Personnel

Review Exploring the limits of

26,1/2 Western leadership theory in
East Asia and Africa
6
Peter Blunt and Merrick L. Jones
Received April 1995 Northern Territory University, Darwin, Australia
Revised May 1996

Introduction
Language and religion have long been recognized as core elements of
imperialism – a condition of dominance by one nation over others resulting
from an unequal distribution of power, usually associated with economic and
technological superiority. The legacies of nineteenth- and twentieth-century
European imperialism are visible in all parts of the globe, in every aspect of
cultural, social and economic life (Isbister, 1993). As the twentieth century
draws to a close, the imperialist tradition is still alive, but is carried more by
economic and political ideologies than it is by religious traditions. The new
wave of proselytizers consists, mostly, of technocrats and entrepreneurs rather
than of theologians and administrators. But the effects on developing countries
of certain elements of the “new colonialism” can be said to be as damaging to
economies, cultures and natural environments as were older, more obviously
invasive, forms (Tully, 1992).
In developing countries, of course, there is much greater awareness now than
there used to be of the nature and pervasiveness of imperialism. As a result, in
some countries there is mounting reluctance to conform to ideals “born in the
USA” concerning – for example – the nature of governance (UNDP, 1995; World
Bank, 1992), particularly systems of political and social control, human rights
and to some extent systems of macro-economic management, and the meaning
of “development” itself (Blunt, 1995b).
The crude idea that “West is best” is not confined to questions of macro
governance, however, as Hofstede (1987, 1993) has argued persuasively in
relation to American management theory, and as Brewster and Bournois (1991)
have observed in their analysis of the “cultural hegemony” of Western human
resource management (see also Easterby-Smith et al., 1995 and Guest, 1990).
Perhaps because the impact of micro systems of organization and management
are less visible to the naked eye and intuitively seem to be less damaging
potentially to the wellbeing of nations, they have yet to arouse the same levels
of resistance in developing countries as did “imposed” macro systems of
governance. Indeed, in the micro domains of management there still may be
more interest in the replication in developing countries of Western theory and
practice than there is resistance to it (see e.g. Arthur et al., 1995; Kiggundu,
Personnel Review, Vol. 26 No. 1/2,
1997, pp. 6-23. © MCB
1989) However, as recognition grows of the centrality to development of well-
University Press, 0048-3486 managed public and private organizations (Esman, 1991; UNDP, 1995; Wallis,
1989), so too is it likely that the prescriptiveness and, in many cases, Western
dysfunctionality of Western views when applied uncritically in developing leadership
countries will become more evident. The purpose of this paper is to encourage theory
the early development of such critical insights by examining one aspect of the
Western functionalist paradigm (Burrell and Morgan, 1979) of human resource
management – transformational leadership – and comparing it with patterns of
leadership observed in East Asia and Africa. 7
The analysis presented here follows a pattern which is reasonably well
established in the literature. The influence of values and culture on a number of
aspects of organization and management has been widely studied, especially
since the publication in 1980 of Hofstede’s important book, Culture’s
Consequences (Hickson and Pugh, 1995; Hofstede, 1980a).
In the field of development studies, such questions have been debated for at
least the last 40 years, as the following statements made at a colloquium held in
Paris in the 1950s demonstrate:
Differing cultures deserve respect. Too much has been made of the negative features of
traditional societies and not enough of the positive, from which so-called modern societies can
learn. Cultures manifest their own “configurations” of motivations and incentives, as a
consequence of their “specific cultural capital”. There are no necessary or sufficient cultural
preconditions for economic development … “development” itself is a culturally loaded term,
ready to succumb to ethnocentrism. And so forth (quoted by Klitgaard, 1994, p. 76).
Klitgaard (1994) remarks that “this convergence of views was impressive
[because it said] ‘Let’s take culture into account’” (p. 76). But then, as now,
analysts were much less impressive on the question of how this should be done.
Since the 1950s, the body of theoretical and empirical studies of questions of
organization and culture in developing countries has grown considerably.
These studies have confirmed the significance of national and organizational
culture to explanations of organizational performance in such settings (see e.g.
Blunt, 1991, 1995a; Jones, 1986; Nevis, 1983). Moreover, this proposition is
unchallenged in the literature.
Of particular relevance to this paper, however, are a number of persuasive
critiques, drawing on cultural arguments, which have been made of US theories
of leadership, motivation and organization (Hofstede, 1980b); organization
development (Jaeger, 1986); teamworking (Sinclair, 1992); and management
theories in general (Hofstede, 1993). An underlying theme of these papers is that
modern thinking in the West about issues of management and organization is
ethnocentric. That is to say, it promotes a culturally determined and largely
North American view of the world of work.
The critique of Western notions of leadership presented in this paper is
informed by the debate surrounding these issues, and becomes more pointed
when it is seen against this background. It is clear, however, that relatively little
purpose would be served by offering simply another rendition of “let’s take
culture into account”. Accordingly, this paper also outlines some preliminary
alternatives to Western notions of leadership, thereby attempting to show
“how” culture might be taken into account.
Personnel Management thinking
Review The dominance in the twentieth century of North American thinking on
26,1/2 questions of organization and management can be seen in the significant
influence exerted on theory and practice by men like Frederick Taylor, Henry
Ford, Abraham Maslow and, more recently, Peter Drucker and Tom Peters. The
economic and military power of the USA has clearly contributed – perhaps
8 disproportionately – to the force and attractiveness of its ideas and cultural
preferences. The universal appeal of Fordism, like that of Coca-Cola, in the
twentieth century may have more to do with the power of the purveyor and the
slickness of the message than it has with the value of the product to the
consumer.
The modern idea of management in the USA has similar attributes. Hofstede
(1993) suggests that in the US managers have attained the status of cultural
heroes, a status managers do not enjoy in most other countries, including
industrialized countries such as Germany and Japan (see also Huczynski, 1993).
