Critical Review of Global Leadership Literature ... - SAGE Journals

749030

research-article2017

HRDXXX10.1177/1534484317749030Human Resource Development ReviewPark et al.

Integrative Literature Review

Critical Review of Global Leadership Literature: Toward an Integrative Global Leadership Framework

Human Resource Development Review 2018, Vol. 17(1) 95–120 © The Author(s) 2017 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484317749030 DOI: 10.1177/1534484317749030 journals.sagepub.com/home/hrd

Sunyoung Park1, Shinhee Jeong2, Soebin Jang3, Seung Won Yoon4, and Doo Hun Lim5

Abstract The purpose of this research is to critically examine the literature on global leadership competencies and behaviors, and present an integrative global leadership framework. For the literature review, we examined 14 global leadership competency models and 11 indigenous studies on effective leader and manager behaviors in various countries published between 1995 and 2016. We adopted Yukl’s effective leader behavior framework, which identified four meta-categories (i.e., task, change, relation, and external conditions) and 15 specific behaviors within each category (e.g., planning, scheduling, monitoring, and problem-solving for the task-orientation). By reviewing the competency models, we found five research themes: intercultural, interpersonal, global, change and vision, and personal traits and values, which included ethics and openness/flexibility. Finally, we proposed a conceptual framework based on our review which demonstrates core dimensions, competencies, and behaviors of effective global leaders. Keywords global leadership, global leadership models, effective leader and manager behaviors

1Louisiana

State University, Baton Rouge, USA A&M University, College Station, USA 3University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA 4Texas A&M University–Commerce, USA 5The University of Oklahoma, Norman, USA 2Texas

Corresponding Author: Sunyoung Park, Louisiana State University, 291 Coates Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA. Email: [email protected]

96

Human Resource Development Review 17(1)

Introduction There has been growing interest in global leadership among scholars and practitioners because organizations and institutions are recognizing its strategic importance for expanding products, services, and resources. For instance, out of the 66 disparate leadership theory categories, approximately 44% are related to global attributes of leadership (Dinh et al., 2014). In the Human Resource Development (HRD) area, several scholars have also emphasized the core competencies in global leadership (e.g., Cumberland, Herd, Alagaraja, & Kerrick, 2016; Herd, Alagaraja, & Cumberland, 2016). The disciplines related to global leadership included cross-cultural and expatriate training, international business, HRD and management, leadership, and organizational psychology (e.g., Hollenbeck, 2001; Holt & Seki, 2012; Jokinen, 2005; Lokkesmoe, Kuchinke, & Ardichvili, 2016; A. J. Morrison, 2000). In reviewing the leadership literature, however, little consensus exists among researchers and practitioners about what constitutes global leadership and how to develop global leaders. Scholars have suggested multiple approaches to developing global leaders and global leadership competency models (Blaess, Hollywood, & Grant, 2012; Caligiuri, 2006; Canals, 2014; Cumberland et al., 2016; Lokkesmoe et al., 2016; Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013). One reason is that related disciplines present different perspectives when explaining global leadership (Mendenhall, Osland, Bird, Oddou, & Maznevski, 2008). For example, the expatriate literature emphasizes global leaders’ experiences in performing international assignments in foreign countries (Jokinen, 2005) whereas cross-cultural studies focus on identifying cultural differences or similarities to improve communication, socialization, and adaptation across different cultures (Hollenbeck, 2001). Despite these differences, studies on global leadership have attempted to capture a leader’s influence as a change agent across borders in a complicated, equivocal, and multicultural environment (Pierce & Newstrom, 2011; Yukl, 2006). In this research, we adopted Jeong, Lim, and Park’s (2016) definition, which regarded global leadership as the leadership of individuals who influence and bring about significant positive changes in firms, organizations, and communities by facilitating the appropriate level of trust, organizational structures and processes and involving multiple stakeholders, resources, cultures under the various conditions of temporal, geographical and cultural complexity. (p. 290)

Based on this definition, we consider global leadership as a process and global leaders as individuals. We select this definition because it comprehensively explains the features of global leadership aligned with Mendenhall and colleagues’ (2008) work (which addressed diverse contexts of global leadership by highlighting multiple cultures and situational complexity), whereas other definitions emphasize specific aspects of global leadership such as leadership roles, traits, and diversity (Javidan, Dorfman, De Luque, & House, 2006; Kets de Vries, Vrignaud, & Florent-Treacy, 2004). Our view of global leaders includes both groups of leaders and managers across levels due

Park et al.

97

to the fact that they not only critically affect their subordinates in their own teams but also affect upper managers, colleagues, and diverse stakeholders, under global contexts characterized as particularly dynamic, uncertain, and complex (Yukl, 2012). In this sense, global leaders and managers can be regarded as emerging professional groups that are able to be adept at operating in international and multicultural contexts, are a unique breed with identifiable traits, and work mainly in organizations that span national boundaries.

Research Purpose and Research Questions Although many scholars have discussed the essential attributes of global leadership (Bird, Mendenhall, Stevens, & Oddou, 2010; Goldsmith, Greenberg, Robertson, & Hu-Chan, 2003), workplace learning and performance professionals who have been charged with developing or supporting global leaders in cross-cultural settings have called for clearer guidance from the vast leadership literature. Numerous empirical studies have been conducted on the success of expatriates, but guidance from the literature on repatriates or the immigrated workforce is sparse. Dinh and colleagues (2014) reported 23 distinctive themes of leadership research (e.g., disposition/traits, ethics/morality, social exchange/relationships, diversity/culture, contingency, and error and recovery) to describe the maturity and breadth of the field, and noted that most leadership perspectives are grounded in functionalist-driven Western views. Therefore, more indigenous and cross-cultural perspectives in developing global leadership theories are in order (Canals, 2014; Dinh et al., 2014; Holt & Seki, 2012). Therefore, the purpose of this research is to critically examine the literature on global leadership competencies and behaviors, and present an integrative global leadership framework. To address the purpose of this research, we reviewed global leadership competency models and effective leader and manager behaviors in the current literature. In doing so, the following questions were formed: Research Questions 1: What are the most common and distinctive themes among popular global competency models or frameworks? Research Questions 2: What do indigenous leadership studies conducted in various countries reveal about effective leader and manager behaviors? More specifically, what converging and diverging points about effective leader and manager behaviors are reported from indigenous leadership studies?

Methods for Reviewing the Literature In reviewing the literature, we followed guidelines provided by Torraco (2005, 2016) and Callahan (2010; that is, location of articles, search period, number of articles screened, and criteria for screening). As suggested by Callahan, we aimed to synthesize relevant bodies of literature and make connections between knowledge bases to propose a conceptual framework. We first conducted a targeted search of studies that were most relevant to our purpose and research questions in multiple online databases,

