COMPARISON OF LEADERSHIP STYLES OF UNITED STATES AND JAPAN: A CASE STUDY
Management is doing things right;
leadership is doing the right thing.
- Peter F. Drucker
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
What makes an efficient, effective, and good leader? Or simply, who is a world-class leader? These similar questions pose the greatest challenge to all leaders – regardless of the area of specialization. Today, the rapidity and continuous flow of business transactions and emerging trends in the corporate world requires the most functional and applicable attributes of leaders. Aside from the required outstanding scholastic credentials, very satisfactory personal characteristics and exceptional work knowledge, the style of leadership is one of the most essential factors that contribute to the overall stature of the organization – profit or non-profit in nature.
The advancement of ideas and innovations has been swift, as different organizations have to promote ideas that can meet the demands of the more knowledgeable and sophisticated market. To meet these challenges and achieve a competitive edge, there is a need to formulate and implement strategies based on innovation, technology and the development of intellectual capital. Few companies, even those at the leading edge of international business, have all the management processes, culture and tools in place to create and harness knowledge in a systematic way. Further, the continuous and dynamic competition in the global business arena has been exceedingly stiff and complex. With this consideration, the organization must be able to utilize a strategy and management system that will enhance the performance of the business so as to outgrow its rivals ( 2000; 2003). One of the contemporary management concerns in the business world today is the concept of leadership.
Background of the Research
There has been a significant body of literature written by business and academic researchers, policymakers and experts that specifically discusses the concept of leadership. Accordingly, leadership is noted to be one of the well-documented topics in different nations. (1990a) stated that there are various authors who provide definition encompassing the concept of leadership. This variety of definition is a product of many scholars’ dedication in undertaking their research on 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 (1997). The major points of this definition are that leadership is a group activity, is based on social influence, and revolves around a common task. Other definitions will be presented in the following discussions wherein the examination of key attributes and application will be conducted. 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 then the purpose of this research to attempt to make that complexity a bit more manageable, thus increasing the ability to understand what effective leadership is particularly in relation to style of the United States and Japan.
The United States and Japan is apparently among the world’s most powerful democracies and richest economies. Understanding the leadership styles employed in these countries might be relevant in overcoming the complex and broad ranging challenges and arguments brought about by misunderstandings, disregard or stereotype images from variety of cultures and histories. Also, it will serve as a model in which other countries may imitate especially on the entrepreneurial and economic dealings. Both countries are undisputed when it comes to maximized employment of all domestic resources for the purposes of development not only within their geographic boundaries but across the world. The remarkable performance of both countries in the global marketplace is attributed to the efficient management and control of authorized figures who lead specified areas. With this fact, the concept of leadership – the act of leading – is not overlooked. Thus, this research predominantly attempts to provide theoretical distinction or comparison of the leadership style of both countries.
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. There are some arguments that exist regarding the context of leadership styles across different cultures, especially in Western and Eastern setting. In order to determine the differences as well as similarities of Western and Eastern cultures, this study will be conducted with particular emphasis on newest developments on the subject. Therefore, the primary goal of this research undertaking 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, in particular the United States, which represents the West and Japan, which represents the East as well. Specifically, the study intends to accomplish the following deliberate 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; and
Ø To analyze the applicability of identified leadership styles in the contemporary setting and instance.
Related Literature
The wide range of literatures related to leadership as well as business management, marketing plus various phenomena affecting its totality are extensive. Given with this fact, this chapter goes over the related literatures conducted on the area of study. By embarking on such pursuit, the research may be guided accordingly by firstly discovering where the research is coming from, what and how much have been studied regarding the topic and what it is yet to tackle. Besides providing background to the study, this section provides the necessary backbone and support in order for the research to stand credible.
By surveying the past publications and researches related to the study, a historical perspective may take place. The researcher also gained an idea on how such venture has been explored in the past. In this manner, this study may be able to reflect, compare itself, learn from setbacks, and produce a stronger and more efficient study. The related literatures also provide the research a rich source of data, both new and old, that will enhance and enrich the study (and the direction it will plan to undertake) even more. References from this segment of the paper are a product of broad traditional and modern researching and information retrieval.
Definition of Leadership
For decades, the issue on leadership has been undertaken in various studies and related discussion (1991; 1985; 1989; 1985; 1988). In fact, the study on leadership dates back in 1921 (1999). Basically, the term leadership comprises the capacity and talent to inspire and influence the thinking, attitudes, and behavior of other people. Among the many definition of leadership provided in worldwide publications, (1997) is seemingly acceptable in the global setting. But then again, it is always recognized that the dynamic changes of the modern times influences almost all areas of living. So, the said definition may no longer appropriate in the line of thinking and in relation to the existing trends that continuously proliferates in the global marketplace.(2002) defined leadership as the process of inspiring other people to comprehend and agree on what needs to be done and how to accomplish them effectively. In addition, leadership is also defined as the process of facilitating collective and individual efforts to fulfill shared objectives.