However the disparities that exist between local custom and the US
management ideal have not prevented widespread international acceptance of
the latter’s tenets: Coca-Cola and modern US management theory may not
always be good for you, but consumers appear either not to know that, or, if
they do, not to care. To this extent, US management theory has become a
cultural and ideological imperative. Again, like Coca-Cola, its symbolic value as
a harbinger of economic and social progress, and of cultural sophistication,
perhaps has been allowed to overshadow its utilitarian limitations.
When we refer to “Western management”, or “Western human resource
management”, or “US management” we are of course aware that such
generalizations conceal considerable variation and complexity – the idea of an
homogeneous West, or even an homogeneous USA, is clearly as unsafe as is the
idea of a monolithic theory of management. There is, nevertheless, considerable
agreement among scholars about the dominance of the functionalist paradigm,
which is said to have
provided the foundation for most modern theory and research on the subject of organisation
… and has sought to generate useful prescriptives, models, metaphors, concepts and detailed
research findings which help to structure and control organised activity in pursuit of system
states deemed to be efficient and effective (Morgan, 1993, p. 15).
Similarly, the source of most functionalist theorizing about management in the
West is the USA (Brewster and Larsen, 1992), though the extent to which such
theorizing is revealed in practice varies greatly within the USA itself, as well as
in other parts of the industrialized West – in particular, differences have been
identified between Europe and the USA (see e.g. Brewster, 1993) and between
different countries in Europe (Hickson, 1993). Nevertheless, Western
functionalist rhetoric about human resource management and leadership is
relatively uniform in its character, being mostly North American but with
evolving variants of British and (other) European origin (Brewster and Larsen,
1992). Interestingly, a recent article in the prestigious Academy of Management
Executive shows that Coca-Cola is concerned not only about the dissemination Western
of beverages worldwide, but about the transportability of functionalist human leadership
resource management, too (Veale et al., 1995). theory
We have seen already that US ideological and cultural hegemony are not
restricted to ideas concerning the management of organizations. They are
equally, or more, evident in the fields of economic management and politics. One
of the clearest examples is provided by economic management where the 9
current orthodoxy regarding the relative influence of the state and of the market
gives prominence to the role of the market.
The market approach to questions of economic management has percolated
down to the level of the management of organizations. Particularly in the USA,
it has become fashionable in the last 20 or so years to analyse organizations
from a “transactions cost” perspective in which hierarchies are opposed to
markets. Organizations – particularly public organizations – are taken to be
antithetical to markets because they are seen to be necessary only when the
costs of economic transactions in a hierarchy are lower than would be the case
if such transactions were conducted in a free market. Moreover, in this view,
when organizations are judged to be necessary, their internal operations should
resemble those markets. Accordingly, as in free markets, where the primary
principle of control is competition, the principal notion of control in
organizations becomes one of economics-based competition between
individuals.
Assumptions about people and organizations as rational economic actors –
meaning that people are assumed to respond in ways designed to optimize
economic rewards – lie close beneath the surface of this approach, as do certain
cultural assumptions regarding the merits of individualism and competition.
These assumptions are potentially problematic because they contradict
important values held by people in 80 per cent of the countries of the world, and
by an even higher percentage of people in developing countries. Most non-
Western cultures do not place high value on overt individual and group
competition: they are collectivist in nature, that is, they value the group over the
individual (Hofstede, 1993; Ghoshal and Moran, 1996).
It is clear from the above that at the national and organizational levels culture
has the potential to confound ethnocentric ideological prescriptions regarding
economic or enterprise management. The confounding potential of culture is
equally as pronounced for groups as it is for individuals. For example,
individual and group motivation will vary according to cultural preferences and
also according to a country’s level of economic development, as became evident
to Nevis (1983), in his study of motivation in the People’s Republic of China, and
to Blunt and Jones (1986), in their study of managerial motivation in Kenya and
Malawi.
Organization development (OD) and teamworking are equally susceptible to
cultural, and possibly also economic, influence. Nevertheless, the empirical and
the theoretical evidence pointing to their limitations (see e.g. Jaeger, 1986) have
not prevented these ideas from assuming the status of organizational
Personnel imperatives in the eyes of many practitioners and theorists in Western societies
Review – to the point where, according to Sinclair (1992), notions such as teamworking
26,1/2 have become tyrannical, and their denial tantamount to heresy. Another
Western product – process consulting – seems to have attained, or to be fast
approaching, a similar level of unquestioning acceptance among practitioners
and theoreticians (Blunt, 1995a).
10 Moreover, normal scientific herding instincts (Kuhn, 1962), or pressures to
conform to the latest orthodoxy, can be so strong that evidence falsifying the
ruling paradigm may be routinely ignored or discounted (Carey, 1981).
Similar problems beset thinking about leadership. Most modern published
notions of leadership have their origins in the West. Such notions have been
propagated far and wide by the Western management education industry, so
that any self-respecting MBA holder, say from Pakistan, Zimbabwe, Ecuador or
anywhere else, will know broadly the same things about leadership and other
aspects of human resource management (Blunt; Jones and Blunt, both in press).
The limitations of the dominant Western functionalist view of leadership, when
applied to non-Western settings, are exposed in the sections which follow.

Leadership
Leadership has been the subject of essay and debate for thousands of years, but
it is only in the twentieth century that it has become a topic for sustained formal
analysis by scholars and researchers. Many theories of leadership have been
developed in the last 50 years. Like most other theories of human behaviour,
however, ways of testing these theories and, hence, of establishing their
scientific credentials have remained elusive. The result is that such theories can
be assessed only in terms of the intuitive appeal of the explanations they offer,
rather than by their ability to withstand repeated attempts to falsify predictions
drawn from them following conventional norms of scientific testing (see e.g.
Blunt, 1981; Popper, 1959). Theories of leadership which have fallen from favour
are therefore more likely to have been victims of changes in fashion in the broad
field of management than of anything else.
