RESEARCH PROPOSAL: COMPARISON OF LEADERSHIP STYLES OF UNITED STATES AND JAPAN
Introduction
This report discusses in detail the research proposal which aims on the comparison of the leadership styles of United States and Japan. Principally, the researcher of the study tries to determine the leadership styles that are being implemented in the countries mentioned above. The research study will also attempt to provide insightful details regarding the differences or similarity of each of the American and Japanese leadership styles implemented in their environment.
In this regard, the research proposal discusses the background of the study as well as the general objective and aims of this research. Furthermore, the research questions to be answered will also be provided and some details regarding the relevant literature review will be given. Finally, the scope and limitation, the rationale of the study and the overview of the methodology to be used will be discussed.
Background of the Study
Accordingly, leadership is noted to be one of the well-documented topics in different nations. As (1990), stated that there are various authors that provides definition of leaderships. This is because of many scholars who have dedicated their research in investigating the context of leadership. The definition of leadership that would be widely accepted by the majority of theorists and researchers might say that leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task." The major points of this definition are that leadership is a group activity, is based on social influence, and revolves around a common task. Although this specification seems relatively simple, the reality of leadership is very complex. Intrapersonal factors (i.e., thoughts and emotions) interact with interpersonal processes (i.e., attraction, communication, influence) to have effects on a dynamic external environment. Each of these aspects brings complexity to the leadership process. It is the purpose of this book to try to make that complexity a bit more manageable, thus increasing our ability to understand what effective leadership is.
According to (2001), the notions and context about organizational leadership and management are frequently exported to different nations regardless of the values that these ideas have been developed. Some authors agreed that while the emergence of leadership approaches is widely acceptable to be a common in different cultures, the manner that these styles have been operationalised are commonly observed as culturally specified. The are some arguments that exists regarding the context of leadership styles across cultures, especially in western and eastern cultures. In order to determine the differences of similarities of Western and eastern cultures, this study will be conducted. The primary goal of this research study is to compare the leadership styles of United States and Japan.
Research Aims and Objectives
The insights regarding the leadership styles used in different nations have been considered as one of the most important aspects in management. Because of the differences in cultures and aspects, most countries implement a distinctive and unique leadership styles. Thus, the main objective of this research study is to compare the leadership styles in two different nations, i.e. United States and Japan. In particular, the study aims on attaining the following objectives:
Ø To conduct literature review on the basic context of leadership and leadership styles
Ø To provide background study regarding the leadership styles implemented in United States
Ø To provide background study regarding the leadership styles implemented in Japan
Ø To compare the leadership styles of United States and Japan.
Plan of the Research study
This research study basically includes the investigation and analysis of existing secondary data and insightful details about leadership styles, US and Japan leadership styles. Herein, the major objective of the intended research is to compare the leadership styles of the countries mentioned. The objectives of the study can be attained by managing and organising the documented literature and previews studies about the given subject. For this proposed study, the researcher will only use qualitative approach. Though, this study will focus on leadership styles, relevant literatures, research studies and experiences of US and Japan may be included, noted that these resources are still relevant to the topic. In that extent, details and information can be gathered and collected from previous studies about leadership, journals, articles, books, published and unpublished reports and various internet resources.
1.4 Rationale of the Study
It has been noted that there are many literatures that tackles about the leadership styles of Western and Eastern cultures. However, there had been restricted resources about the comparison of leadership styles of these two cultures. Having been able to consider the importance and significance of this context in the global environment, it is therefore essential that new studies will be conducted focusing on this topic, i.e. comparing the leadership styles of Japan and United States. Hence, this study will be conducted to add up to the previous studies regarding leaderships styles. The research is significant in identifying the difference of the similarities of leaderships styles implemented within the two countries.
1.5 Overview of the Report
This proposed research study will be divided into five chapters. The description of the subsequent chapters is as follows:
Chapter one will provide the introduction and background of the topic and the research objectives which will served as the guidelines for achieving the main reason why this study is conducted.
Chapter 2 will provide the literature review that will be used for this study. This chapter will be divided into various sections. The first section presents the background of leadership styles available. The next part of this section will review the leadership styles implemented within US and Japan.
In the third chapter, the researcher will provide the research methodology to be used in this study. As mentioned, this research is base solely on qualitative approach.
The fourth chapter presents that analysis of the secondary data colleted about the leadership styles of US and Japan. Moreover, the discussion will also provide the comparison of the leaderships styles implemented in these two countries.
