Introduction
Many studies on leadership effectiveness explore the leader behaviors and external factors that determine the behaviors and actions of leaders. In this case, research reveals that leadership practices differ across nations, often due to cultural differences. Additionally, gender is a sensitive issue in organizational contexts, particularly in debates about the level of involvement and engagement of women in leadership positions.
With numerous studies demonstrating the importance of gender diversity as a critical success factor, modern scholars should continue to investigate how this leadership issue impacts specific organizational contexts and processes, including crisis management. The importance of culture and gender is evident as the global workplace continues to evolve, and studies on diversity call for even greater diversity. Embracing, implementing, and managing diversity poses a significant challenge for organizational leaders, which could be addressed through further research.
This paper explores the intersection of culture and gender diversity in the context of leadership. The scope of culture extends to the national level, where the concept of national culture is explored, encompassing broad cultural issues pertinent to specific nations. Additionally, the scope of gender diversity encompasses how it impacts leadership and how it can be effectively promoted. The paper’s structure comprises a summary of these concepts, which are discussed in three articles. An evaluation and comparison of the concepts will be conducted, followed by a description of considerations for future research.
Concept Summaries
Regional Culture
Leadership effectiveness often depends on individuals’ actions and behaviors, which are shaped by their cultural context. The article by Li et al. (2013) examines regional differences in neighboring cities, focusing on how cultural differences impact leadership effectiveness. The main idea expressed in the article is that regional differences within a large culture influence leadership effectiveness. This idea is supported by the research findings, which indicate significant differences between group supervisors in Hong Kong and Shenzhen.
In this case, Hong Kong has shown a more aggressive approach to deploying the leader-member exchange (LMX) model than Shenzhen. With these findings, the study addresses the gap that most studies on cross-cultural management and cultural diversity fail to cover, as they often treat culture as a single, constant entity. These studies do not account for regional differences, so these scholars have chosen to focus on this topic.
The methods used in this study include a survey that was conducted using questionnaires as the primary data collection tool. The sample comprised supervisors from 11 workgroups, each with approximately 12 members. A total of 214 questionnaires were administered, yielding a return rate of 88.8%, which resulted in 190 respondents being used. The data was analyzed using empirical techniques, including regression analysis, to determine the correlation coefficient between the LMX theory and leadership outcomes.
It is also important to note the variables used, which include job performance and turnover intention. These variables and their correlation with a leader’s LMX tendencies are explored using regression analysis. The quality of the article is assured by the fact that scientific methods were used for the collection and analysis of the data. The research is also published in a peer-reviewed journal, indicating that it has met the standards for an academic article.
With the research gaps addressed, it is essential to acknowledge the contribution and significance of this study towards the literature. A new stream of research has been established, focusing on how regional cultural differences affect leaders’ effectiveness using various models and styles. In this case, different regions within the broader geographical location have varying degrees of success with specific leadership models. This stream of research would be critical in narrowing down research on national cultures and broadening the scope of corporate culture. The new literature can inform practice, including the styles and models that leaders should adopt.
Leadership and Gender During Crisis
The emergence of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has presented an irresistible opportunity to explore gender differences in leadership. An article by Eichenauer et al. (2021) examines how supervisory leaders managed the crisis, focusing on the differences between male and female leaders. The focus of the scholars is to address the assertions that female leaders are more effective than male leaders in times of crisis.
The research confirmed these assertions, indicating that employees perceived female leaders as more effective than male ones. Therefore, the main idea is that communality is an increasingly likable aspect in crisis leadership, making women better leaders than men. The gap addressed in the paper is mainly the assertion that women are better leaders. The term ‘assertions’ indicates that the claim is made without necessarily being backed by adequate literature. By the end of the analysis, the assertion has evolved into a sound theoretical model supported by empirical data.
The methods used in this study have incorporated several techniques for collecting and analyzing data. The researchers conducted two studies; the first used an experimental design to measure perceived agency and communality. The sample comprised 312 adults gathered in the United States using Qualtrics Panels.
Descriptive statistics have been used to describe the demographics of the sample. Additionally, a six-item scale was used to measure leader behaviors, and hypothesis tests were accomplished using statistical methods, including standard deviation, means, and intercorrelations. The second study employed similar methods, particularly in participant recruitment.
The experimental design provided greater control over the variables and data. The sample comprises 256 individuals, with 50% from each gender. In this case, it can be argued that scientific methods have been used to test hypotheses and generate theoretical foundations. This ensures the quality of the study and its usability in both scientific and academic settings.
The findings from this study make critical contributions to the available research. For instance, researchers may view themselves as pioneers in validating the claim that women may excel as leaders in specific contexts. Additionally, the study unveils a new stream of research where seminal studies can be conducted on gender differences in leadership outcomes. Besides the potential seminal papers, scientific research can be conducted to build upon the efforts of Eichenauer et al. (2021) and provide a broader perspective on the subject. The contribution to literature can extend to practice, where corporate leaders embrace new concepts.