Prevailing Western functionalist views about leadership are closely bound
up with questions of organizational culture (see e.g. Bate, 1990; Schein, 1989);
and it is sometimes asserted that the culture of an organization can be moulded,
changed or even replaced by top management (Meek, 1992). Leaders,
particularly transformational leaders, are seen as progenitors of positive
culture and catalysts of constructive change: “the effective leader of the new age
shapes and shares a vision which provides direction, focus, meaning and
inspiration to the work of others” (Blunt, 1991, p. 65). In the West, leading from
the front has become fashionable again, so that leaders are to be visible role
models who convey in everything they do and say what they would expect from
others (see e.g. Kotter, 1988 and 1990). A particularly important part of the
leader’s job is to set the psychological tone of the organization by displaying
and promoting desirable attitudes, values and beliefs which are the building
blocks of organizational culture (Kets de Vries, 1994). Clues to desirable
organizational values can be found in corporate mission and vision statements Western
in which, frequently, reference is made to the importance of such values as leadership
fairness, trust, openness, acceptance of and willingness to admit mistakes, theory
commitment to the organization, productivity, quality, customer service (see e.g.
Conger, 1991; Zaleznik, 1990).
In the current Western functionalist paradigm, transformational leaders pay
particular attention to the building of trust, which ensures reliability and 11
predictability of employee responses and reduces the need for supervision and
control. They set also the organization’s direction and shape employee
behaviour by outlining a vision which is sufficiently persuasive to inspire and
energize others in its pursuit (Kotter, 1990). This idea assumes that employees
will take initiatives of their own once the broad goals have been set.
Because the possession of vision is seen to be crucial to effective
transformational leadership, its requisite ingredients have been widely
publicized. Following Handy (1989), the vision should:
• be different – that is, it should reconstitute or reconceptualize the known
or familiar;
• recognize that its own realization depends on the contributions of others,
without which it will remain simply a dream; and
• be a vision which the leader lives, one that he or she believes in and is
seen to believe in.
This last criterion raises questions of integrity and authenticity which are
central to the notion of the transformational leader. Mant (1983), one of the
relatively few writers to take issue with functionalist Western management
theory, says in his typically forthright way that “the ‘management’ demands of
most managerial jobs are not particularly onerous, but leadership (which
involves sticking your neck out and some moral fortitude) seems to be a more
elusive quality” (p. 227). And Mintzberg regards authenticity as the most
important ingredient of culture building and leadership:
I believe in a kind of psychic law of management here: that workers, customers, everyone
involved with a management, no matter how physically distant, can tell when it is genuine in
its beliefs and when it is just mouthing the right words (Mintzberg, 1989, p. 275).
Current theories of leadership, and leadership rhetoric, in the West place high
value also on teamwork, empowerment, performance management, rationality,
delegation, listening and learning (see e.g. Conger, 1989; Ford and Fottler, 1995).
The problem is that the amount of hype surrounding such putative features
of management implies that it is a hard sell, even in its place of origin.
Transformational leadership in the West, including the USA (Kotter, 1990), is
more a construct of the rhetoric of management consultants than it is the reality
of management practice. It seems likely that – as with Coca-Cola – the less the
worth of the product to the consumer the more one needs to envelop it in a
promotional mystique (Huczynski, 1993), and this helps to disguise its
discordance with most of the cultures in which its tenets are applied.
Personnel Western leadership theory: assumptions and implicit values
Review As with functionalist notions of “softer” organization development – which
26,1/2 emphasize things like teamworking and interpersonal skills rather than
organizational design, which gives greater consideration to differentials of
structure and reward (Jaeger, 1986, 1990) – current functionalist rhetoric on
transformational leadership suggests that its underlying values attach
12 considerable importance to:
• relative equality of power and status between leaders and followers;
• high tolerance of ambiguity and uncertainty on the part of all concerned;
• high levels of trust and openness;
• a desire to share feelings and emotions;
• a willingness to confront personal conflict and difference of opinion, and
to take risks; and
• strong beliefs in the virtues of teamworking.
These values can be translated into Hofstede’s well-known dimensions of
national culture as follows (Jaeger, 1986):
• Low power distance. The less powerful individuals in society are
unwilling to accept an unequal distribution of power without question
and are unwilling to regard it as normal.
• Low uncertainty avoidance. People are not made nervous by situations
they consider to be unstructured or unclear or unpredictable, and they do
not try to avoid such situations by adopting strict codes of behaviour;
they tend not to believe in absolute truths.
• Low individual ity. People place relatively high value on group
membership and less on individual identity.
• Medium mascul inity. Roles in a culture for either sex are defined
somewhat differently, meaning that men are expected to be relatively
assertive and to compete, and women to serve and to care for children
and the weak, and to have regard for the non-material quality of life.
Research findings, and commonsense tell us that many countries have cultural
profiles which are quite different from that described above. The fundamentally
prescriptive nature of Western leadership theory is demonstrated by the
obvious fact that these cultural prerequisites do not even fit the cultural profile
of the USA which, according to Hofstede, is characterized by medium power
distance, low uncertainty avoidance, high masculinity and high individualism.
When the “Western” leadership cultural profile is compared to those of
developing countries among the 53 countries and regions studied by Hofstede,
not one country matches the profile on all four dimensions. A single country –
Costa Rica – matches the profile on power distance and individuality, while
Jamaica corresponds with the profile on uncertainty avoidance and approaches
it on masculinity/femininity.
 It seems unlikely, therefore, that more than a handful of the 129 nations Western
defined by the 1993 Human Development Report as developing countries leadership
(UNDP, 1993), many of whose cultures have yet to be described using Hofstede’s theory
dimensions, would have cultural profiles conducive to the current ideal of
leadership now popular in the West. Again, as with Coca-Cola, we can deduce
from this that while Western leadership theory may not always be good for you,
the persuasiveness of the message is difficult to resist, particularly in the 13
absence of local alternatives. The sections of this paper which follow attempt to
counter this imbalance by outlining East Asian and African versions of
leadership which are more in tune with cultural features found in those regions.