98


including Google Scholar, Emerald Insight, Academic Search Complete, Business Source Complete, and Human Resources Abstracts. To address our two research questions, we used a comprehensive list of keywords and mixed search terms, such as “cross-cultural leadership,” “global leader,” “global leadership,” “global leadership competences,” “global competency model,” “effective leader behaviors,” “effective manager behaviors,” “indigenous leadership,” and “emic,” within the search titles or keywords. Our initial search yielded a total of 231 studies. By employing a staged review process (Torraco, 2005, 2016), we examined abstracts followed by an in-depth review of full texts based on the following inclusion criteria: (a) peer-reviewed scholarly articles; (b) studies grounded in comprehensive literature reviews or empirical research; and (c) studies that proposed specific and/or a comprehensive set of competencies. For example, in addressing Research Question 2, we included articles that were identified as indigenous leadership studies that specifically stated effective leader and manager behaviors pertaining to or providing implications for global leadership, based on direct methods such as interviews, critical incidents, and observation in field settings. The screening process excluded articles that were conceptual in nature, focused on merely one or two competencies or behaviors (e.g., cultural intelligence, wisdom), and failed to clearly explain the specific methods employed in the research. Snowball sampling was also utilized as we encountered relevant articles in in-text citations and reference lists during our review process (Callahan, 2010). As a result, we identified 25 articles published between 1995 and 2016 to be included in our final review. Among them are 14 studies on global leadership models and competencies, and 11 indigenous leadership studies that examined effective leader and manager behaviors in indigenous settings. Not surprisingly, most of them originated from Western scholars, particularly from the United States. The frameworks proposed by non-Western scholars were limited to critiquing existing frameworks and lacked empirical support. In this regard, the inclusion of the 11 indigenous studies that examined effective leader and manager behaviors grounded in concrete methodology was an attempt to fill this gap. Based on these studies, our review and content analysis led to five emerging themes among the global leadership models and 183 derived behavioral patterns in the 11 selected indigenous studies. The examination of existing global leadership models allowed us to understand the limitations and complexities in identifying effective global leadership competencies and behaviors, as underlined by the lack of consensus and diverse perspectives in conceptualizing global leadership (Mendenhall et al., 2008). Furthermore, the five themes emerged in our analysis provided a basis to build upon existing studies and extend our understanding of global leadership by incorporating findings from non-Western indigenous studies. As for the 11 indigenous studies (e.g., South Korea, Egypt, and Mexico) that examined effective leader and manager behaviors, we identified common behaviors (i.e., congruence) across these articles, considering those commonalities in globally desirable leader behaviors. For the analysis, we adopted Yukl, Gordon, and Taber’s (2002) and Yukl’s (2012) effective leader behavior framework as reference that represents a

Park et al.

99

U.S. centric leadership perspective for the comparisons with the 11 non-U.S. centric studies. We used his framework to deductively code the findings of the 11 indigenous studies to see the extent to which they are consistent with what has been found within the U.S. cultural context, and to identify any commonalities and similarities of leadership behaviors across geographical borders. Yukl and his colleagues (2002; Yukl, 2012) identified four meta-categories of task, change, relation, and external conditions, and 15 specific behaviors within each category including planning, scheduling, monitoring, and problem-solving for task-orientation. Yukl et al.’s (2002) and Yukl’s (2012) framework derived from their respective taxonomies included various levels of management, not just top management, based on the heterogeneous range of empirical studies on effective leader behaviors. Thus, Yukl’s framework is aligned very well with the definition of global leaders we adopted for our research: global leaders and managers at various levels influencing and bringing about positive changes at the organizational, group, or individual levels by improving structures, relationships/trust, work conditions/processes, and resources in uncertain environments. Consequently, the review of literature and series of analyses allowed us to develop an integrative global leadership framework that delineates global leaders’ competencies and effective behaviors, and helped us analyze the fit and application of emergent dimensions and behaviors from appropriate theoretical lenses.

Review of Global Leadership Models The increasing need for organizations to compete beyond the domestic market has attracted much attention and focused on developing global leaders (Bird et al., 2010). Global leadership competencies are referred to as universal qualities that enable individuals to perform their job outside their own national as well as organizational culture, no matter what their educational or ethnic background is, what functional area their job description represents, or what organization they come from. (Mendenhall et al., 2008, p. 65)

Numerous studies have identified lists of global competencies or proposed conceptual frameworks for effective global leaders (e.g., Goldsmith et al., 2003; Jokinen, 2005; Kets de Vries et al., 2004; Kim & McLean, 2015; Mobley & Dorfman, 2003). For example, Goldsmith et al. (2003) identified five competencies for global leaders: (a) thinking globally, (b) appreciating cultural diversity, (c) developing technological savvy, (d) building partnerships and alliances, and (e) sharing leadership. Jokinen (2005) also proposed a framework consisting of three main global leadership competencies: (a) core competencies that form fundamental characteristics (e.g., self-awareness and inquisitiveness), (b) desired mental characteristics that guide a leader’s action and behavior (e.g., empathy, and cognitive skills), and (c) desired behavioral competencies that include the explicit skills and knowledge linked to performance (e.g., networking skills).

100


Although these studies provide considerations for global leaders and organizations, global leadership competency models have been widely criticized for a number of shortcomings, including the lack of agreement on definitions and conceptualizations; redundancy of specific items, dimensions, and categories; and lack of attention to different cultures and contexts (Cumberland et al., 2016; Jokinen, 2005; A. J. Morrison, 2000). In this regard, Cumberland et al. (2016) recently highlighted the need to improve our understanding of global leadership competencies accounting for different global contexts, while incorporating personality traits, competencies, and behaviors. Acknowledging these limitations in the global leadership literature, we analyzed a selected number of global leadership competency models to gain a more comprehensive understanding of common and distinctive themes in previous studies and to synthesize these findings with other leadership studies and frameworks discussed in later sections. Table 1 provides a list of global leadership models included in our review.

Emerging Themes From Global Leadership Competency Models Five themes emerged as being representative of the competencies proposed by existing global leadership models. We describe each in terms of its significance and essential attributes of global leaders. In this research, we selected the term theme to integrate the diverse dimensions, clusters, and competencies that previous studies have proposed. Theme 1: Intercultural. The most frequently mentioned competencies for global leadership are intercultural skills and awareness. Intercultural competence generally refers to the ability to understand cultural differences and work effectively in another culture (Gertsen, 1990). Thus, leaders who have intercultural competence need to be capable of navigating through cross-cultural differences, act appropriately in various cultural settings, and make business decisions accordingly (Story & Barbuto, 2011). 13 out of the 14 articles included in this review suggested that intercultural competence is an important requisite for global leaders. For example, Lokkesmoe (2011) posited that intercultural competence is central for global leaders in understanding different cultures and dealing effectively with ambiguity when working in other cultures. Others have used different terminologies to emphasize leaders’ attributes in regard to intercultural competencies. Examples include cultural knowledge and skills (Boyd et al., 2011), cultural sensitivity (Bueno & Tubbs, 2012), intercultural awareness (Ding, 2014), and cultural adaptation (Story & Barbuto, 2011). Theme 2: Interpersonal. Another salient and common theme found in the reviewed articles pointed to interpersonal awareness and skills. Competencies related to these areas have been frequently discussed under the theme “relationship management” (Bird et al., 2010; Jokinen, 2005), which generally includes interacting with others, cultivating relationships, and understanding one’s affect on others (Bird et al., 2010). Interpersonal skills have also been understood as and closely linked to emotional intelligence or emotional sensitivity (Jokinen, 2005; Kets de Vries et al., 2004).