Finally, the fifth chapter will summarise the findings of this research study, including the pertinent conclusions derived from the result of the analysis given in the previous chapters.
1.6 Scope of the Study
This proposed research study highlights the areas of leadership styles across cultures. For this proposed study, the researcher opted to use deductive method. Such decision of the researcher is based on different characteristics of a deductive method which has been explained by (2003). Herein, it is said that deductive method may be simple and fast accomplish. Secondly, data gathering in this approach are often based on a on-take context and that it encompasses a lower-risk approach. Due to time constraints and financial restrictions, the researcher opted to use this approach so as to accomplish effectively the proposed study.
In this regard, the researcher will gather data from different related documents from both local and international schools and some other studies from business and industrial journals. After gathering all the needed information, the researcher will conduct a content analysis of the gathered documentary materials. In this study, the documented secondary data will be utilised and the data sources which are vital to the study consists of magazines, the web, journals, some reports, and newspapers. In lieu with ethical consideration, the researcher of this proposed study will see to it that the entire documentary materials which will be used will be properly referenced and plagiarism aspects will be prevented at all cost.
Theoretical Framework
In the proposed research, the theoretical framework which will be used is the Input-Process-Output Model. In this model, a process is viewed as a sequence of boxes which are called the processing elements and connected by inputs and outputs. Insightful details and information flow through a series of procedures and activities based on a set of rules or decision points made. To present this process, flow charts and process diagrams are the most commonly used visual representations. For this model, what goes in is the input; what causes the change is the process; what comes out is the output. Figure 1.1 illustrates the basic IPO model:
Figure 1.1
Input – Process – Output Model
The IPO model that will be used in this study will give general structure and guide for achieving the objectives of the study. Substituting the variables of this study on the IPO model, the researcher came up with the following:
Figure 1.2
Conceptual Framework
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Literature Review
The Concept of Leadership Styles
Consequently, a major component of administration is leadership. From the viewpoint of systems theory, leadership might be considered as a subsystem of systems administration. It could also be considered as a concept which becomes a part of the conceptual framework of administration theory. Leadership styles are definitely an important part of administrative theory.
Traditionally, the dimensions of leadership theory have been two in number, authoritarian and democratic. A third has been called laissez-faire. Authoritarian leadership is that which is associated with the bureaucratic organizational structure. Authority comes downward from the leader. He initiates decisions. He is the super-ordinate and does not consult with the subordinates. The exact opposite dimension is the laissez-faire, or free-rein, type. This type is one in which the individual member is independent of the group and the leader. He makes his own decisions. He acts outside of the organizational structure.
The most favoured dimension for some administrators is democratic leadership. This type is seen in a participative type of organization. Authority stems from the group. Group members participate in the decision-making process. According to (1974), there are numerous types of leadership styles which have been implemented in various organisations. These leadership styles are summarizes as follows: (1) "authoritative (dominator)," (2) "persuasive (crowd arouser)," (3) "democratic (group developer)," (4) "intellectual (eminent man)," (5) "executive (administrator)," and (6) "representative (spokesman)." The first three styles are extreme in nature, the more modern type of leadership style being that of situational leadership contingency management.
Management of both vertical (multi-level) and horizontal (multi-actor) governance requires strong leadership. A categorisation of leadership types can be established relating to the institutional settings within which leadership is exercised and which allow (or prevent) feasible leadership action. Leadership styles by contrast can be categorised according to the actual behaviour of leaders faced by particular situations.
Leadership in collaborative arrangements differs from leadership within single organisations given the need to develop an integrative capacity. Joint arrangements such as partnerships are seldom hierarchical but instead involve a wide range of partners as discussed above. A range of leadership styles may therefore be appropriate for joint working dependent on the personal characteristics evident in the leader(s) reflecting the degree of charisma, commitment, persuasion, ambition etc. which rest within any individual. Many studies highlight the importance of individual psychological characteristics. The literature also emphasises the variety of styles that exist. (1978) had termed 'collectively purposeful causation' towards a more explicit discussion of power relations and the ability to initiate change. The classic distinction between power 'over' and power 'to', reflect a new awareness of the importance of influence in the exercise of leadership.