Leadership in East Asia

Whatever a naive literature on leadership may give us to understand, leaders cannot choose
their styles at will; what is feasible depends to a large extent on the cultural conditioning of
one’s subordinates (Hofstede, 1980b, p. 7).
In the Western functionalist paradigm, leadership is legitimized largely on the
basis of performance. It is dependent also on the level of support received from
subordinates, hence the current emphasis on teamwork, empowerment,
employee satisfaction and morale. As indicated above, the emphasis placed on
the leader’s central role in building organizational culture implies the necessity to
cultivate employee commitment, involvement and morale. A leader fails to do
this at her peril, as followership is earned and subordinates are keenly aware of
their formal and informal power to dethrone or, at the very least, unsettle leaders.
In East Asia, on the other hand, leader legitimacy and acceptance often are
contingent on non-utilitarian qualities of the leader. The position of leader is
maintained by intra- and extra-organizational structural arrangements, in
some cases with deep historical roots, not by follower recognition. As Whitley
(1992) notes:
The virtuocracies of Korea and China ruled because of their superior moral worth,
demonstrated by their mastery of the Confucian classics. This meant that they did not need to
justify their status by performing some useful function on behalf of society as a whole, except
perhaps maintaining “harmony”…(p. 113).
Leadership in East Asia is therefore much less likely to be withdrawn or diluted
as a result of follower dissatisfaction, or through lack of technical competence.
This is consistent with the higher levels of power distance which
characterize most East Asian societies (Hofstede, 1980a), with patrimonial
family structures and such cultural features as filial piety. All of these factors
contribute to the wide social distance separating leaders from followers. Goals,
and means for their attainment, are decided by leaders and are carefully and
humanely imposed. There is little involvement of followers and little
expectation on their part that this will occur. The power and authority of the
leader are accepted as right and proper. Hierarchy is viewed as the natural way
to order social relations. There is “conformity to the ‘natural’ order of power
relations” (Kirkbride et al., 1991, p. 368).
Personnel Open challenges to the leader are improper and undesirable. The leader can
Review expect therefore to receive obedience, deference and compliance. But in return
26,1/2 she or he must accord followers respect and dignity (face), and show care and
concern, although their extent will vary somewhat between cultures in East
Asia. Whitley (1992), for example, distinguishes between what he calls a
“supportive, nurturing” type of authority in Japan and an “omnipotent,
14 sympathetic” one in Korea. Redding and Hsiao (1993) refer to organizations
owned by overseas Chinese as having a “feudal” atmosphere characterized by:
(a) monopoly ownership of economic resources at the top, (b) high dependence by the majority
of subordinates, (c) paternalistic response by the superior, and (d) an exchange of protection
downwards and loyalty upwards … The pervading atmosphere is one of benevolent
autocracy… (p. 180).
A major responsibility of the East Asian leader is the maintenance of harmony.
This is achieved more easily where social and organizational relationships are
well ordered and power is distributed unequally. Moreover, the maintenance of
harmony, which has deep cultural roots in East Asian theologies and
philosophies (such as Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism), is the
responsibility of all parties, and children are taught from an early age to
recognize its social significance. The Chinese, for example, perceive
disturbances to group or interpersonal harmony as shameful, and child-rearing
practices make use of “shaming techniques” to emphasize this point and the
importance of group loyalty. Collectivism and “shame” are important features
of social control in China (Kirkbride et al., 1991).
Conformity is linked strongly to socially functional notions of interpersonal
harmony and collectivism or group-centredness (Kirkbride et al., 1991; Redding,
1990). This is in clear contrast to the Western functionalist paradigm where
emphasis is placed on autonomy, competition between individuals and groups,
performance and self-assertion. Empirical evidence of this divergence is to be
found in a study conducted by Smith et al. (1989) who observed that in Western
cultures (Britain and the USA), which are characterized by individuality, much
greater pressure to perform is placed on subordinates than is the case in Asian
collectivist cultures, such as Japan and Hong Kong.
East Asian notions of personhood or humanness depend strongly on one’s
capacity to take account of others in a humane way, with respect and
consideration, and with a gentle touch.

Towards an African model of leadership

African economic psychology is generally characterised by powerful connections between
objects, humans and the supernatural. Although the emphasis put on each of these elements
and the interrelationships among them can vary from one ethnic group or tribe to another, the
quest for equilibrium with other human beings and with the supernatural is the guiding
principle … Self-reliance and self-interest tend to take a back seat to ethnicity and group
loyalty (Dia, 1994, p. 176).
As with Asia and the West, it is unrealistic to suppose that much of what can be
said about leadership will apply equally across the whole vast continent of Africa,
even if we confine ourselves to those nations generally referred to as “south of the Western
Sahara”. Given the cultural heterogeneity of many African countries, similar leadership
dangers exist in relation to individual nations (see e.g. Adigun, 1995). theory
Nevertheless, as we have noted elsewhere (Blunt and Jones, 1992), amid this great
diversity there are sufficient similarities for a tentative profile to be drawn.
In Africa individual achievements frequently are much less valued than are
interpersonal relations. The value of economic transactions lies as much, if not 15
more, in the ritual surrounding them and their capacity to reinforce group ties
as it does in their worth to the parties involved. Wealth is, first, extended family
or clan wealth, and second ethnic or tribal wealth; often it can be acquired
legitimately at the expense of the organization (Dia, 1994). In many
circumstances, ceremony, ritual, interpersonal relations, reciprocity and the
distribution of scant resources to clan and ethnic affiliates are therefore natural
responsibilities of leadership in Africa (Kolawole, 1996; Nzelibe, 1986; Warren et
al., 1996).
African societies tend to be egalitarian within age groups, but hierarchical or
gerontocratic between age groups (Linquist and Adolph, 1996). As a result,
leaders often behave, and are expected to behave, paternalistically (Jones et al.,
1995). Leaders bestow favour and expect and receive obeisance or deference.