Alternatively, (1992) stated the creation of culture is the main essence of leadership and that both culture and leadership are two sides of a single coin. Relating leadership to management, Schein believed that leaders tend to establish and change culture, while administrators and managers live within the culture. While related definitions differ from one another, the particular attributes speak of the essential role the leaders have to play in leading people and most importantly managing cultural diversity regardless of place and manner of application. Although this specification seems relatively simple, the reality of leadership and its related aspects is very complex. To coincide with the complexity of leadership process, an assortment of leadership styles is used by leaders in different settings and line of objectives. The leadership styles sometimes can make an organizational change be successful or be a total failure.
Leadership is an important aspect of management. As stated by a few authors ( 1993; 1992), management requires full leader participation and involvement instead of designating individual groups who will shoulder all the responsibilities. The involvement of leaders serves a number of purposes. For instance, this helps in preventing the resistance of employees to changes brought about by the implementation of quality systems. The enthusiasm and determination of the leaders to make the project work can positively influence other company staff. Leadership as administration is based on the ways that the cultures of the people are made and the ideas on how the companies are able to manage their human resources have helped with the ways that they can continue to improve not only with their services to their employers but also their services to the company (2001). Furthermore, this also helps in creating a sense of commitment and loyalty (1991).
The ever-changing trends in the business communities worldwide permit every organization to use the most suited leadership styles. In organizational setting, there are several leadership styles that are utilized by the every corporate personnel or authority (e.g. supervisor, manager, etc.). Leadership style is the pattern of behavior used by a leader in attempting to influence group members and make decision regarding the mission, strategy, and operations of group activities ( 2000). The presence of leadership in management is also one effective factor in addressing technical and non-technical issues regarding the workplace. It is important however that the appropriate leadership style is used. Truly, there are many types of leadership styles that can be utilized within an organization; however such styles are dependent to the strategic implementations of the organization’s mission and vision.
Types of Leadership Styles
The presence of leadership in management is also one effective factor in addressing organizational technical and non-technical issues (1998). It is important however that the appropriate leadership style is used. The following discussion is the styles in leadership that managers implement in the organization.
Transformational Leadership Style
Historically, the concept of transformational leadership was introduced by James MacGregor Burns way back 1978 particularly on his treatment of political leadership (1998, 1990). At present, this leadership theory was used in various applications such as organizational psychology. Bass noted that transformational leadership is an expansion of transactional leadership. Transactional leadership emphasizes the transaction or exchange that takes place among leaders, colleagues, and followers (1998). This exchange is based on the leader discussing with others what is required and specifying the conditions and rewards these others will receive if they fulfill those requirements. In transformational leadership, strong personal identification of the leader is involved. Furthermore, the relationship in this leadership style is more than the fulfillment of self-interest or provision of rewards (Hater and Bass 1988). The transformational leadership approach consist four dimensions that serves as prime features: Charismatic Leadership (Idealized Influence, CL or IL), Inspirational Motivation (IL), Intellectual Stimulation (IS), and Individualized Consideration (IC) (1998). These are the components that bring out all potential applications and results of the approach when used.
In general, transformational leadership consists of a leader who inspires followers to share a communal vision, encourages people to achieve the vision, and provides necessary resources for the development of personal potential. A leader who uses this leadership paradigm serves as a role model, supports optimism, musters commitment, and focuses on the followers’ call for eventual growth (1996; 1988, 1994, 1994, 2002).
Transactional Leadership Style
Transactional leadership, the counterpart of the transformational style, is more on controlling people and giving out orders. This style has two main categories. One is called the management-by-exception where leaders tend to make use of their authority to reward or penalize people under them. Managers or leaders who use this category of transactional leadership tend to focus on asserting power, pointing out errors and disciplining subordinates with poor performance (1985). Contingent reward leadership is the other category of this leadership style. In this style, the focus is on the communication of work standards and the provision of rewards if these standards are followed. Leaders applying this style ensure that the subordinates know what is expected of them and the consequences should they fail to meet these expectations. Naturally, rewards are given for good performance while punishments are given for poor performance (1999). In general, the qualities of transformational leadership style are opposite to transactional style of leadership.
Servant Leadership Style
Servant leadership is among the most popular leadership approach that was coined and defined by (1970). Originally, the attributes of servant leadership was rooted in the history thousand years ago, at least during the time of Jesus. The servant leadership most distinguished feature is the leader’s role as steward of the organization’s resources from human, finance, and others. It supports leaders to serve others while staying focused on achieving results in line with the values and integrity of the organization. Servant leadership possess six components namely valuing people, developing people, building community, displaying authenticity, providing leadership, and sharing leadership (1999). These elements of servant leadership indicate specific behaviors in terms of applicability.
Generally, leaders who use the servant leadership approach are servants of its followers. Particular interests of followers are given attention before his/her self. Also, a servant leader centers personal progress and empowerment of supporters as well as facilitates the achievement of shared vision among people (2002;1999; 1998; 1977). Today, various critics of this leadership paradigm judge it as ‘yet another fad to line consultant’s pockets’ but its proponents justify such argument with the timeless applications and principles used by several successful organizations (e.g. businesses).