101

Park et al. Table 1. List of 14 Global Leadership Models Reviewed. Authors

Study method

Findings

Adler, Brody, and Osland (2001)

Literature review

Bird et al. (2010)

Literature review

Boyd, Moore, Williams, and Elbert (2011) Bueno and Tubbs (2012) Ding (2014)

Delphi technique

Personal traits and competencies, interpersonal competencies, global business competencies, and global organizational competencies Pyramid model of global leadership: Five levels of knowledge, traits, attitudes, and skills Nine competencies for global leaders

Interviews

Six competencies for global leaders

Phenomenological research Panels, focus groups, and interviews Literature review

Virtual global leadership model: Six competencies for virtual global leaders Five competencies for global leaders

Goldsmith et al. (2003) Jokinen (2005)

Kets de Vries et al. (2004) Kim and McLean (2015)

Semi-structured interviews Literature review

Lokkesmoe (2011)

Interviews

Mobley and Dorfman (2003) Osland and Bird (2008)

Literature review

Story and Barbuto (2011)

Literature review

Terrell and Rosenbusch (2013)

Phenomenological research

Literature review

Integrative global leadership competency framework: Three dimensions of core competencies, mental characteristics, behavioral competencies 12 dimensions for global executive leaders Integrative global leadership competency framework: Three levels and four dimensions Integrated model of global leadership development: Four competency domains and eight contextual factors Four competencies for global leaders Global leadership expertise development model: Categories of antecedents, transformational processes (mediators), and levels of expertise (outcomes) Developmental model for global leaders: Process model of focused on three competencies and psychological capital Seven clusters and 56 competencies for global leaders

Twelve of the 14 studies proposed interpersonal competencies as a critical component for global leadership. For example, Jokinen (2005) identified interpersonal skills under behavioral competencies for global leaders and distinguished between

102


social skills and networking skills. The author posited that social skills are more informally enacted on a personal level, whereas networking skills relate to building formal relationships on an organizational level. Others have described it in a variety of terms, including establishing close personal relationships (Adler et al., 2001), interpersonal skills (Bird et al., 2010), interpersonal intelligence (Boyd et al., 2011), building virtual teamwork skills (Ding, 2014), building partnerships and alliances (Goldsmith et al., 2003), emotional intelligence and teambuilding (Kets de Vries et al., 2004), and maintaining emotional stability (Mobley & Dorfman, 2003). Having strong social skills (Jokinen, 2005) and communication were also described as important aspects of a leader’s competency (Boyd et al., 2011; Lokkesmoe, 2011; Terrell & Rosenbusch, 2013) Theme 3: Global. Having a global mind-set and global knowledge were also a common theme. Despite the lack of consensus in defining the construct, the importance of leaders’ global mind-set has been widely recognized in the global leadership literature (e.g., Cohen, 2010; Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002; Levy, Taylor, Boyacugiller, & Beechler, 2007). Global mind-set is defined as “a highly complex cognitive structure characterized by an openness to and articulation of multiple cultural and strategic realities on both global and local levels, and the cognitive ability to mediate and integrate across this multiplicity” (Levy et al., 2007, p. 27). This definition emphasizes that leaders need the skills, behaviors, and knowledge to successfully interpret and make sense of complexities in the global environment (Gupta & Govindarajan, 2002). Cognitive complexity and cosmopolitanism have also been closely linked to having a global mind-set (Levy et al., 2007). Twelve out of the 14 articles suggested that either global mind-set or global knowledge was essential for global leaders. Five out of the 12 articles also included global knowledge as an important requisite. For example, Boyd et al. (2011) identified several competencies that are critical for international business including understanding global issues. Others emphasized this competency using various terms including to “demonstrate global business savvy” (Adler et al., 2001), “global organizational knowledge and skills” (Kim & McLean, 2015), and “global organization expertise” (Osland & Bird, 2008). Theme 4: Change and vision. Leaders’ capability to lead and implement change initiatives was also found to be important for achieving organizational success in the global environment (Kim & McLean, 2015; Yukl, 2006). As such, a number of authors have stated that leading change and envisioning are central to global leadership. Eight out of the 14 articles emphasized these attributes as being important for global leaders. These attributes were also mentioned by other authors as part of the leaders’ competencies, skills, and ability to lead change and inspire vision in the global business context. For instance, Story and Barbuto (2011) posited that embracing change and effectively dealing with complexity are important aspects of leaders’ self-authored identity. Others include successfully bringing about change (Adler et al., 2001), leading change and/or inspiring vision (Bird et al., 2010;

Park et al.

103

Jokinen, 2005), and visioning or envisioning (Kets de Vries et al., 2004; Lokkesmoe, 2011). Theme 5: Personal traits and values. This theme consists of personal attributes not categorized into the earlier four. These include integrity and ethics (six out of 14) and flexibility and openness (five out of 14). The significance of these attributes was highlighted using different categories and terminologies such as personal characteristics, intrapersonal skills, and traits. Although personal characteristics and traits are seen as relatively harder to change and develop, they are believed to be important aspects in selecting and developing global leaders (Caligiuri & Di Santo, 2001). These characteristics were discussed in terms of the leader’s personal traits (Adler et al., 2001; Lokkesmoe, 2011), intrapersonal skills and critical thinking (Boyd et al., 2011), fundamental characteristics (Jokinen, 2005), and self-authored identity (Story & Barbuto, 2011). Flexibility and openness were also mentioned as part of global leaders’ intrapersonal skills (Boyd et al., 2011), fundamental characteristics (Jokinen, 2005), and personal competency (Lokkesmoe, 2011).

Effective Leader and Manager Behaviors Although there are exhaustive lists of studies and articles that offer ideas for developing global leadership competencies, the extant literature has been criticized for describing these competencies in terms of personality traits, skills, and mind-sets, rather than in terms of behavioral statements (Jeong et al., 2016). Thus, recommended competencies are vague and ambiguous, making them difficult to adopt and act on accordingly in practice (Kim & McLean, 2015; Taormina & Selvarajah, 2005). To demonstrate and act on competencies, measureable behavioral indicators are required (Russ-Eft, 1995; Spencer & Spencer, 1993). Our review revealed that existing competency studies and models for global leadership largely reflect Western perspectives but reflect little from indigenous perspectives. A. J. Morrison (2000) postulated that an effective global leadership model should contain both universal and indigenous characteristics. Kim and McLean (2015) also illustrated global leadership competency as “universal and contingent characteristics consisting of underlying competencies that influence the attitudes, thinking, behaviors, and capacities of a global company to achieve its common goals in the globalized context” (p. 6). For example, Yoon, Shin, Kim, and Chai’s (2017) analysis of two leading global firms in South Korea illustrated that the speedy success of global companies in the country is strongly influenced and includes applications of Western-originated leadership concepts while incorporating them into the paternalistic culture of the Korean society and organizations. Many scholars have also attempted to identify effective leadership behaviors through survey instruments but competency domains have been different across studies, and theoretical foundations have not been strong in many instruments, making it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions (Kets de Vries et al., 2004; Yukl, 2012). Recognizing these extant limitations, we first analyzed selected indigenous leadership

104


studies conducted in various countries using inductive data-gathering approaches, and then we synthesized the findings to suggest both universal, convergent effective leader and manager behaviors, and idiosyncratic or divergent effective leader and manager behaviors (see Table 2). An indigenous study refers to the study of unique local phenomenon (i.e., contextor culture-specific) from a native perspective (Lyles, 2009), usually conducted by local scholars using local languages (Tsui, 2007). Lyles (2009) and Li (2012) presented four types of indigenous research: (a) emic-as-etic: involving a naive application of theories from the West in a local context; (b) etic-to-emic: involving a cross-cultural comparative component with the potential to discover novel constructs that are unique to the local phenomenon; (c) emic-as-emic: exploring local phenomena from an emic perspective; and (d) emic-and-etic: involving an integration of emic theories resulting from indigenous research conducted in different local/cultural contexts. Considering the qualifications of indigenous studies, 11 studies in Table 2 lend themselves well to the arena of indigenous research.