Consensus is highly valued and decision making within levels can therefore
take a long time (see Cosway and Anankum, 1996). Between levels (downwards)
observance of hierarchy means that consensus can be achieved relatively
quickly (Blunt, 1978 and 1983; Dia, 1994).
African societies seem to have a great capacity also for tolerance and
forgiveness. How else can we explain the attempts at reconciliation with former
oppressors by African leaders like Jomo Kenyatta, Robert Mugabe and Nelson
Mandela? Many observers have wondered at this capacity to forgive and forget.
This image of the benign acceptance of past wrongs is epitomized by Nelson
Mandela who, after three decades of imprisonment
comes out, becomes an architect of black/white reconciliation, goes to beg white terrorists who
are prepared to fast until death, “Please, please, don’t kill yourselves. Please eat.” This man
who had just lost twenty-seven of the best years of his life, goes to beg white terrorists not to
fast until death. Where else but in Africa will you find this sort of thing? (Mazrui, 1994, p. 134).
Such tolerance, such acceptance of human frailty, however, runs counter to
Western market philosophies which espouse the survival of the fittest. In the
current paradigm, an important part of the leader’s job is to get rid of poor
performers. The hard-faced managerial rubric now commonly employed, with
its macho triumphalist tone (see e.g. Matheson, 1995), is revealing. Managerial
success in initiating change is to be measured according to the scale of
manpower cuts achieved: individuals who are judged to be underperforming
are “deadwood”, to be “rooted out” or “cut out”; organizations are to be not just
“lean” but “mean”. When such leadership rhetoric does address willingness to
accept mistakes, it includes in the fine print the promise of swift retribution if
the mistakes continue or are not more than compensated for by successes.
Personnel A recent study by Arthur et al. (1995) makes explicit comparisons between US
Review and Nigerian human resource management practices, the implication being that
26,1/2 Nigeria has a certain amount of catching up to do. Likewise, Kamoche (1992, p.
497) has assessed human resource management practices in Kenya against a
“contemporary ‘Western’ model”. Kiggundu (1988, p. 226) also has employed such
conventional Western functionalist formulations as benchmarks in concluding
16 that “there is an acute shortage of quality leadership and management in Africa”,
and as a basis for his observation that “authoritarian, personalised, and
politicised” leadership and management styles are not in Africa’s best interests. It
is our contention that such views – inadvertently perhaps – misconstrue the
nature and possible effects of African leadership styles, and conclude, wrongly,
that greater congruence with Western models is always what is required.
In many African settings, considerable emphasis is placed on a leader’s
ability to honour his or her obligations to ethnic affiliates, without denying
others to an extent which causes conflict to break out into the open (Nzelibe,
1986). It is expected that the organization will not pull together because of
ethnic and/or family-based cleavages. Vision, in the Western sense described
earlier, may therefore be out of place in many organizations in Africa. Debate
concerning whether visionary or transformational leadership is espoused more
than practised in the West makes its applicability in Africa (and East Asia)
more tenuous still.
Followers appear not to want it, preferring a leader who is kindly, considerate
and understanding to one who is too dynamic and productive and, possibly, too
demanding. The foregoing suggests authoritative rather than authoritarian
leadership; that is, leaders are seen to possess genuine authority but are
expected by their subordinates to use it only sparingly and in a humane and
considerate way.
Much of the above is illustrated by an empirical study conducted in
Botswana by Jones et al. (1995), in which public sector managers reported that
they perceive effective leaders primarily as those who provide clear direction
and targets, accompanied by a paternal and supportive management style.
Other researchers, like Brown (1989), Leonard (1987, 1988) and Montgomery
(1986, 1987), point to the preoccupation of African leaders with stability and
internal administrative order. What largely is absent from these perceptions is
the current Western notion of a leader who concentrates on long-term strategy,
on communicating a corporate vision, on securing broad commitment to an
organizational mission, and on inspiring people throughout the organization to
work towards the mission (Jones et al., 1995).
It may be, of course, that large governmental ministries, such as that
investigated in the Jones et al. study, do not require such inspirational
individuals – corporate heroes – to the extent that Kotter (1990) and other
contemporary Western theorists assert to be the case with enterprises which
have to cope with turbulent environments. Also, as Brown (1989, p. 376) points
out, “an important and undervalued function of bureaucracies in politically
unstable societies is the search for stability, and that incorporation plays as Western
important a role as task performance in defining their rationale”. leadership
This finding is consistent also with the idea of high power distance, which is theory
a central feature of many African cultures. In a society where power is
concentrated at the top, even quite senior managers will not be in positions
where they can set the direction or pace of change. These matters will be decided
by those above them, and decisions to be implemented will be passed down. The 17
leader’s job then becomes one of operationalizing directions received from above,
making them clear to subordinates and providing advice and support.
Such responses suggest that African managers are concerned overwhelmingly
about the quality of their relationship with their boss, rather than, for example,
with individual or organizational effectiveness. That is, internal interpersonal
issues predominate over those associated with the organization’s performance, its
long-term strategies, its clients and its external environment. The effective
manager is perceived to consult subordinates, treat them considerately, promote
their self-development, support and help them, and provide them with clear
direction. In this view, good managers are people-oriented rather than task-
oriented. The phrases used by several respondents in the Botswana research
(Jones et al., 1995) to describe the ideal boss – “teacher” and “father figure” –
illustrate nicely the relationship with the boss which seems to be valued.
The impression which emerges vividly from the Botswana data is of an
organizational culture where authority is exercised in a rather paternal way and
where deference to authority figures is high. This type of hierarchical
relationship involves also a degree of dependence on seniors by more junior
individuals, and this is accepted as normal.