Promoting Gender Diversity
Many businesses worldwide support the idea that women in leadership improve corporate success and effectiveness. Therefore, most global organizations successfully implement mechanisms to promote gender diversity in organizational leadership. An article by Ellis et al. (2015) explores how gender diversity in the Gulf region can be promoted. The primary concern is that women are underrepresented in the C-suites and corporate boards across the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states.
The authors also acknowledge that women are making significant strides, as evidenced by the growing emphasis on gender diversity in the corporate agenda across the GCC region. The article presents a central idea: there is a shift in companies’ strategic agendas, where women in leadership are being discussed. Deliberate efforts are made to increase women’s participation. Therefore, it can be argued that the research gap is being addressed in terms of the actions being taken and the benefits companies derive from their efforts to improve women’s participation in leadership.
The article is not a scientific paper and does not follow scientific or academic data collection, analysis, and presentation methods. On the contrary, Ellis et al. (2015) represent a survey report for market research. In the survey, interviews were used to collect primary data from employees across the GCC region. In data analysis, simple descriptions of the interview outcomes are presented, indicating that no statistical methods have been employed.
The sample size is also not discussed, so the authors have not revealed the number of people interviewed. Percentages are the basic descriptive statistics used to present the outcomes of the market survey. From an academic perspective, the quality of the paper cannot be guaranteed since the journal or publication is not peer-reviewed.
Although the article is not published in a peer-reviewed journal, its contents make a critical contribution to the leadership literature. The facts revealed by Ellis et al. (2015) include the barriers to improving gender diversity in the workplace. At this point, it can be argued that corporate leaders have the role and responsibility to hold this position.
Therefore, the identified barriers can be subjected to scientific study, and the findings can be used to support current or emerging literature and inform leadership practices. The rationale is that when such issues emerge through market research, scholars are often the best individuals to offer a better view by subjecting the issues to rigorous studies. The issues can either be confirmed or refuted, but the most important outcome is that new emerging issues are recognized and shape the future of research.
Concept Evaluation
An evaluation of the concepts will focus on several aspects, including the issues of concern raised, weaknesses identified, the next steps in research, and contributions to the emerging proposal. In the article by Li et al. (2013), the primary concern is the failure of scholars to acknowledge cultural differences across large cultures. The article addresses this gap by noting that Hong Kong and Shenzhen exhibit distinct leadership tendencies due to their cultural differences. In this case, studies of national culture often focus on entire countries or continents, especially East versus West.
Li et al. (2013) provide an example comparing China with the United States and Australia. The weakness of this research is that the cultural aspects that distinguish the two regions are not explored, which means that only an assumption is made that cultural differences are responsible for the LMX preferences and practices. Therefore, the next step for future research is to explore the underlying cultural issues. Lastly, these gaps can inform key decisions on the emerging proposal, including the scope of the research.
Regarding gender differences during crises, the issue of concern is the measurement of the variables, such as leader likeability. Such elements are highly subjective and could depend on multiple factors. Without adequate controls, it can be argued that the findings are inconclusive, especially if they do not assess the personal differences among the respondents. Therefore, it is recommended that the research be replicated to test and verify the findings before they can be generalized to larger or universal populations. The next step for research should be to attempt to replicate the study or accomplish confirmatory research to support the findings.
The study by Eichenauer et al. (2021) has no significant weaknesses, except that it was conducted during a pandemic setting. Crises within organizations have not been tested, often offering a different scope and context. These gaps can be explored to contribute ideas to an emerging proposal, particularly where different contexts and settings need to be investigated.
In promoting gender diversity, the primary issue raised is that, despite companies’ efforts, barriers still exist and need to be addressed. Ellis et al. (20150 may have conducted a simple market survey, meaning their article can only be used to form a background or inform any research. The issues raised must be subjected to scholarly research for a deeper understanding. Therefore, the following research step would be to undertake a qualitative study to explore these issues.
The preference for qualitative approaches is based on the notion that they allow for a more detailed examination of a phenomenon. Therefore, the only weakness of this article lies in the methods used and the data analyzed. However, it can still contribute significantly to an emerging proposal since valid arguments have been made regarding the situation across the GCC. Therefore, a context and scope for the proposal can be derived from the findings made in this article.
A common observation across the three articles is that each offers a distinct perspective on leadership. It becomes evident that the breadth of leadership can extend infinitely as scholars keep finding interrelationships between leadership and other concepts. For example, an organization studies culture, focusing on how different ethnicities, races, or national backgrounds affect interpersonal relations and individual and corporate performance. However, the article by Li et al. (2013) connects culture to leadership, extending beyond the workplace and into geographical regions.
Similarly, gender diversity is often used to argue for the inclusion of women in the workplace. However, Eichenauer et al. (2021) argue that women are more effective leaders in times of crisis. The primary argument is that leaders encounter various situations that impact their ability to fulfill their mandates and achieve success. Therefore, exploring all factors that affect leadership, both internal and external, presents an opportunity to inform leadership practice where the literature can shape actions, behaviors, decisions, and strategies.
Comparison
A comparison between the three articles can be made from various angles. Considering they are all presented in the context of leadership, their significance and contribution to the subject can be explored. First, it can be argued that the three articles form a solid background for expanding leadership research even further. For example, Li et al. (2013) prove that the link between leadership and culture needs further exploration.
The other two articles focus on gender differences in the workplace, which is a key similarity. However, the contexts differ in that one focuses on crises and the other on promoting gender diversity (Eichenauer et al., 2021; Ellis et al., 2015). The two articles on gender diversity have also produced a similar conclusion in that they both find women in leadership to be a success factor.
Other areas of comparison include how the research topic is approached. Regional differences in culture and gender differences in crisis leadership are scientific papers or primary research conducted by scholars. The article promoting gender diversity across the GCC is a simple market survey offering a simplified overview. Additionally, methodological differences appear between the two scientific papers, mainly regarding data collection and analysis.
Regarding the topics themselves, culture and gender diversity can be perceived as critical issues in leadership. For example, modern firms comprise culturally diverse workforces, which forces leadership actions and behaviors to be adopted. Similarly, gender diversity is increasingly becoming a critical requirement for corporate managers, especially where legislations offer strict regulations on gender and other forms of discrimination.
A key point to emphasize is that there is no direct relationship between the three concepts other than the two that address leadership effectiveness. On the one hand, Li et al. (2013) explore how regional cultures influence leadership effectiveness. On the other hand, Eichenauer et al. (2021) attempt to confirm the assertion that women are more effective leaders in crises.
However, it can be argued that their contribution to the literature on leadership is undeniable, especially since they all attempt to explore issues that other scholars mostly ignore. Even the article by Ellis et al. (2015) explores how firms promote gender diversity and the barriers involved, which could be used to inform leadership practices related to the broader theme of diversity. Therefore, these features can be conceptualized as similar across the articles, although this position is based on the possible inferences from the articles.
Future Research
Among the three topics presented in this paper, future research should focus more on gender differences in leadership outcomes. As explained earlier, the article by Eichenauer et al. (2021) only uses the pandemic as the context for exploring leadership differences. However, organizations face other forms of crisis, including disasters, data breaches, or even corporate scandals that need to be managed. These contexts form better case scenarios for exploring how men and women handle the crisis and which gender is more effective. This recommendation is based on the idea that there is a need to explore this concept in business settings where the findings can be used to inform organizational leadership practices.
In other words, practical lessons for organizational leaders are needed, including appointing people to lead the companies out of a crisis. For example, a data breach scandal presents one of the possible crises for modern businesses that have adopted digital technologies. The crises would affect internal and external stakeholders, including workers, customers, suppliers, and partners.
A team would be selected to lead the company out of this crisis, requiring a capable leader. Suppose future research can prove that women are also better in these situations. In that case, contemporary firms can always select women leaders with the hope that their likelihood of succeeding is higher than that of men.
The COVID-19 case by Eichenauer et al. (2021) is a social crisis, which means leaders with better social skills are more likely to succeed. Corporate crises may also involve handling human beings, in which people skills are critical. However, other competencies are needed, including knowledge of the situation and technical or other expertise relating to the problem.
The justification for this recommendation is that it will make critical contributions to emerging research and could influence major corporate decisions. Additionally, the current literature fails to offer adequate evidence that women can be more successful than men across all types of crises. Therefore, future research can make further comparisons and offer a general conclusion and theoretical foundation. Additionally, this recommendation can help make a case for including more women in leadership and help companies address the barriers discussed by Ellis et al. (2015). Therefore, the justification for this pathway for future research is the need for further clarification on the subject and the possibility of updating available literature.
Conclusion
Three concepts have been discussed in this paper: regional culture, leadership, gender diversity during crises, and promoting gender diversity. Each of them has different implications for the broader subject of leadership. For example, regional culture affects the effectiveness of leaders using particular models or styles. Similarly, leadership and gender in crises have revealed how women have proven to be better leaders in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. With most countries recognizing the need for more women in the workplace, barriers to promoting gender diversity have been identified. In each of the three concepts, research conducted by various scholars has illustrated practical implications for companies worldwide.
Culture and gender diversity are some of the critical issues affecting organizational leadership. Diversity is a trend that has been enforced by realizing its implications for organizational outcomes. Additionally, some diversity management practices focus more on compliance with legal requirements.
From a leadership perspective, cultural and gender issues have various business implications, including boosting performance and leadership effectiveness. A consideration for future research has been given, where it has been recommended that a different context for exploring gender differences in crises should be used. The justification for this recommendation is that workplaces face different types of crises that may require other forms of expertise, and decisions on who should lead the companies out of the crises may be based on the updated literature.
References
Eichenauer, C., Ryan, A., & Alanis, J. (2021). Leadership during crisis: An examination of supervisory leadership behavior and gender during COVID-19. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 1-18. Web.
Ellis, T., Marcati, C., & Sperling, J. (2015). Promoting gender diversity in the gulf. McKinsey Quarterly, 1-8.
Li, J., Tan, Y., Zhu, H., & Wang, X. (2013). Regional differences in a national culture and their effects on leadership effectiveness: A tale of two neighboring Chinese cities. Journal of World Business, 48(1), 13-19. Web.