Universal and Convergent Behaviors of Effective Leaders and Managers To identify universal and indigenous aspects, we used Yukl’s hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior as reference (Yukl, 2012; Yukl et al., 2002) because through their four dimensions of task-, relationship- orientation, change-orientation, and external leader behaviors, Yukl’s framework captured essential skills, knowledge, and personality traits and attitudes grounded in diverse dimensions of leadership behaviors. Task-oriented. Leaders’ planning behaviors under the task-oriented meta-category include developing work schedules, organizing responsibilities and goals, and allocating resources (Yukl et al., 2002). As shown in Table 3, of the 10 indigenous studies, nine studies commonly found leaders’ planning-relevant behaviors to be effective. These behaviors are prioritizing, organizing, and scheduling work; managing time, resources, and projects; and producing plans efficiently and effectively. Clarifying behaviors are leaders’ actions to develop and communicate clear, specific task goals and assignments. Four indigenous studies shared similar effective behaviors (i.e., setting direction and instilling a clear sense of purpose, providing clear direction for employees’ daily work, and giving a clear explanation of task goal expectations). Monitoring behaviors represent leaders’ actions to assess work progress and procedures and make changes when necessary. Seven indigenous studies shared commonalities related to paying attention to monitoring work output, quality, and organizational efficiency and demonstrating control of projects and monitoring progress. A leader’s problem-solving behaviors involve identifying the root of the problem and making decisions for solutions. Eight indigenous studies also found other relevant behaviors such as proactively solving problems in a timely manner and getting to the root of problems and fixing the causes.

105

Hamlin, Nassar, and Wahba (2010)

Hamlin, Ruiz, and Wang (2011)

Cammock, Nilakant, and Dakin (1995)

Hamlin and Patel (2012)

Chai, Jeong, Kim, Kim, and Hamlin (2016)

Patel and Hamlin (2012)

Hamlin and Hatton (2013)

Bergmann, Hurson, and Russ-Eft (1999)

Egypt

Mexico

New Zealand

Romania

South Korea

Three EU counties

The United Kingdom

The United States and Canada

Note. ASEAN = Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

China

Selvarajah, Duignan, Suppiah, Lane, and Nuttman (1995) Taormina and Selvarajah (2005) Wang (2011)

Authors

5 ASEAN countries

Country

453 public-sector managers (senior, middle, and supervisors) and nonmanagers 36 managers and nonmanagerial staff in the Romanian public health care sector

2 factors and 17 scales

30 effective behavioral statements

6 emic replication studies utilizing critical incidents 9 emic replication studies utilizing critical incidents Critical incidents

2 emic replication studies utilizing critical incidents 2 emic replication studies utilizing critical incidents Repertory grid interviews and factor analysis 2 emic replication studies utilizing critical incidents Critical incidents

Critical incidents

99 senior, middle managers and supervisors in the private and public sectors in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand 289 managers (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand) 35 senior, middle, and entry-level managers in a large state-owned telecommunications company 55 top, middle, and front-line managers and nonmanagerial staff in the Egyptian public health care sector 27 middle, front-line managers/nonmanagerial staff in the Mexican public health care sector

94 behavioral statements

Q-sort, structured interviews, and critical incidents Factor analysis

8 positive behavioral criteria

Managers and nonmanagers from more than 450 public and private sector organizations across industries

487 senior, middle, and front-line managers across the public, private, and third sectors

10 effective behavioral criteria

17 leadership competencies

45 managers (top, middle, front-line) and nonmanagerial employees in Korean For-profit, large-sized companies 308 managers in the private and public sectors in Germany, the United Kingdom, and Romania

20 effective behavioral categories



14 effective behaviors

4 factors, 24 items

Study sample

Findings

Study method

Table 2. List of 11 Literature Included for Content Analysis.

106

—

—

Wang (2011)—

Hamlin et al. — (2011)

Maintaining high professional standards of the unit

—

Proactively solving problems in a timely manner

—

Good at Attention to controlling monitoring and resolving work output, problems, quality, and and achieving organizational results efficiency Providing positive reinforcement

Providing rewards Supporting and public employees recognition of with employees work-related problems/ Listening to the needs of employees

—

Praising the good Supporting work of staff/ work-related Valuing and difficulties respecting staff who work hard

—

Supporting Maintaining work Consistent decisions in making deadlines/ made jointly decisions/ Focusing on with others/ Understanding maximizing Listening the problems productivity when of others employees want to say something

—

Taormina Developing strategies and Selvarajah to gain a competitive (2005) edge

Hamlin et al. Good at planning Setting SMART (2010) and organizing goals, plans, and metrics

—

Supporting individual/ team efforts

Making decisions that solve problems

Managing crossfunctional processes

—

Envisioning change

Encouraging innovation

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Empowering and delegating responsibilities

Delegating fairly/ Supporting Democratic in employee decisioneducation, making training, and development

Providing job coaching

Encouraging staff Giving staff the flexibility to to attend distribute and training perform work programs and in the way learn from they consider mistakes best

—

—

—

—

—

Promoting good news stories emanating from the department

Showing concern for providing good customer service

—

—

Understanding employees’ mistakes

—

(continued)

Accountable for mistakes

—

—

Taking responsibility for own or group’s actions

Representing

—

—

Constantly Responding evaluating to the emerging expectations technologies of customers

—

—

Creating and describing a vision

Adapting to Being an Having a changing initiator, not strategic working a follower vision conditions (progressive) for the organization

—

External monitoring

Responding to identified customer needs

Networking

—

Facilitating collective learning

External behavior

Managing the changes required to realize a vision

Advocating change

Change-oriented

Future-oriented Constantly Delegating well looking and thinking and consulting for new in the long with staff approaches term

Empowering

Promoting staff Allowing subordinates welfare and to have development authority and autonomy/ Sharing power/ Listening to the advice of others

—

Training successors

Highlighting the positive and recognizing good performance

Managing time, resources, and projects

Friendly and supportive/ Relates well with others

Getting to the root of problems and fixing causes

Setting direction Maintaining the big picture and instilling and leaving a clear sense time to of purpose manage

Developing

Recognizing

Bergmann et al. (1999)

Supporting

Problem-solving

Monitoring

Clarifying

Prioritizing, organizing, and scheduling work

Planning

Relationship-oriented

Cammock et al. (1995)

Yukl (2012)

Task-oriented

Table 3. Global Convergence in Effective Leader Behaviors.

107

—

—

—

Chai et al. (2016)

Empowering and Envisioning the — Promoting and Appraising Making decisions Actively Simplifying and Producing plans Giving clear future delegating facilitating individual listening to effectively and standardizing explanations efficiently and authority and subordinates’ performance/ subordinates’ efficiently/ work of task effectively/ responsibilities personal Providing ideas, Providing processes goals and Aligning work to development positive opinions, or helpful based on expectations and personal subordinates/ reinforcement concerns/ and timely the leader’s and how goals of Involving using praise, Fostering feedback on expertise and these are to subordinates employees in recognition, a positive employee experience be achieved with the decisionreward, and/or working behavior, organization’s making encouragement environment/ performance, goals Good and mistakes interpersonal relationships within and between teams

—

—

Active supportive leadership

Providing help and support (active supportive leadership) Actively attends Delegating and empowering to their staff/Including learning and staff in development decisionneeds making

Responsive and sensitive in difficult situations

— Proactive execution and control

—

—

—

Change-oriented Introducing innovations as appropriate

—

— Empowering Supporting staff by giving staff in their them freedom learning, to make training, decisions and selfdevelopment

Relationship-oriented Reacting quickly Showing appreciation and providing when staff help with deliver good work-related results or problems efforts