In periods of transition, which apply in all African countries, it is plausible
that in many organizational circumstances this form of leadership is more
functional, and therefore more desirable, than are Western alternatives. The
limited number of empirical studies conducted have reported an overriding
concern of African workers, including managers, with issues of security. The
preferred type of leader who emerges from the paragraphs above is more likely
to be seen as offering a degree of assurance and security than would the
thrusting, demanding, driven creature of the Western model. As Mazrui (1994)
suggests, it will take time for markets to weave their magic, to create new
cleavages based on individual – or more limited forms of group – wealth rather
than on ethnic criteria or kinship. As the influence of markets grows, so
Western notions of leadership and management may become more applicable.

Conclusion
Encouraging informed debate about the role of Western human resource
management in developing countries is clearly desirable. The debate must be
genuinely multilateral, however, and it should welcome differences of opinion.
The argument in this paper is that frequently debate has tended – and tends
still – to be one-sided, and too culturally and ideologically biased. Blunt (1995b),
for example, has shown how the UNDP’s notion of sustainable human
Personnel development confounds ends with means in a way which gives prominence to
Review an ideological precept – popular participation in political and organizational
26,1/2 decision making – central to the Western democratic tradition. Similar
preoccupations are evident in Western notions of leadership.
Our brief discussion of leadership has shown that current Western notions
are not widely applicable in Africa and East Asia. The major reasons have to do
18 with significant differences in values concerning authority, group loyalties and
interpersonal harmony. Leadership in the West is follower- and performance-
dependent, and therefore inclined to be more participatory. Concern for
employee welfare masks an overriding interest in the performance of the
individual and of the organization, whereas in the East the maintenance of
harmony and face have deep philosophical and cultural roots, which can
override short-term commercial considerations but (paradoxically, perhaps)
still be in the long-term (performance) interests of the organization. Africa and
East Asia are quite similar in this respect (which, incidentally, is evidence that
the performance of economies and organizations is a function of much more
than patterns of leadership alone).
Table I summarizes some of the elements in the current Western “ideal”
model of leadership discussed here, and contrasts them with elements in
patterns of leadership in East Asia and Africa. The intention is to convey some
impressions of the practice of organizational leadership in Africa and East Asia
and to compare them with the rhetoric of Western notions of transformational
leadership.
It remains to be seen whether these features will be eroded in developing
countries in East Asia and Africa as functions of the more entrenched open-
market systems of macro-economic management and of emergent middle
classes who may favour liberal democratic means of political control.
For the moment, however, it seems that many indigenous managers in
developing countries – especially those who have been trained in the West – will
be susceptible to suggestion, in some cases perhaps feeling that things can only
get better and assuming, wrongly, that organizational dysfunction in their own
countries invalidates all indigenous management practice or local variations of
Western practice. However, there is a growing body of empirical evidence which
exposes this mistaken assumption and an increasing recognition of the benefits
to development of indigenous forms of organization (see e.g. Blunt and Warren,
1996).
Informed expatriate managers, on the other hand, may well find it less
difficult to make judgements about the relevance in foreign settings of models of
leadership that they find difficult to apply at home. But it will be less
straightforward for them to determine what should be put in their place. The
functionalist agenda clearly will not be well-served by attempts to engender in
East Asia and in Africa forms of leadership which, it could be said, have failed
to take hold in the West.
Our discussion suggests that foreign managers working in African and East
Asian settings, and indigenous managers interacting with foreign managers,
 Current Western Leadership in Leadership
Western
Element leadership “ideal” East Asia in Africa leadership
theory
Influences on Paramount concern Maintenance of Highly centralized
leadership for organizational harmony fundamental power structures
practices performance Attention to social High degrees of
Drive for efficiency networks uncertainty 19
and competitiveness Consensus valued Emphasis on control
Urgency Respect for seniority, mechanisms rather than
Follower-dependent, age, experience organizational
thus participative Expectation that performance
managerial authority Bureaucratic resistance
will be exercised to change
with moderation Acute resource scarcity
Individual concern for
basic security
Importance of extended
family and kin networks
Managing Relative equality of Leadership from the Authoritarian/
authority authority and status top paternalistic leadership
between manager and Respect for seniority patterns
subordinates Goals set by top Centralization
Delegation/ management Bureaucratic controls
decentralization Acceptance of wide Preoccupation with
Teamwork power and status rules and procedures
“Empowerment” differentials between Reluctance to judge
managers and performance
subordinates
Managing High degree of Deep-rooted, shared High degrees of
uncertainty tolerance of ambiguity theologies and conservatism
Uncertainty accepted philosophies provide Change-resistant
as normal relative certainty and organizational
Continuous change security hierarchies, reinforced
viewed as natural and Long-term view of by preoccupation with
desirable evolving change rules
Sense of urgency Hierarchy and Social networks crucial
conformity stressed to provide individual
Collecivist mutual security
duties
Managing High levels of trust Emphasis on High degrees of
relationships and openness valued maintenance of conservatism
Open confrontation of harmony and personal Change-resistant
differences dignity organizational
Conflict valued as Persons valued over hierarchies, reinforced
potentially creative issues by preoccupation with Table I.
Support of followers Avoidance of rules Comparison of
essential confrontation and Social networks crucial elements of the
Drive to secure conflict to provide individual Western “ideal”
commitment and high Maintenance of security leadership with
morale social networks East Asian and
important African paradigms
Personnel should engage with their colleagues in the expectation that there will be a two-
Review way transfer of know-how, along with careful joint consideration of which
26,1/2 practice seems to make most sense in any given set of circumstances.
There is a risk in all of this of being seen to romanticize indigenous patterns
of leadership – in much the same way as some social anthropologists used to
champion the cause of the “noble savage”, a luxury less easily indulged by the
20 subjects of their concern.
The position adopted in this paper is that there is no one best way to manage
or to lead human resources. We have attempted to show that the “what” and the
“how” of leadership (Smith and Peterson, 1987) vary between regions and
between cultures. The logic of our argument will apply to nations also in so far
as their overall character supersedes internal cultural variation. In relation to
questions of governance, at certain stages in their development some nations
will give priority to aims over means. Others will define aims and means
somewhat differently, but intrinsically no better or worse than they might be
defined in the West. For similar reasons, this should lead one to expect, rather
than to resist on principle, the expression of cultural and institutional
differences which give rise to forms of human resource management and
leadership that do not conform neatly to models now popular in the West.
