Analysis of Leadership Culture in China and America

The leadership process across China is based on collectivism. Hill & Hult, (2017) emphasize that across the nation, the leadership process is not an individualized process. Decisions originate from collective collaboration and formulation of ideas in the operational process. The prospect of collectivism translates into an environment whereby individualism scores low while the power distance is heightened significantly. In such an environment, it is clear that the top leadership commands respect and the decision-making process can be managed effectively through the direct interaction with the employees. Further, the emphasis on long-term relationships is evident in the analysis of the leadership culture across the nation. Consistency in direct communication and interaction plays a substantial role in the leadership dynamics of the nation. 

             On the other hand, across America, individualism is a feature of the leaders. The decision-making process is substantially individualized. Involvement of the employees in making important decisions is not a dimension of leadership as evident from the low score in the long-term relationship index. The leaders do not focus on nurturing a business-centric relationship with the power distance score considerably low (Bakir et al., 2015). From a personal experience, working for an American company revealed the level of individualism in the decision making through the level of red tape involved in policy formulation and implementation. Bureaucracy is an issue of concern across the organization with the need to conform to the departmental levels in decision making defining the business conduct.

Leadership Preference

             Through the analysis of both power distance and long-term relationships, preference for Chinese leadership is evident. From an individualistic perspective, promoting collectivism in decision making should be the hallmark of a remarkable leader. Involvement of employees in the daily operations should be a motivating factor towards encouraging performance (Bakir et al., 2015). A collective approach to decision making ensures that employees behave as a part of the organization and meeting the set targets defines their input. 

References

Bakir, A., Blodgett, J. G., Vitell, S. J., & Rose, G. M. (2015).A preliminary investigation of the reliability and validity of Hofstede’s cross-cultural dimensions. In Proceedings of the 2000 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 226-232). Springer, Cham.

Hill, C. W. L &Hult, G. T. M. (2017). International Business: Competing in the global marketplace (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill Education. (Print ISBN: 978-1259578113; Digital ISBN: 978-1259706431