IBUS6002 · Cross-cultural Management
Leadership and Teams
Western leadership theory implicitly assumes one best way to lead. Cross-cultural evidence dismantles that: the same behaviour reads as “strong leadership” in one culture and “arrogant” or “weak” in another, because followers judge leaders against a culturally-shaped prototype. This is case domain 4. The exam's leadership case — often a founder or regional star moving global — asks you to diagnose the fit between a leader's style and the prototype of those they must lead, now and as the workforce modernises. The chapter's moves: place the case on the three approaches (universal / contingency / normative); diagnose the leader on GLOBE's six CLT (culturally endorsed leadership) dimensions via Implicit Leadership Theory prototypes; recognise paternalistic leadership (Aycan) as the key non-Western style; and use the Pyramid model for the “build a leader who works anywhere” developmental answer. Then it turns to teams: process gains vs losses (Stahl), faultlines, and the two management toolkits — MBI (Map–Bridge–Integrate, co-located) and SPLIT (virtual teams).
What this chapter covers
- 018.1 Three approaches — universal / contingency / normative
- 02Implicit Leadership Theory (ILT) — leadership is in the eye of the followers
- 03GLOBE's 6 CLT dimensions + the prototype read
- 04Paternalistic leadership (Aycan) — the key non-Western style
- 05The Pyramid model — developing a global leader
- 069.1 Global & multicultural teams — process gains vs losses, faultlines
- 07Managing the team — MBI (co-located) & SPLIT (virtual)
Worked example: the leader who doesn't fit the prototype
- +2Apply ILT. Leadership is in the eye of the followers: staff judge her against their prototype of a leader, which here expects visible direction and personal care, not hands-off empowerment.
- +2Read the GLOBE CLT dimensions. The endorsed prototype in this cluster leans toward more directive, status-conscious, group-protective leadership; her self-protective-light, participative default mismatches it.
- +1Name the fitting style. Paternalistic leadership (Aycan) — directive but caring, family-like — is positively received in collectivist, high-PD cultures; pure empowerment can read as neglect.
- +1Recommend + guardrail. Add visible direction and personal attention without abandoning development; calibrate as the workforce modernises. Guardrail: the prototype is a tendency, not a verdict on every individual.
Key terms
- Implicit Leadership Theory (ILT)
- Lord & Maher's idea that followers carry mental prototypes of what a leader is, formed through social interaction; people who match the prototype are perceived as leaders. The consequence for cross-cultural work: “good leadership” is in the eye of the (culturally-shaped) followers.
- Three leadership approaches
- Universal (one best way; Western theories travel — the baseline you critique), contingency (effective leadership is culture-specific — e.g. GLOBE CLT, paternalistic), and normative (a culture-general global leadership can be built — the Pyramid model). Placing the case on this trio is the first move.
- GLOBE CLT dimensions
- Six culturally endorsed leadership theory dimensions — charismatic/value-based, team-oriented, participative, humane-oriented, autonomous, and self-protective — whose endorsement varies by cultural cluster. They turn “what counts as a good leader here” into a comparable, mappable profile.
- Paternalistic leadership (Aycan)
- A key non-Western style: the leader gives direction in both professional and personal life and creates a family atmosphere — hierarchical but caring, with reciprocated loyalty. Positively received in collectivist, high power-distance cultures; felt as intrusive or controlling in individualist, egalitarian ones.
- MBI & SPLIT
- Two team-management toolkits. MBI (Map the differences, Bridge through communication, Integrate to manage differences) suits co-located multicultural teams; SPLIT addresses the added challenges of virtual/global teams (e.g. structure, process, language, identity, technology). Faultlines — demographic fracture lines that split a team into subgroups — are the risk both manage.
Leadership and Teams FAQ
What does “leadership is in the eye of the followers” actually mean for an answer?
It means you diagnose the fit between the leader's style and the followers' culturally-shaped prototype, not the leader's traits in isolation. Via ILT, the same behaviour is endorsed in one culture and rejected in another. So a strong answer maps the followers' prototype (often via GLOBE CLT) first, then asks whether the leader matches it — the mismatch is the diagnosis and the adaptation is the recommendation.
Why does the unit emphasise paternalistic leadership specifically?
Because it is the clearest example that the Western “empowering, egalitarian” ideal is not universal. In collectivist, high power-distance cultures a directive-but-caring, family-like leader is positively received, and a hands-off Western style can read as neglect. Naming paternalistic leadership shows you can move beyond the Western baseline — exactly the critical move the case exam rewards.
When do I use the Pyramid model versus GLOBE?
GLOBE/ILT is for diagnosis — does this leader's style fit these followers' prototype? The Pyramid model is for the developmental/normative question — “how do we build a leader who works anywhere?” If the case asks you to assess fit, reach for ILT and GLOBE CLT; if it asks how to develop global leadership capability, reach for the Pyramid model. Many strong answers use both.
How do MBI and SPLIT differ, and which do I cite?
MBI (Map–Bridge–Integrate) is the general toolkit for managing differences in a co-located multicultural team. SPLIT extends the thinking to virtual/global teams, where distance, time zones, language and technology add friction and faultlines deepen. Cite MBI for a co-located team scenario and SPLIT when the team is dispersed or virtual; both aim to convert diversity from a process loss into a process gain (Stahl).
Exam move
Anchor every leadership answer in ILT — diagnose the fit between the leader's style and the followers' prototype, not the leader in isolation — and build the prototype with GLOBE's CLT dimensions. Keep paternalistic leadership ready as the standard non-Western counter to the Western empowering ideal; it is the fastest way to show critical range. Use the three approaches (universal/contingency/normative) to frame the case and reach for the Pyramid model only when the question is developmental (“build a global leader”). For teams, match the toolkit to the setting — MBI co-located, SPLIT virtual — and name faultlines and the process-gain-vs-loss framing. Two frameworks minimum, closed with the “prototype is a tendency, not a verdict” guardrail.