We anticipate that notions such as those discussed in this paper eventually
will be defined, partly in universal and partly in localized terms. Finding a true
balance will be difficult, but evidence supporting the need to do so is
compelling.

References
Adigun, I.O. (1995), “Effects of domestic multiculturalism on job attitudes in Nigeria: a research
note”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 910-29.
Arthur, W., Woehr, D.J., Akande, A. and Strong, M.H. (1995), “Human resource management in
West Africa: practices and perceptions”, International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 347-67.
Bate, P. (1990), “Using the culture concept in an organisation development setting”, Journal of
Applied Behavioural Science, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 83-106.
Blunt, P. (1978), “Social and organisational structures in East Africa: a case for participation”,
Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 433-49.
Blunt, P. (1981), “Methodological developments in the social sciences: some implications for
interdisciplinary study”, New Zealand Psychologist, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 55-70.
Blunt, P. (1983), Organisational Theory and Behaviour: An African Perspective, Longman,
London.
Blunt, P. (1991), “Organisational culture and development”, International Journal of Human
Resource Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 55-71.
Blunt, P. (1995a), “The cultural limits of process consulting in development assistance”, in
Reineke, R.D. and Sulzer, R. (Eds), Organisationsberatung in Entwicklungslandern: Konzepte
und Fallstudien, Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp. 49-67.
Blunt, P. (1995b), “Cultural relativism, ‘good’ governance, and sustainable human development”,
Public Administration and Development, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Blunt, P. (in press), “Management education in developing countries”, in Warner, M. (Ed.),
International Encyclopedia of Business and Management, Routledge, London.
Blunt, P. and Jones, M.L. (1986), “Managerial motivation in Kenya and Malawi: a cross-cultural Western
comparison”, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 165-75.
Blunt, P. and Jones, M.L. (1992), Managing Organisations in Africa, Walter de Gruyter, New York,
leadership
NY and Berlin. theory
Blunt, P. and Warren, D.M. (Eds) (1996), Indigenous Organisations and Development, Intermediate
Technology Publications, London,.
Brewster, C. (1993), “Developing a European model of human resource management”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 765-84. 21
Brewster, C. and Bournois, F. (1991), “Human resource management: a European perspective”,
Personnel Review, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 4-13.
Brewster, C. and Larsen, H.H. (1992), “Human resource management in Europe: evidence from ten
countries”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 409-50.
Brown, D. (1989), “Bureaucracy as an issue in Third World management: an African case study”,
Public Administration and Development, Vol. 9, pp. 369-80.
Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979), Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis,
Heinemann, London.
Carey, A. (1981), “The Lysenko Syndrome in Western social science”, in Ainsworth, W. and Willis,
Q. (Eds), Australian Organisational Behaviour, Macmillan, Melbourne, pp. 212-24.
Conger, J.A. (1989), “Leadership: the art of empowering others”, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 17-24.
Conger, J.A. (1991), “Inspiring others: the language of leadership”, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 31-45.
Cosway, N. and Anankum, S.A. (1996), “Traditional leadership and community management in
Northern Ghana”, in Blunt, P. and Warren, D.M. (Eds), Indigenous Organisations and
Development, Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp. 88-96.
Dia, M. (1994), “Indigenous management practices: lessons for Africa’s management in the ‘90s”,
in Serageldin, I. and Taboroff, J. (Eds), Culture and Development in Africa, World Bank,
Washington, DC, pp. 165-91.
Easterby-Smith, M., Malina, D. and Yuan, L. (1995), “How culture-sensitive is HRM? A
comparative analysis of practice in Chinese and UK companies”, International Journal of
Human Resource Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 31-59.
Esman, M.J. (1991), Management Perspectives of Development: Perspectives and Strategies,
Kumarian Press, West Hartford, CN.
Ford, R.C. and Fottler, M.D. (1995), “Empowerment: a matter of degree”, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 21-31.
Ghoshal, S. and Moran, P. (1996), “Bad for practice: a critique of the transaction cost theory”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 13-47.
Guest, D. (1990), “Human resource nanagement and the American Dream”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 377-97.
Handy, C. (1989), The Age of Unreason, Hutchinson, London.
Hickson, D.J. (Ed.) (1993), Management in Western Europe: Society, Culture and Organisation in
Twelve Nations, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York, NY.
Hickson, D.J. and Pugh, D.S. (1995), Management Worldwide: the Impact of Societal Culture on
Organisations Around the Globe, Penguin, London.
Hofstede, G. (1980a), Culture’s Consequences, Sage, London,.
Hofstede, G. (1980b), “Motivation, leadership, and organisation: do American theories apply
abroad?”, Organisational Dynamics, Summer, pp. 42-63.
Hofstede, G. (1987), “The applicability of McGregor’s theories in Southeast Asia”, Journal of
Management Development, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 9-18.
Personnel Hofstede, G. (1993), “Cultural constraints in management theories”, Academy of Management
Executive, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 81-94.
Review Huczynski, A. (1993), Management Gurus, Routledge, London.
26,1/2 Isbister, J. (1993), Promises Not Kept: The Betrayal of Social Change in the Third World, 2nd ed.,
Kumarian Press, West Hartford, CN.
Jaeger, A.M. (1986), “Organisation and national culture: where’s the fit?”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 178-90.
22 Jaeger, A.M. (1990), “The applicability of Western management techniques in developing
countries: a cultural perspective”, in Jaeger, A.M. and Kanungo, R.N. (Eds), Management in
Developing Countries, Routledge, London, pp. 131-45.
Jones, M.L. (1986), “Management development: an African focus”, Management Education and
Development, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 202-16.
Jones, M.L. (1988), “Managerial thinking: an African perspective”, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 481-505.