—

Recognizing problems and taking the necessary action

Giving recognition Addressing their Delegating and empowering learning and and thanks to staff/Including development staff when they staff in needs do well decisionmaking

Good at planning — and organizing

Hamlin and Effective planning — and organizing Hatton (2013)


Setting priorities Demonstrating Hamlin and Demonstrating control over good planning and Patel projects and objectives (2012) monitoring and providing progress clear direction for daily work of staff

Task-oriented

Table 3. (continued) External behavior

—

—

—

—

Anticipating Collaborating trends and and potential developing problems partnerships with suppliers

— Mediating Promoting a for the learning department, environment team, or subordinates

—

—

—

Standing up for or acting as a shield for the department, team or subordinates/ Protecting subordinates while taking or sharing the responsibility

—

Fighting for the interests of the department and staff

—

108


Relationship-oriented. As with the relations-oriented meta-category, a leader’s supporting behaviors involve building good interpersonal relationships, encouraging subordinates when frustrated, and listening to their needs and feelings. Nine indigenous studies had congruent themes of reacting quickly and providing help with work-related problems, relating well with others, and listening to the needs of employees. Leaders demonstrate supporting behaviors as they show appreciation or give rewards for subordinates’ good work. Seven indigenous studies shared similar themes including valuing and respecting staff who work hard and providing positive reinforcement using reward, public recognition, or encouragement. Developing behaviors pertains to leaders’ actions to advance subordinates’ knowledge and skills and to support their career development. Nine indigenous studies had congruent themes of supporting employee education and training, encouraging others to learn from mistakes, providing job coaching, and addressing employees’ learning/ development needs. Leaders’ empowering behaviors involve consulting with subordinates when making decisions or even delegating decisions. Relevant behavioral statements included delegating well and consulting staff, democratic in decision-making, and empowering staff by giving them freedom to make decisions. Change-oriented. Under the change-oriented meta-category, envisioning change behaviors is related to leaders’ actions to articulate an inspiring, appealing vision for the future. Four indigenous studies described relevant themes including having a strategic vision for the organization, creating and describing a vision, and future-oriented and long-term thinking. Encouraging innovation denotes leaders’ behaviors that promote creative new thinking. Three indigenous studies included similar themes of constantly looking for new approaches, being an initiator instead of a follower, and introducing innovations as appropriate. Leaders’ advocating for change behaviors involve explaining the need for change or setting up strategies to deal with change. Two indigenous studies showed relevant themes of managing changes required to realize a vision and adopting to changing working conditions. Facilitating collective learning behaviors pertains to leaders’ actions that create and share new knowledge. Two indigenous studies had congruent themes including promoting good news stories emanating from a department and promoting a learning environment. External. Under the external behavior meta-category, networking involves building relationships or interacting with people outside of the organization. Five indigenous studies shared similar themes including collaborating and developing partnerships with suppliers, responding to the expectations of customers, and mediating for the department, team, and subordinates. External monitoring behaviors pertain to scanning and analyzing the external environment and identifying potential risks or opportunities. Two indigenous studies found congruent themes of anticipating trends and potential problems and constantly evaluating emerging technologies. Representing behaviors include speaking for the team as a representative, taking responsibility for the team’s reputation, and protecting team members. Two indigenous studies showed

Park et al.

109

similar themes of fighting for the interests of the department and staff and standing up for or acting as a shield for the department, team, and subordinates.

Culturally Divergent Behaviors of Effective Global Leaders and Managers Of the 183 behavioral statements derived from the 11 indigenous studies included in the content analysis, 67 statements had no match with Yukl et al.’s (2002) and Yukl’s (2012) taxonomy. The lack of congruence indicates a possible divergence or a localspecific feature of effective leadership behaviors. These behaviors could be best classified under nine themes that emerged, as presented in Table 4. The themes include managing emotions, building relationships at the personal level and caring, displaying expertise and intelligence, being open and sharing information, being fair, being approachable and trustful, and showing flexibility. Managing emotions. Seven studies found that effective leaders handle their emotions, exhibit honesty and integrity, and behave as role models. In our research, we categorized these behaviors under the theme of professional ethics/emotional intelligence. Personal integrity builds trust in the organization and is necessary for global leaders (Black, Morrison, & Gregersen, 1999). Global leaders are required to pay attention to ethical issues and commit to meeting their own personal morals and the company standards. McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) also emphasized global leaders’ honesty and integrity to operate effectively within their businesses. Caring and personal relationship building. With regard to caring and personal relationship building behaviors, nine indigenous studies indicated that effective leaders show genuine concern for people, care for their well-being, and build camaraderie. Black et al. (1999) also emphasized that effective global leaders show a sincere interest in and concern for others. This skill requires more than merely listening to or sharing feelings, but it also means emotionally connecting with subordinates and building close personal relationships. Kets de Vries et al. (2004) reported that effective global leaders “pay attention to work, career, life, and health stress issues, and balancing appropriately the various kinds of pressures that life brings” and “articulate and model the importance of the need for life balance for the long-term welfare of employees” (p. 480). Expertise. Seven indigenous studies shared the common theme that effective leaders are knowledgeable and have both intelligence and expertise. Black et al. (1999) also identified that effective global leaders have both global business and global organizational savvy. Global leaders are required to have education in and knowledge of various topics such as finance, accounting, economics, and marketing and should have an understanding of tangible and intangible resources or capabilities within the organization. Similarly, several authors (e.g., Brake, 1997; McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002; Rhinesmith, 1996) in the global leadership competency literature have also indicated

110

Professional ethics/emotional intelligence

Building personal relationships and caring

Hamlin et al. Honesty/Control (2010) emotions in hard situations/Set a good example

Open and sharing

Fair

Treat employees Open communication/ fairly and equally Share information

Great capacity for — — work — Display technical skills, Share information makes credible presentations — Objective and Knowledgeable about consistent in the work of the dealing with industry work conflicts and people — Share information Fair, equitable, unbiased work distribution and treatment

Knowledgeable (expertise and intelligence)

Take care of staff and treat them as family/Take time to know staff at a personal and social level/Support personal problems Demonstrate Wang (2011) Lead by example/Do Care about knowledge and not act selfishly employees/ strong leadership Socialize with skills employees in nonwork settings

Cammock Straightforward and — et al. (1995) honest (integrity) Show compassion Bergmann Handle personal et al. (1999) emotions/Display professional ethics Respect the selfTaormina and Deal calmly with tense situations esteem of others Selvarajah (2005)

Emerging themes

Table 4. Convergence in Diverging Effective Leader Behaviors.

(continued)

—

— Develop a sense of trust with staff/ approachable

—

—

—

Flexible

Flexible

Treat people as if they were trustworthy

Highly visible, approachable —

Trusting/ approachable

111

Chai et al. (2016)

Hamlin and Hatton (2013)

Behave as a rolemodel/Leads by example

—

Provide technical advice and helpful answers related to work —

Knowledgeable (expertise and intelligence)

Keep staff well informed

—

Open and sharing

—

Fair delegation and workload distribution

Fair

Open and approachable; Develop a trusting relationship —

—

Trusting/ approachable

—

Flexible

Flexible

Genuine concern for Exhibit personal people credibility and competence

Fair/equal Flexible/ Open adaptable communication/ treatment approach Share information — — Open, personal Care and concern — Communicate trusting for employees well with staff; managerial Keeps them approach informed Adopt a flexible Appraise individual Build trusting Share company Produce plans and Care for approach relationships make decisions based information that performance subordinates such as a family and give may affect them and provide on expertise/Simplify as individual customized feedback based and standardize work human-beings, and feedback on objective processes based care about their criteria on expertise or well-being/Build experience camaraderie

Use personal approach to manage and lead staff

—


Hamlin and Honesty/Integrity Patel (2012)

Understand personal needs of employees

Building personal relationships and caring

—

Professional ethics/emotional intelligence

Hamlin et al. (2011)

Emerging themes

Table 4. (continued)

112


that intellectual intelligence, and professional and technical business knowledge and skills are important competencies of global leaders. Open sharing. Seven indigenous studies had similar behavioral statements indicating that effective leaders share information and openly communicate with subordinates. Although Bird and Osland (2004) and Brake (1997) discussed cross-cultural communication skills or mindful, intercultural communication as important global leadership competencies, to the best of our knowledge, few global leadership competency studies have identified the themes of open communication or sharing information, probably because studies on the global context focus more on how to overcome different cultures or language barriers. However, our analysis of global leadership studies conducted in indigenous settings emphasize that leaders’ behaviors of sharing information and having open communication are important. Promoting fairness. Six indigenous studies commonly found that effective leaders are fair to subordinates in treatment, work distribution, work conflicts, or performance reviews. Although equity or fairness in treating subordinates is likely to be a crucial issue in the global workplace because subordinates come from various national backgrounds, surprisingly, no compatible behaviors have been reported in the global leadership competency literature. This research might stimulate relevant discussions such as how to promote fairness or equity as global leaders. Trust and being approachable. Behaviors related to building trust and being approachable emerged in six indigenous studies. Bird and Osland (2004) postulated that effective global managers are capable of creating and establishing trust through mindful communication. A. Morrison (2006) explained that trusted relationships can be built based on global leaders’ integrity and high level of ethics. To engage in trusting relationships, global leaders should develop various communication channels, both virtually and face-to-face, to be approachable or visible to subordinates (Zander, Mockaitis, & Butler, 2012). Flexibility. Four indigenous studies commonly found that flexibility is an effective leadership behavior. Flexibility refers to “willingness to adapt and adjust to varied situations,” which encompasses both cognitive and behavioral components (Bird et al., 2010, p. 95). A. Morrison (2006) emphasized that global leaders need to discern when to stand firm and when to be flexible on ethical standards. McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) indicated that global leaders should be flexible in their thoughts and tactics to work with people across cultures.

Discussion In responding to our two primary research questions, we provided (a) the most common and distinctive themes among popular global leadership competency models or frameworks and (b) converging and diverging points about effective global leader

Park et al.

113

and manager behaviors. Reviewing global competency models revealed five research themes: intercultural, interpersonal, global, change and vision, and personal traits and values. Ethics and openness/flexibility were also identified as essential attributes of global leaders and discussed among personal characteristics and traits in competency studies. The review of literature in this research calls for several meaningful discussion points. First, comparing the key tenets of effective leader behaviors found in each cluster organized by Yukl et al.’s (2002; Yukl et al., 2012), four major categories (task, relationship, change, and external conditions) helped us see that their dimensions of managing relationships and change directly matched the interpersonal and change themes from various competency models (e.g., Jokinen, 2005; Lokkesmoe, 2011). However, other themes such as intercultural, global, and personal traits and values need better alignment with leader behaviors related to task-orientation and external condition-orientation. Our analysis of the behavioral statements reported in the studies in indigenous and global settings also clarified universal and convergent effective global leader behaviors as well as culturally distinctive behaviors. Given that Yukl (2012; Yukl et al., 2002) four major categories and 16 essential leader behaviors reflect views on effective leadership from Western-oriented views, the two types of behaviors that emerged from the indigenous studies are significant in that they add to and highlight the unique indigenous perspectives in the global leadership effectiveness literature. As a takeaway from our research for future researchers and practitioners, we developed an integrative global leadership framework that delineates effective global leader and manager behaviors based on the four dimensions of task, relationship, change, and external. Table 5 shows the results of combining the three analyses we performed: theories/perspectives, competencies, and behaviors. In the proposed framework, Yukl (2012; Yukl et al., 2002) four major categories of effective leader behaviors still capture both types of effective global leaders’ behaviors very well: universal/convergent and culturally distinctive/idiosyncratic. We note that labeling the type of global leader behaviors was not a straightforward decision. Organizational leadership is always a normative concept that reflects the changing needs of society and organizations (Dinh et al., 2014). As shown in Tables 3 and 4, not every study endorsed all of the global leader and manager behaviors universally; thus, “universal” and “convergent” traits only imply that they are commonly accepted or endorsed by the majority of the studies. In the same vein, idiosyncratic and culturally distinctive behaviors do not mean that the listed behavior is country- or culture-specific; rather, there were no explicit matches between these behaviors and Yukl et al.’s (2002; Yukl, 2012) 16 behaviors. For instance, leaders’ flexibility was emphasized more distinctively in studies conducted in countries that have been influenced by Confucianism (Chai et al., 2016; Wang, 2011). These findings provide an important implication for the development of effective local leadership programs or expatriate programs for multinational companies. When competency models and effective leader and manager behavior studies have been compared in previous studies, the task-oriented and relationship-oriented meta-categories did not suggest any commonalities compared with our findings. Kets

114

Culture-distinctive: •• Ethics, morals, and standards; •• Care and personal relationships; •• Organizational knowledge

Convergent: •• Intercultural competence; •• Emotional intelligence; •• Social/networking skills; •• Virtual teamwork; •• Global mind/knowledge; •• Ethics; •• Openness/flexibility; and communication

Effective global leader behaviors

•• Prioritize, organize, and schedule •• Provide a clear direction •• Clarify purpose and expectations •• Manage time, resources, and plans •• Assess quality, output, and progress •• Identify problems, causes, and resolve them •• Build global and organizational expertise •• Share information

Task: Plan/clarify/monitor/solve •• Lead with a vision •• Introduce innovations •• Advocate for change •• Adapt work conditions •• Motivate and celebrate •• Manage emotions and have integrity •• Commit to morals and standards •• Flexible •• Promote fairness •• Open communication •• Accessible

•• Show concern for others •• Connect emotionally with subordinates •• Build personal and close relationships •• Treat others fairly and equally •• Build trust

Change: Envision/encourage/ advocate/facilitate

•• Respond quickly and help employees •• Listen to employees’ needs •• Recognize and reward •• Coach and mentor •• Delegate and consult •• Create and share knowledge •• Promote learning

Relationship: Support/develop/ recognize/empower

Table 5. Framework: Core Dimensions, Competency, and Behaviors of Effective Global Leaders.

•• Engage and develop (outside) partnerships •• Respond to customer needs •• Scan and analyze environments •• Manage opportunities and risks •• Evaluate trends and technology •• Protect members •• Behave as a role model

External: Network/watch/ represent/ally

Park et al.