Some authors also focussed on those who 'entice others to participate' in joint action, and developed the role of the 'convenor' of collaborative action. This recognition of the capacity of the leader to mobilise collaborative advantage echoes for those who pointed to the tendency for many US leaders to move towards a more facilitative style of leadership, and those who emphasise facilitative leadership as the basis for transformational collaboration (1996). (1996) suggest that network participants may be enthusiasts, activists, pragmatists or opponents and these general attitudes towards network participation must of course affect the potential emergence of individuals as leaders.(1996) also identify three approaches to leadership - the charismatic, the fluid, and the coordinating role.
The following discusses the description of the four distinct leadership’s styles that can be implemented.
Telling Style
The leader who uses this style closely controls the work of their staff and acts quickly to correct and re-direct any falls in performance. They make sure people are clear about what tasks they have to accomplish and emphasize the use of standard procedures stressing at all times the importance of targets and deadlines.
Selling Style
The leader who uses this style shows a concern for the task as well as staff relationships. They may spend time in friendly or supportive conversation, but they also make sure people are clear about their individual responsibilities and the standards of performance required. They may sometimes incorporate staff ideas into any decisions, but ultimately the leader retains overall control of the task and how it is completed.
Participating Style
The leader who uses this style allows people to manage their own work. They do not lead or direct staff in any strong direction or manner. Rather the leader allows individuals to set their own goals. Such leaders are available for discussion and advice, but will not push their own ideas. They rely on the self-guidance and direction of the individual but also make people feel valued — offering encouraging and supportive contributions.
Delegating Style
The leader who uses this style effectively liberates or empowers people to define problems and develop solutions by themselves. They do not intervene but make themselves available if required by adopting a distant but supportive position.
Overview of Methodology
Research DesignAs mentioned above, the main goal of this proposed study is to compare the leadership styles of US and Japan. In order to achieve the objective of this study, the researcher opted to use the descriptive approach. Such descriptive style of research will use secondary data that will be collected in previous studies, published or unpublished documents.
Accordingly, with the descriptive research, it is necessary to have a clear picture of the phenomena on which a researcher wishes to collect data prior to the collection of the data. (2003). Further, even if many project tutors are often wary or work that is too descriptive, and they will want a researcher to go further and draw conclusions from the data gathered, description in management and business research has a very clear place, although, it should not be thought of as an end in itself, but only as a means to an end. (2003).
This research is base on qualitative research method. Traditionally, qualitative research has been viewed somewhat simplistically as a set of different research methods that have certain features in common. In this respect, qualitative methods are employed to collect data about activities, events, occurrences and behaviours and to seek an understanding of actions, problems and processes in their social context. For this research study, qualitative approach will be used in order to understand the differences or similarities of the leadership styles in US and Japan.
Qualitative research, allows the researcher to be adaptable at all stages of the research process because it is both inductive and deductive. Initially it is inductive. This means that, to begin with, patterns, themes and categories emerge out of the data instead of being imposed on them prior to data collection and analysis. Later the process of qualitative research becomes deductive because, as the research progresses, the researcher develop working propositions and ideas which are being tested out over the next stages of data collection and analysis. This may even involve searching for new data that confirm your propositions. There is a constant interplay, therefore, between analysis and data collection, which is why qualitative research is often described as iterative. Key point Qualitative data analysis is concerned with:
Ø Data reduction: carving up the mass of unwieldy data into manageable chunks by coding, memoing and summarizing them into simplified patterns and configurations.
Ø Interpretation: bringing meaning and insight to the words and acts of participants in your study by generating concepts and theories (or theory-based generalizations) which explain your findings. You then communicate the meaning of your findings to others through your written report.
Although data reduction and interpretation are common to most types of qualitative analysis, there are no rigid stages or rules for undertaking the process of qualitative analysis, unlike in quantitative research where there are well-established methods and procedures. Such flexibility and openness lie at the heart of qualitative research, suggesting that perhaps it is inappropriate to aim for homogeneous, classifiable types of qualitative analysis (1994). Instead the researcher should follow the analytical approach which the researcher considers best fits your overall research design and the nature of the data.
The value of qualitative research can best be understood by examining its characteristics. One of the primary advantages of qualitative research is that it is more open to the adjusting and refining of research ideas as an inquiry proceeds. Also, the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the research setting, as in an experimental study, but rather seeks to understand naturally occurring phenomena in their naturally occurring states. Inductive reasoning, as opposed to deductive reasoning, is common in qualitative research, along with content or holistic analysis in place of statistical analysis ( 1995).
Interesting News
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment