This report summarizes some of the ideas of Muczyk and Holt, who prescribed that global leaders should adapt to changing economic conditions, particularly the growing intensity of globalization, by aligning their leadership styles and processes with cultural demands.  They suggested a “global framework of leadership” based on four “leadership dimensions”—consideration, concern for production, incentive for performance and democracy-autonomy—and then went on to prescribe recommendations for effective leadership styles in various regions of the world based on the predominant cultural characteristics in those regions identified by various researchers.

The traditional process for identifying and executing strategy calls for companies to take their external environment as a “given” and analyze that environment to determine the best way care out a competitive advantage in that environment by following either a “differentiation” or “low cost” strategy.  In this report, however, we examine a different approach that argues that organizational strategies can and should vary based on structural conditions, the resources and capabilities of the organization and the organization’s “strategic mind-set” and that companies can develop and implement strategies that actually reshape their external environment in a way that is most favorable to them.

Organizational culture is a popular and important topic among researchers working in the area of comparative management studies.  In order for comparisons and theories to be meaningful, however, there must be a model of dimensions of organizational culture that can be referred to in collecting and analyzing information and spotting variations and differences between organizations.  This report briefly summarizes a series of steps suggested by the writings of Edgar Schein, which include identifying the problems that an organization has with “external adaptation” and “internal integration”, collecting and synthesizing evidence as to how the organization has elected to attempt to “solve” those problems and, finally, investigating the solutions to find common threads that ultimately paint a picture of how organizational members “view their world”.  This “world view”, of course, is tied not only to the business environment in which the organization operates but to other important factors that have been studied and compared in great deal over the years, such as the societal culture in which the organization operates.

This report explores the efforts of two researchers, Muczyk and Holt, to suggest how leaders might select between “democratic” and “autocratic” styles in different cultural contexts.  In general, Muczyk and Holt observed that “democratic” leadership with respect to making decisions and setting goals may be suited for cultures that are low on power distance, high on individualism and femininity, low on uncertainty avoidance and characterized by internal environmental orientation and might also be suitable in societies whose members have a low regard for hierarchy and an inclination to bypass the chain of command.  On the other hand, Muczyk and Holt speculated that “autocratic” leadership might be more appropriate in societies that are high in power distance, collectivism, masculinity, and uncertainty avoidance and that are characterized by external environmental orientation and in societies whose members have a high regard for hierarchy and are reluctant to bypass the chain of command.  The observations made by Muczyk and Holt were similar to those made by Hofstede, who argued that large power distance and collectivism were closely related and typically associated with developing countries while small power distance and high individualism were closely related and typically associated with industrialized countries.

While Japan has probably been the major focus of research and commentary regarding the role of the state in economic development, Korea’s experience as a “developmental state” is also an important illustration of the role that governments sometimes choose to play in directing the public and private sectors toward specific economic and social goals.  This report provides a brief introduction to the role of the state in Korean economic development.  Beginning with this post, we are shifting to a new monthly publication schedule that will transition to a newsletter format, although special posts will still be made as necessary for development that we believe merit the immediate attention of our visitors.

Comparative management studies focuses on gaining a better understanding of management styles, attitudes and practices in different countries.  There is substantial evidence to support the proposition that “culture” has often provided the most popular reference point for comparative studies of management and organization; however, this report introduces another important factor that needs to be considered: the particular external business environment in which managers and their firms are operating.