Other Types of Leadership Styles
Aside from the three aforementioned leadership styles, there are other styles that are rooted on various political and social principles. Among them are: aristocratic (monarchy), autocratic/paternalistic (dictatorial), democratic or participative, laissez-faire, and/or combination of both. 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 favored 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 organizations. 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. These styles of leadership are most likely applied in the known forms of governments around the world. Thus, discussion further may mislead the concept of leadership this research undertaking is trying to pursue.
The above discussions prove the variety of possible fields in the organization that each technique works. Individual level of significance, although, is defined. But with the presentation of facts and argument, it is safe to claim that the universality of the models is their common denominator. Several literatures probed the issue of universal application (2002; 2002; 2002). Similarly, the call for exceptional standards on ethics is common to both. In this aspect, the leadership strategies, styles and model that are successful apply in respective organizations are replicated and applied by other firms. In effect, the influence of the leader in global leadership transformation is included in the extensive responsibility they share to the international business setting. As leaders, they make international changes to which broad and multi-cultural entities respond to.
Leadership in United States
In the United States, most scholars have been able to define the context of leadership by determining the function of leaders in a company and classifying leadership into various styles. For instance, the definition of American scholar (2002) describes the leadership style of the US. It is also noted as the process of assisting the subordinates and facilitating cumulative efforts to achieve a common goal. In the US, the leadership style that has been commonly described by most scholars is the participative type of leadership. Accordingly, the American leaders are able to use this style, specifically in making decisions. (2001) emphasise 5 types of participation approaches, including the so-called quality circle, self-directed work teams, quality of work life program, scalon gain sharing plans and quality circle. These classifications have provided American organisations a model to encourage staff participation. In this research, the potentialities of the aforementioned leadership styles will also be probed.
Leadership in Japan
Japan has been noted for being an innovative leader and participative leaders. In this country, most companies adhere to the transformational type of leadership. Transformational leaders motivate others to do more than they originally intended and often even more than they thought possible. Such leaders set more challenging expectations and typically achieve higher performances. Transformational leadership is an expansion of transactional leadership. Transactional leadership emphasizes the transaction or exchange that takes place among leaders, colleagues, and followers (1992). This exchange is based on the leader discussing with others what is required and specifying the conditions and rewards these others will receive if they fulfill the requirements. Accordingly, the leadership style used in Japan is noted to be effective. This is because Japanese leadership style has enable the organization to achieve higher levels of employee motivation, commitment, delegation in terms of decision making and intrinsic job satisfaction ( 1982 , 2006). In addition, authors like (1981 ,2006) also agreed that Japanese is known to be a collectivistic culture which means that industries would highlights collective decision making as well as accumulative obligation. (1981) utilized a communicative concept to given meaning to Japanese leadership style. Herein, Japanese leaders have been able to act as efficient communicators in their respective companies. In addition, Japanese leaders make efforts in maintaining harmony in their companies.
Appropriateness of the Methodology
In order to complete the objectives of the study, the qualitative research approach will be applied. Qualitative research methods in comparison with quantitative research methods are more diverse. Myers (1997) stated that this kind of research process was “designed to help researchers understand people and the social and cultural contexts within which they live”. According to (2000), the qualitative research approach is most appropriate when conducting descriptive and exploratory study in order to quantify data that seem immeasurable, such as feelings, beliefs, and thoughts. Meanwhile, qualitative research is defined by (2003) as “a subjective approach which includes examining and reflecting on perceptions in order to gain an understanding of social and human activities” ().
In using the qualitative research approach, data is collected by such methods as watching, asking questions, and examining documents. The research variables, on the other hand, were first analyzed to provide descriptions of the factors that were relevant to the topic. The variables of the study were researched qualitatively whereas the data, situations, or facts collected were explained or correlated with other information. In sum, in this study qualitative research methods were used because the researcher attempted to construct theories that would explain the relationship of one variable to another. With this method, non-standard elements such as behavior, attitudes, opinions, and beliefs were analyzed.
Data analysis was done step by step. Every piece of information was read carefully, and the text was sub-divided into meaningful units. Information was condensed to formulate answers to the researcher’s questions. Once the data was collected and collated, the final task was the interpretation of the results. The study emphasizes that a great deal of caution was exercised in drawing conclusions from the data. Research using qualitative methods can be considered valid. In the broadest sense, validity addresses the quality of the data and the appropriateness of the methods used in carrying out the research. Although reliability and validity apply mostly to research results and conclusions, these issues were considered when the research was designed, (i.e. in the earliest stages of the process). The validity and reliability of the study, and the methodology used, were based on studies already published. Thus, it is recommended that further researches focusing in quantitative approaches are needed.
This methodology is considered appropriate in this research undertaking because it facilitates more open regulation and refinement of research ideas as the 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). Lastly, the consideration of time constraint and other phenomenological advantages is among the most beneficial characteristics of this method.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com