow, R., Frese, M. and Mueller, V. (2011), “Ambidextrous leadership for innovation: the
influence of culture”, Advances in Global Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 41-69.
Brake, T. (2006), “Leading global virtual teams”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 38
No. 3, pp. 116-21.
Bueno, C.M., Antolin, G. and Tubbs, S.L. (2004), “Identifying global leadership competencies:
an exploratory study”, The Journal of American Academy of Business, Vol. 5 Nos 1/2,
pp. 80-7.
Casimir, G., Waldman, D.A., Bartram, T. and Yang, S. (2006), “Trust and the relationship
between leadership and follower performance: opening the black box in Australia and
China”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 12, pp. 68-84.
Chao, C.-C. and Tian, D. (2011), “Culturally universal or culturally specific: a comparative study
of anticipated female leadership styles in Taiwan and the United States”, Journal of
Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 64-79.
DeChurch, L.A., Hiller, N.J., Murase, T., Doty, D. and Salas, E. (2010), “Leadership across levels:
levels of leaders and their levels of impact”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 21, pp. 1069-85.
DeChurch, L.A., Burke, C.S., Shuffler, M.L., Lyons, R., Doty, D. and Salas, E. (2011),
“A historiometric analysis of leadership in mission critical multi-team environments”,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 22, pp. 152-69.
Dowling, P.J., Festing, M. and Engle, A. (2008), International Human Resource Management,
Cengage Learning Australia.
Doz, Y.L. and Kosonen, M. (2007), “The new deal at the top”, Harvard Business Review, pp. 98-104.
Griffith, D.A., Cavusgil, S.T. and Xu, S. (2008), “Emerging themes in international business
research”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 39, pp. 1220-35.
Gugler, P. and Shi, J.Y.J. (2009), “Corporate social responsibility for developing country
multinational corporations: lost war in pertaining global competitiveness?”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 87, pp. 3-24.
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P. and Dorfman, P. (2002), “Understanding cultures and implicit
leadership theories across the globe: an introduction to project GLOBE”, Journal of World
Business, Vol. 37, pp. 3-10.
Hsieh, H.-F. and Shannon, S.E. (2005), “Three approaches to qualitative content analysis”,
Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 15 No. 9, pp. 1277-88.
Javidan, M., House, R.J., Dorfman, P.W., Hanges, P.J. and Luque, M.S.D. (2006), “Conceptualizing
and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE’s and
Hofstede’s approaches”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37, pp. 897-914.
MD
51,2
278
Jenster, N.P. and Steiler, D. (2011), “Turning up the volume in interpersonal leadership:
motivating and building cohesive global virtual teams during times of economic crisis”,
Advances in Global Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 267-97.
Jepson, D. (2009), “Studying leadership at cross-country level: a critical analysis”, Leadership,
Vol. 5, pp. 61-80.
Karp, T. and Helgo, T.I.T. (2009), “Reality revisited: leading people in chaotic change”, Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 81-93.
Kondrasuk, J.N., Bailey, D. and Sheeks, M. (2005), “Leadership in the 21st century: understanding
global terrorism”, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 263-79.
Li, M., Wang, Y. and Mobley, W.H. (2011), “Introduction-passion, compassion and complexity in
global leadership research and practice”, Advances in Global Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 1-11.
Li, S. and Tallman, S.B. (2006), “The effects of knowledge strategy and international diversity on
MNEs’ performance after the shock of Sep 11th attacks”, in Best Paper Proceedings,
Academy of Management Meeting, Atlanta, CA.
Lloyd-Walker, B. and Walker, D. (2011), “Authentic leadership for 21st century project delivery”,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 29, pp. 383-95.
Maria, J.F. and Arenas, D. (2009), “Societal ethos and economic development organizations in
Nicaragua”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 88, pp. 231-44.
O’Dempsey, T. (2009), “Fair training: a new direction in humanitarian assistance”, Progress in
Development Studies, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 81-6.
Piotrowski, C. (2010), “Earthquake in Haiti: a failure in crisis management?”, Organization
Development Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 107-12.
Pirola-Merlo, A. (2009), “The need for moral leadership not moral leaders”, in Sarros, J.C. (Ed.),
Contemporary Perspectives on Leadership, The Tilde Group, Melbourne, pp. 161-75.
Ralston, D.A., Holt, D.H., Terpstra, R.H. and Kai-Cheng, Y. (2008), “The impact of national culture
and economic ideology on managerial work values: a study of the United States, Russia,
Japan, and China”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 8-26.
Rodriguez, P., Uhlenbruck, K. and Eden, L. (2005), “Government corruption and the entry
strategies of multinationals”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 383-96.
Rogers, K.S. (2011), “Leading sustainability”, Advances in Global Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 137-53.
Scandura, T. and Dorfman, P. (2004), “Theoretical letters: leadership research in an international
and cross-cultural context”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15, pp. 277-307.
Stelter, N.Z. (2002), “Gender differences in leadership: current social issues and future
organizational implications”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 8,
pp. 88-99.
Tatoglu, E. and Demirbag, M. (2008), “Transition in the age of anxiety: the Turkish case”, Journal
of Management Development, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 653-9.
Useem, M., Cook, J. and Sutton, L. (2005), “Developing leaders for decision making under stress:
Wildland fire fighters in the South Canyon fire and its aftermath”, Academy of
Management Learning and Education, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 461-85.
Walker, M.C. (2006), “Morality, self-interest, and leaders in international affairs”, Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 138-45.
Wang, Y., Li, M. and Mobley, W.H. (2011), “Conclusion: a continuous quest for responsive and
responsible global leaders”, Advances in Global Leadership, Vol. 6, pp. 333-45.
Twenty-first
century
leadership
279
Warner, M. (2002), “Globalization, labour markets and human resources in Asia-Pacific
economies: an overview”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 13
No. 3, pp. 384-98.
Waugh, W.L. and Streib, G. (2006), “Collaboration and leadership for effective emergency
management”, Public Administration Review (special issue), pp. 131-40.
Zimmermann, P., Wit, A. and Gill, R. (2008), “The relative importance of leadership behaviours in
virtual and face-to-face communication settings”, Leadership, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 321-37.
About the authors
Julie-Anne Sheppard is the Assistant Training Manager with the Master Builders Association of
Victoria. She completed a Master’s in Human Resource Management in July 2011 majoring in
leadership, strategic human resource management and organisational learning. She is interested
in the manner in which global leadership and global trends impact leadership behaviours and
choices locally.
James C. Sarros is Professor of Management at Monash University, Australia. He has
published extensively on leadership, succession planning, organisational culture, strategy
execution, and character. His current research deals with strategy execution in corporations
globally, and the exploration of senior management and board of directors alignment on key
strategic issues. James C. Sarros is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
james.sarros@monash.edu
Joseph C. Santora is Professor of Management at the International School of Management in
Paris, France, and is an Adjunct Research Fellow at Monash University, Australia. He is
internationally recognised for his research on succession planning in family and small business
enterprises, and his work on organisational leadership training and development.
MD
51,2
280
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints