Choosing The Right Leaders In Multicultural Organizations
I’ll never forget my first experience serving on a promotions board. Newly appointed as HR manager of a large manufacturing facility with thousands of employees, I quickly learned that our operations required managers who were not only technically proficient but also exceptional at motivating people and fostering collaboration.
When a department head position became available, the promotions board was tasked with selecting the best internal candidate. Despite being the newest manager on the board, I believed I had a clear understanding of the job's demands and felt confident in knowing who the best person for the job was - Cesar.
He was a senior supervisor with extensive experience and a direct report to the outgoing manager. Having collaborated with him on several successful employee involvement programs, I knew him well both as a colleague and friend. He was consistently a high performer, respected across the department, and known for his technical expertise and strength in managing people. He demonstrated a unique ability to transform underperformers and unite his team toward common objectives. With my firsthand experience, performance data, and evidence-based arguments… I was certain I could persuade the board that he was the ideal candidate.
You can imagine how surprised I was when Cesar was not selected for the position. According to our board chairperson, the decision was based on perceptions around his leadership style, passion, and executive presence.
It wasn't that he was a poor leader, detached or lacking in influencing skills, but compared to the candidate selected, he appeared less intense and single-minded in pursuing business objectives. Unfortunately, our predominantly European promotions board deemed these qualities more important for elevating and sustaining organizational performance than the ability to maintain harmonious relationships and collaboration.
Throughout my career, I've noticed a persistent tension between choosing a task-oriented leadership style and a relationship-focused approach. This debate often surfaces during promotion deliberations and talent review exercises. Especially in multicultural organizations, where senior leadership roles may be dominated by a particular ethnicity. Despite ample evidence showing that both task and social leadership orientation are vital for success (Taylor et al., 2006), organizations still seem to vacillate between leaders who are intense and goal oriented and those who focus more on people and group dynamics.
Why does this occur? Why is it more prevalent in multicultural organizations? I believe it's because leadership preferences are culturally driven. Senior leaders from collectivist cultures such as those in Asia, Latin America, and Africa may view effective leadership as fostering connections and prioritizing team success over individual achievements. Conversely, leaders from individualistic cultures like North America, Western Europe, and Australia might perceive effective leadership as focusing more on individual goals and personal achievements, driven by innovation, creativity, and independence (Myers & Twenge, 2022).
In my opinion, it’s not a question on who is the better leader. Or who’s leadership skills are superior or inferior. Instead organizations should ask, “What style is more appropriate to the cultural context within which leadership is to be exercised?” The foundational work of Hofstede on culture indicates that cultural context, particularly individualistic versus collectivist orientations, plays a crucial role in determining effective leadership styles (Hofstede, 2001). Similarly the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Study, one of the most comprehensive studies on leadership and culture, asserts that the significant number of studies around leadership and culture, reflects the significant impact of cultural values on leadership styles and outcomes (House et al., 2004).
Like all of us, the perceptions of senior leaders particularly on what they believe to be effective leadership is strongly influenced by their cultures. Thus their choice of the right leader for the job will be driven to a large extent by their biases. In collectivist cultures, leadership effectiveness is often associated with the leader’s ability to foster group harmony, emphasize team goals, and maintain social cohesion (Hofstede, 2001). These leaders are typically expected to prioritize the collective interests of the group and provide strong emotional support to ensure team unity and cooperation (House et al., 2004). This is probably why I thought Cesar was right for the role.
Conversely, in individualist cultures, effective leadership is frequently linked to traits such as personal achievement, autonomy, and the ability to inspire individual performance (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Leaders in these contexts are often valued for their ability to encourage innovation and creativity, driving organizational success through personal charisma and vision (Hofstede, 2001). Perhaps, this is why the Western European members of the board chose another candidate.
As leadership styles and qualities considered effective vary widely across cultural orientations, it’s crucial that, when involved in selecting candidates for leadership roles or participating in talent discussions, we first examine the factors influencing our perceptions of effective leadership. If our choices are primarily shaped by leadership norms rooted in our own cultural backgrounds, it might be wise to evaluate whether these leadership expectations align with the cultural context in which the leader will operate. By doing so, we stand a better chance of making better leadership choices, cultivate a more inclusive leadership team that embraces diverse styles and better equipped to meet the cultural needs of the environments in which we work.