115

de Vries et al. (2004) stated that effective global executives “create the proper organizational design and control system to make the guiding vision a reality, and using those systems to align the behavior of employees with the organization’s values and goals” (p. 479). In accordance with Yukl (2012) suggestions to plan, clarify, monitor, and solve problems, indigenous studies have also perceived leaders’ directive and guiding behaviors and expertise in global issues and business/organizational knowledge as crucial, placing a heavy emphasis on the leader’s honesty and integrity. In particular, Bird et al. (2010) discussed leader integrity as one of the components of a global leader’s threshold traits and the ability to make ethical decisions as a system skill. In terms of succession planning tasks of indigenous or global organizations, this finding provides a clear guideline about the criteria for personal attributes to screen successful future global leaders. Another interesting finding from various competency models was the inclusion of vision in leading change efforts. Findings from the change and vision theme indicated that global leaders need to be competent in inspiring others, envisioning change, and dealing with complexity to deliver successful change efforts in a complex or uncertain environment (Kets de Vries et al., 2004; Story & Barbuto, 2011). We would also like to note that the external behavior meta-category and the relationship and interpersonal dimension merit more scrutiny in behavioral distinctions. In the competency literature, the interpersonal theme included leadership attributes in regard to interpersonal awareness and skills such as developing personal relationships, building partnerships, teambuilding, and emotional intelligence (e.g., Adler et al., 2001; Goldsmith et al., 2003). The external category in the effective leader behavior literature emphasized networking behaviors such as building interpersonal relationships, building teams, and collaboration with suppliers or clients. Although there are no precise numbers, our overall results also support Black and colleagues’ (1999) claim that effective global leadership characteristics are more homogeneous across cultures. They reported that about one third of the effective global leader characteristics are idiosyncratic and specific to certain contexts including country affiliations. Global leadership competencies that are more general include (a) the ability to express a vision, values, strategy, and in-depth business and managerial knowledge; (b) the ability to cope with uncertainty; (c) the ability to learn, integrate, coordinate, and innovate; and (d) the ability to communicate effectively, and develop and empower others (Aycan, 2001). Finally, the results shown in Table 5 suggest that contingent on the responsibility dimensions (managing tasks, relationships, changes, and external conditions), global leaders and managers are expected to actively perform a handful of intrapersonal, relational, organizational, and organization-external actions in dynamics and complicated global contexts. There is also an implication for practice. As effective global leaders and managers cannot be raised or developed in a short period of time, HR or HRD professionals’ critical task is to identify high-potential leaders and managers at the earlier stage of their careers and plan and implement competency development programs reflecting the current research’s findings.

116


Limitations and Implications for Future Research Although our research attempted to incorporate different global leadership frameworks, this research is not without limitations. We are incorporating only 11 indigenous leadership studies to capture effective leadership behaviors based on Yukl’s framework especially within indigenous contexts. This limitation prevents generalization of more convergent characteristic behaviors of leadership. In addition, we did not discuss relevant leadership theories and/or perspectives with an intention to fulfill our definition of global leadership. Numerous leadership theories (e.g., authentic leadership, cross-cultural leadership, entrepreneurial leadership, flexible leadership, situational leadership, and strategic leadership) would merit further integration and development for global leadership. As evident from our review, however, multiple dimensions, distinctive categories, and different labels are often mixed and used interchangeably among researchers in describing competencies and desirable behaviors for effective global leaders. It has been argued that the competencies or behaviors identified in various studies are redundant, provide long lists, and lack a systematic and effective framework, making it challenging for researchers and practitioners to extract the most important competencies needed for global leaders (Jokinen, 2005; Kim & McLean, 2015). We believe that our proposed framework effectively synthesizes knowledge about global leader competencies and behaviors while capturing both culturally homogeneous as well as distinctive global leader behaviors. For future researchers, this research will help improve the criticality and distinction of global leaders’ roles (or role dimensions) and effective leader behaviors for the target role dimension by surveying scholars and practitioners, and applying relevant theoretical lenses. Another commonly reported problem is the challenge of creating competencies and behavior scales that are effective across cultures (A. J. Morrison, 2000). Our proposed framework identifies effective global leader and manager behaviors and aligns them with established frameworks of effective leader orientation. These behavioral statements are a starting point to develop and validate an effective leader behaviors scale for global leaders. At the beginning, methods, such as expert panels or Delphi techniques can be used to establish the face validity and content validity of proposed effective behaviors of global leaders. Following this, construct validity can be pursued through appropriate samples such as leaders charged with a global mission and culturally diverse workforce. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Park et al.

117

References Adler, N. J., Brody, L. W., & Osland, J. S. (2001). Going beyond twentieth century leadership: A CEO develops his company’s global competitiveness. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 8(3/4), 11-34. doi:10.1108/13527600110797263 Aycan, Z. (2001). Human resource management in Turkey: Current issues and future challenges. International Journal of Manpower, 22, 252-260. Bergmann, H., Hurson, K., & Russ-Eft, D. (1999). Everyone a leader: A grassroots model for the new workplace. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. Bird, A., Mendenhall, M., Stevens, M. J., & Oddou, G. (2010). Defining the content domain of intercultural competence for global leaders. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25, 810828. doi:10.1108/02683941011089107 Bird, A., & Osland, J. S. (2004). Global competencies: An introduction. In H. Lane, M. Maznevski, M. Mendenhall & J. McNett (Eds.), Handbook of global management (pp. 5780). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Black, S., Morrison, A., & Gregersen, H. (1999). Global explorers: The next generation of leaders. New York, NY: Routledge. Blaess, D. A., Hollywood, K. G., & Grant, C. (2012). Preparing the professoriate to prepare globally competent leaders. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(2), 88-94. doi:10.1002/jls.21240 Boyd, B. L., Moore, L. L., Williams, J., & Elbert, C. D. (2011). Entry-level competencies needed for global leaders. International Leadership Journal, 3(1), 20-39. Brake, T. (1997). The global leader: Critical factors for creating the world class organization. Chicago, IL: Irwin. Bueno, C. M., & Tubbs, S. L. (2012). Identifying global leadership competencies: An exploratory study. The Journal of American Business Review, 1, 215-222. Caligiuri, D. (2006). Developing global leaders. Human Resource Management Review, 16, 219-228. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2006.03.009 Caligiuri, P. M., & DiSanto, V. (2001). Global competence: What is it B and can it be developed through global assignments? Human Resource Planning Journal, 24(3), 27-38. Callahan, J. L. (2010). Constructing a manuscript: Distinguishing integrative literature reviews and conceptual and theory articles. Human Resource Development Review, 9, 300-304. doi:10.1177/1534484310371492 Cammock, P., Nilakant, V., & Dakin, S. (1995). Developing a lay model of managerial effectiveness: A social constructionist perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 443474. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00784.x Canals, J. (2014). Global leadership development, strategic alignment and CEOs commitment. Journal of Management Development, 33, 487-502. doi:10.1108/JMD-02-2014-0014 Chai, D. S., Jeong, S., Kim, J., Kim, S., & Hamlin, R. G. (2016). Perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness in a Korean context: An indigenous qualitative study. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 33, 789-820. doi:10.1007/s10490-016-9476-x Cohen, S. L. (2010). Effective global leadership requires a global mindset. Industrial and Commercial Training, 42, 3-10. doi:10.1108/00197851011013652 Cumberland, D. M., Herd, A., Alagaraja, M., & Kerrick, S. A. (2016). Assessment and development of global leadership competencies in the workplace: A review of literature. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18, 301-317. doi:10.1177/1523422316645883 Ding, H. (2014). Virtual global leadership model: Exploratory research of leadership. World Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 94-106.