Jones, M.L. and Blunt, P. (in press), “Management education in Africa”, in Warner, M. (Ed.),
International Encyclopedia of Business and Management, Routledge, London.
Jones, M.L., Blunt, P. and Sharma, K. (1995), Managerial Behaviour, Organisational Functioning
and Performance in an African Public Service Organisation, Sida, Stockholm.
Kamoche, K. (1992), “Human resource management: an assessment of the Kenyan case”,
International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 497-521.
Kets de Vries, M.F.R. (1994), “The leadership mystique”, Academy of Management Executive,
Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 73-89.
Kiggundu, M.N. (1988), “Africa”, in Nath, R. (Ed.), Comparative Management: A Regional View,
Ballinger, Cambridge, MA, pp. 169-243.
Kiggundu, M.N. (1989), Managing Organisations in Developing Countries, Kumarian Press, West
Hartford, CN.
Kirkbride, P.S., Tang, S.F.Y. and Westwood, I. (1991), “Chinese conflict preferences and negotiating
behaviour: cultural and psychological influences”, Organisation Studies, Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp. 365-86.
Klitgaard, R. (1994), “Taking culture into account: from ‘let’s’ to ‘how’”, in Serageldin, I. and
Taboroff, J. (Eds), Culture and Development in Africa, World Bank, Washington, DC,
pp. 75-120.
Kolawole, G.O. (1996), “The Ogbomoso Parapo: a case study of an indigenous development
association in Nigeria”, in Blunt, P. and Warren, D.M. (Eds), Indigenous Organisations and
Development, Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp. 50-5.
Kotter, J.P. (1988), The Leadership Factor, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Kotter, J.P. (1990), A Force for Change: How Leadership Differs from Management, The Free Press,
New York, NY.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago,
IL.
Leonard, D.K. (1987), “The political realities of African management”, World Development, Vol. 15,
pp. 899-910.
Leonard, D.K. (1988), “The secrets of African managerial success”, IDS Bulletin, Vol. 19 No. 4,
pp. 35-41.
Linquist, B.J. and Adolph, D. (1996), “The drum speaks – are we listening? Experiences in
development with a traditional Gabra institution – the Yaa Galbo”, in Blunt, P. and Warren,
D.M. (Eds), Indigenous Organisations and Development, Intermediate Technology
Publications, London, pp. 1-6.
Mant, A. (1983), Leaders we Deserve, Blackmore, Oxford
Matheson, S. (1995), “Professionalism and management: accountability versus responsiveness – Western
recent Inland Revenue developments”, Public Administration and Development, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 295-302. leadership
Mazrui, A.A. (1994), “Development in a multi-cultural context: trends and tensions”, in theory
Serageldin, I. and Taboroff, J. (Eds), Culture and Development in Africa, World Bank,
Washington, DC, pp. 127-36.
Meek, V.L. (1992), “Organisational culture: origins and weaknesses”, in Salamon, G. (Ed.), Human
Resource Strategies, Sage/OUP, London. 23
Mintzberg, H. (1989), Mintzberg on Management, The Free Press, New York, NY.
Montgomery, J.D. (1986), “Levels of managerial leadership in Southern Africa”, Journal of
Developing Areas, Vol. 21, pp. 15-30.
Montgomery, J.D. (1987), “Probing managerial behaviour: image and reality in Southern Africa”,
World Development, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 911-29.
Morgan, G. (1993), “Paradigm diversity in organisational research”, in Hassard, J. and Pym, D.
(Eds), The Theory and Philosophy of Organisations, Routledge, London, pp. 13-29.
Nevis, E.C. (1983), “Using an American perspective in understanding another culture: towards a
hierarchy of needs for the People’s Republic of China”, Journal of Applied Behavioural Science,
Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 249-64.
Nzelibe, C.O. (1986), “The evolution of African management thought”, International Studies of
Management and Organisation, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 6-16.
Popper, K.R. (1959), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London.
Redding, S.G. (1990), The Spirit of Chinese Capitalism, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York,
NY.
Redding, S.G. and Hsiao, M. (1993), “An empirical study of overseas Chinese managerial
ideology”, in Blunt, P. and Richards, D. (Eds), Readings in Management, Organisation and
Culture in East and Southeast Asia, Northern Territory University Press, Darwin, pp. 174-84.
Schein, E.H. (1989), “Organisational culture: what it is and how to change it”, in Evans, P., Doz, Y.
and Laurent, A. (Eds), Human Resource Management in International Firms, Macmillan,
London.
Sinclair, A. (1992), “The tyranny of a team ideology”, Organisation Studies, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 611-
26.
Smith, P.B., Misumi, J., Tayeb, M., Peterson, M. and Bond, M. (1989), “On the generality of
leadership style measures across cultures”, Journal of Occupational Psychology, Vol. 62 No. 2,
pp. 97-109.
Smith, P.B. and Peterson M.F. (1987), Leadership in Context, Sage, London.
Tully, M. (1992), No Full Stops in India, Penguin, London.
United Nations Development Programme (1993), Human Development Report 1993, UNDP,
Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
United Nations Development Programme (1995), Public Sector Management, Governance, and
Sustainable Human Development, Division of Public Affairs, UNDP, New York, NY.
Veale, D., Oliver, L. and van Langen, K. (1995), “Three Coca Cola perspectives on international
management styles”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 74-7.
Wallis, M. (1989), Bureaucracy: Its Role in Third World Development, Macmillan, London.
Warren, D.M., Adedokun, R. and Omolaoye, A. (1996), “Indigenous organisations and
development: the case of Ara, Nigeria”, in Blunt, P. and Warren, D.M. (Eds), Indigenous
Organisations and Development, Intermediate Technology Publications, London, pp. 43-9.
Whitley, R. (1992), Business Systems in East Asia: Firms, Markets and Societies, Sage, London.
World Bank (1992), Governance and Development, World Bank, Washington, DC.
Zaleznik, A. (1990), “The leadership gap”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 7-22.