The crucial fact about leadership in any culture is that it is a complement to subordinateship. Whatever a naïve 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 a leader’s subordinates.
Need the unique services of proffesional resume writer? Our online resume writers are online 24/7! Make your dreams come true!
Along these lines, Figure 8 describes the type of subordinateship that, other things being equal, a leader can expect to meet in societies at three different levels of Power Distance-subordinateship to which a leader must respond. The middle level represents what is most likely found in the United States. Neither McGregor, nor Likert, nor Blake and Mouton allow for this type of cultural proviso-all three tend to be prescriptive with regard to a leadership style that, at best, will work with U.S. subordinates and with those in cultures-such as Canada or Australia-that have not too different Power Distance levels. In fact, my research shows that subordinates in larger Power Distance countries tend to agree more frequently with Theory Y. A U.S. theory of leadership that allows for a certain amount of cultural relativity, although indirectly, is Fred Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership. Fiedler states that different leader personalities are needed for “difficult” and “easy” situations, and that a cultural gap between superior and subordinates is one of the factors that makes a situation “difficult.” However, this theory does not address the kind of cultural gap in question. In practice, the adaptation of managers to higher Power Distance environments does not seem to present too many problems. Although this is an unpopular message-one seldom professed in management development courses-managers moving to a larger Power Distance culture soon learn that they have to behave more autocratically in order to be effective, and tend to do so; this is borne out by the colonial history of most Western countries. But it is interesting that the Western ex-colonial power with the highest Power Distance norm-France-seems to be most appreciated by its former colonies and seems to maintain the best postcolonial relationships with most of them. This suggests that subordinates in a large Power Distance culture feel even more comfortable with superiors who are real autocrats than with those whose assumed autocratic stance is out of national character.