118


Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 36-62. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 Gertsen, M. C. (1990). Intercultural competence and expatriates. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1, 341-362. doi:10.1080/09585199000000054 Goldsmith, M., Greenberg, C. L., Robertson, A., & Hu-Chan, M. (2003). Global leadership: The next generation. New Jersey, NJ: Pearson FT Press. Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2002). Cultivating a global mindset. The Academy of Management Executive, 16, 116-126. doi:10.5465/AME.2002.6640211 Hamlin, R. G., & Hatton, A. (2013). Toward a British taxonomy of perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 24, 365-406. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21163 Hamlin, R. G., Nassar, M., & Wahba, K. (2010). Behavioural criteria of managerial and leadership effectiveness within Egyptian and British public sector hospitals: An empirical case study and multi-case/cross-nation comparative analysis. Human Resource Development International, 13, 45-64. doi:10.1080/13678861003608238 Hamlin, R. G., & Patel, T. (2012). Behavioral indicators of perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness within Romanian and British public sector hospitals. European Journal of Training and Development, 36, 234-261. doi:10.1108/03090591211204733 Hamlin, R. G., Ruiz, C. E., & Wang, J. (2011). Perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness within Mexican and British public sector hospitals: A cross-nation comparative analysis. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 22, 491-517. doi:10.1002/ hrdq.20087 Herd, A. M., Alagaraja, M., & Cumberland, D. M. (2016). Assessing global leadership competencies: The critical role of assessment centre methodology. Human Resource Development International, 19, 27-43. doi:10.1080/13678868.2015.1072125 Hollenbeck, G. P. (2001). A serendipitous sojourn through the global leadership literature. Advances in Global Leadership, 2, 15-47. doi:10.1016/s1535-1203(01)02113-x Holt, K., & Seki, K. (2012). Global leadership: A developmental shift for everyone. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5, 196-215. doi:10.1111/j.17549434.2012.01431.x Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., De Luque, M., & House, R. J. (2006). In the eye of the beholder: Cross cultural lessons in leadership from project GLOBE. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67-90. doi:10.5465/AMP.2006.19873410 Jeong, S., Lim, D., & Park, S. (2016). Leadership convergence and divergence in the era of globalization. In P. O. Pablos & R. D. Tennyson (Eds.), Handbook of research on human resources strategies for the new millennial workforce (pp. 285-308). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0948-6 Jokinen, T. (2005). Global leadership competencies: A review and discussion. Journal of European Industrial Training, 29, 199-216. doi:10.1108/03090590510591085 Kets, de, Vries, M. F. R., Vrignaud, P., & Florent-Treacy, E. (2004). The global leadership life inventory: Development and psychometric properties of a 360-degree feedback instrument. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, 475-492. doi:10.1080/0958519042000181214 Kim, J., & McLean, G. N. (2015). An integrative framework for global leadership competency: Levels and dimensions. Human Resource Development International, 18, 235-258. doi:10 .1080/13678868.2014.1003721

Park et al.

119

Levy, O., Taylor, S., Boyacugiller, N. A., & Beechler, S. (2007). Global mindset: A review and proposed extensions. In M. Javidan, R. M. Steers & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Advances in international management: The global mindset (pp. 11-47). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Li, P. P. (2012). Toward an integrative framework of indigenous research: The geocentric implications of yin-yang balance. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29, 849-872. Lokkesmoe, K. J. (2011). Transforming global leadership: Applying the lessons learned from Brazil, India, and Nigeria toward the development of an integrated modal of global leadership. In J. Barbour & G. Hickman, G. (Eds.), Leadership for transformation (pp. 197-225). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Lokkesmoe, K. J., Kuchinke, P., & Ardichvili, A. (2016). Developing cross-cultural awareness through foreign immersion programs: Implications of university study abroad research for global competency development. European Journal of Training and Development, 40, 155170. doi:10.1108/EJTD-07-2014-0048 Lyles, M. (2009, June). Call for proposal submission for dissertation grant and workshop. International Association for Chinese Management Research. Retrieved from http://www. iacmr.org/Publications/MOR/IndigenousResearch/Definition%20of%20IndigIndig%20 Research%20MOR.pdf McCall, M. W., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (2002). Developing global executives: The lessons of international experience. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Mendenhall, M. E., Osland, J. S., Bird, A., Oddou, G. R., & Maznevski, M. L. (2008). Global leadership: Research, practice, and development. New York, NY: Routledge. Mobley, W. H., & Dorfman, P. W. (2003). Advances in global leadership. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Morrison, A. (2006). Ethical standards and global leadership. In W. H. Mobley & E. Weldon (Eds.), Advances in global leadership (pp. 165-179). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. doi:10.1016/s1535-1203(06)04012-3 Morrison, A. J. (2000). Developing a global leadership model. Human Resource Management, 39, 117-131. doi:10.1002/1099-050x(200022/23)39:2/33.0.co;2-1 Osland, J. S., & Bird, A. (2008). Process models of global leadership development. In M. E. Mendenhall, G. R. Oddou & J. Osland (Eds.), Global leadership: Research, practice, and development (pp. 79-93). New York, NY: Routledge. Patel, T., & Hamlin, R. G. (2012). Deducing a taxonomy of perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness: A comparative study of effective and ineffective managerial behavior across three EU countries. Human Resource Development International, 15, 571-587. doi: 10.1080/13678868.2012.726539 Pierce, J., & Newstrom, J. (2011). Leaders and leadership process: Reading, self-assessments and applications. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Rhinesmith, S. (1996). A manager’s guide to globalization: Six skills for success in a changing world. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Russ-Eft, D. (1995). Defining competencies: A critique. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 6, 329-335. doi:10.1002/hrdq.3920060402 Selvarajah, C. T., Duignan, P., Suppiah, C., Lane, T., & Nuttman, C. (1995). In search of the ASEAN leader: An exploratory study of the dimensions that relate to excellence in leadership. Management International Review, 35, 29-44. Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competency at work. New York, NY: John Wiley.

120


Story, J. S. P., & Barbuto, J. E., Jr. (2011). Global mindset: A construct clarification and framework. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18, 377-384. doi:10.1177/1548051811404421 Taormina, R. J., & Selvarajah, C. (2005). Perceptions of leadership excellence in ASEAN nations. Leadership, 1, 299-322. doi:10.1177/1742715005054439 Terrell, R. S., & Rosenbusch, K. (2013). How global leaders develop. Journal of Management Development, 32, 1056-1079. doi:10.1108/JMD-01-2012-0008 Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 356-367. doi:10.1177/1534484305278283 Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15, 404-428. doi:10.1177/1534484316671606 Tsui, A. S. (2007). From homogenization to pluralism: International management research in the Academy and beyond. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1353-1364. Wang, J. (2011). Understanding managerial effectiveness: A Chinese perspective. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35, 6-23. doi:10.1108/03090591111095718 Yoon, S. W., Shin, J., Kim, S., & Chai, D. S. (2017). Effective leadership and leadership development in South Korea: Lessons learned from two large conglomerates. In A. Ardichvili & K. Dirani (Eds.), Leadership development in emerging market economies (pp. 187-206). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behaviors: What we know and what questions need more attention? The Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66-85. doi:10.5465/ amp.2012.0088 Yukl, G., Gordon, A., & Taber, T. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9, 15-32. doi:10.1177/107179190200900102 Zander, L., Mockaitis, A. I., & Butler, C. L. (2012). Leading global teams. Journal of World Business, 47, 592-603. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2012.01.012

Author Biographies Sunyoung Park is an assistant professor in the School of Leadership and Human Resource Development at Louisiana State University. Shinhee Jeong is a PhD candidate in the Department of Educational Administration and Human Resource Development at Texas A&M University. Soebin Jang is a PhD student in HRD at the Department of Organizational Leadership, Policy and Development, University of Minnesota. Seung Won Yoon is a professor in the Department of Higher Education and Learning Technologies at Texas A&M University-Commerce. Doo Hun Lim is an associate professor of Workforce Learning and Development at The University of Oklahoma.