Abstract
Every leader’s symbolic action creates meaning. However, it is especially the symbols which leaders in a cross-cultural context use that are always reconstructed based on experience, culture, and generally accepted and practised values from a different cultural background. Accordingly, this chapter analyses the adjustment process of expatriate managers abroad; special emphasis is put on the degree to which the willingness to adjust the symbolic actions to the local cultural environment is rewarded with a higher acceptance as leader. Results show that, especially, the adjustment of language and behaviour results in a higher acceptance rate. Thus, it is argued in this chapter that leaders should carefully regard how their symbolic interactions are interpreted or comprehended by the host country workforce since the acceptance as a leader is one important aspect in order to achieve success in an international assignment.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Andres, T. D. (1985). Management by Filipino values. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.
Ang, S., van Dyne, L., Koh, C., Ng, K. Y., Templer, K. J., Tay, C., & Chandrasekar, N. A. (2007). Cultural Intelligence: Its Measurement and effects on cultural judgment and decision making, cultural adaptation and task performance. Management and Organization Review, 3(3), 335–371.
Armenakis, A., Fredenberger, W., Giles, W., Cherones, L., Feild, H., & Holley, W. (1996). Symbolism use by business turnaround change agents. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 4(2), 123–134.
Bartoelke, K. (1987). Leadership: Nothing but constructing reality by negotiations? In J. G. Hunt, B. R. Baliga, P. Dachler, & C. A. Schriesheim (Eds.), Emerging leadership vistas (pp. 151–157). Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.
Black, J., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Towards a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 291–317.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kim, K., Farh, C. I. C., & Tangirala, S. (2010). When does cross-cultural motivation enhance expatriate effectiveness? A multilevel investigation of the moderating roles of subsidiary support and cultural distance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1110–1130.
Dandridge, T., Mitroff, I., & Joyce, W. (1980). Organizational symbolism: A topic to expand organizational analysis. Academy of Management Review, 5(1), 77–82.
de Leon, C. T. (1987). Social categorisation in Philippine organisations: Values toward collective identity and management through intergroup relations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 5(1), 28–38.
Dierendonck, D. van. (2011). Servant leadership: A review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1), 3–22.
Fairholm, M. R., & Fairholm, G. W. (2009). Understanding leadership perspectives: Theoretical and practical approaches. New York, NY: Springer.
Festing, M., & Maletzky, M. (2010). Cross-cultural leadership adjustment: A multilevel framework based on the theory of structuration. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 186–200.
Guthrie, G. M. (1968). The Philippine temperament: Six perspectives on the Philippines. In G. M. Guthrie (Ed.), Philippines (pp. 49–83). Quezon City: Bookmark.
Haslberger, A. (2005). The complexities of expatriate adaptation. Human Resource Management Review, 15(2), 160–180.
Heckathorn, D. D. (1990). Collective sanctions and compliance norms: A formal theory of group mediated social control. American Sociological Review, 55(3), 366–384.
Hofstede, G. (2005). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Hollnsteiner, M. R. (1970). Reciprocity in the lowland Philippines. In F. Lynch (Ed.), Four readings on Philippine values (pp. 65–108). Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: An introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3–10.
Katz, J. E., & Sugiyama, S. (2005). Mobile phones as fashion statements: The co-creation of mobile communication’s public. Meaning, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 31(1), 63–81.
Kelly, B. E., & Bredeson, P. V. (1991). Measures of meaning in a Public and in a parochial school: Principals as symbol manager. Journal of Educational Administration, 29(3), 6–22.
Kossek, E. E., Huang, J. L., Piszczek, M. M., Fleenor, J. W., & Ruderman, M. (2015). Rating expatriate leader effectiveness in multisource feedback systems: Cultural distance and hierarchical effects. Human Resource Management, 56(1), 151–172.
Kraimer, M. L., Wayne, S. J., & Jaworski, R. (2001). Sources of support and expatriate performance: The mediating role of expatriate adjustment. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 71–99.
Littrell, R. F., Alon, I., & Chan, K. W. (2012). Regional differences in managerial leader behaviour preferences in China. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal, 19(3), 315–335.
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Boston, Mass: Unwin Hyman.
Morgan, G., Frost, P. J., & Pondy, L. R. (1983). Organizational symbolism. In L. R. Pondy, P. J. Frost, G. Morgan, & T. C. Dandridge (Eds.), Organizational symbolism (pp. 3–38). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Neuberger, O. (1995). Führen und Geführt werden. Stuttgart: Ferdinand Enke.
Nowak, C., & Linder, C. (2016). Do you know how much your expatriate costs?: An activity-based cost analysis of expatriation. Journal of Global Mobility, 4(1), 88–107.
Oguri, M., & Gudykunst, W. B. (2002). The influence of self construals and communication styles on sojourners’ psychological and sociocultural adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26(5), 577–593.
Pondy, L. R. (1978). Organizational symbolism. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Seale, C. (2007). Quality in qualitative research. In C. Seale, G. Giampetro, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 379–389). London: Sage Publications.
Selmer, J. (2007). Which is easier, adjusting to a similar or to a dissimilar culture? American business expatriates in Canada and Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 7(2), 185–201.
Shaheena, J. J. (2003). The sustainability of social capital within ethnic. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(1), 31–43.
Shay, J., & Bruce, T. (1997). Expatriate managers. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Quarterly, 38(1), 30–35.
Shenkar, O. (2012). Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1), 1–11.
Tayeb, M. (1995). The competitive advantage of nations: The role of HRM and its socio-cultural context. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(3), 588–605.
Winkler, I. (2010). Contemporary leadership theories: Enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership. Contributions to management science. Heidelberg, New York: Physica-Verlag.
Zimmermann, A., & Sparrow, P. (2007). Mutual adjustment processes in international teams. International Studies of Management & Organization, 37(3), 65–88.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Measures
I used the following indicators for the constructs. Factor loadings range between 0.584 and 0.940 and were significant at least at a p < 0.05 level.
Verbal symbolic leadership: Cronbach’s α (α) = 0.928, composite reliability (CR) = 0.949, average variance extracted (AVE) = 0.823.
(i) Adjustment of speech, (ii) mindfulness with wording, (iii) try to apply the foreign phrase, and (iv) choose metaphors I hear from my staff.
Enacted symbolic leadership: α = 0.940, CR = 0.958, AVE = 0.850
(i) Underplay dominance, (ii) back words with actions, (iii) reaction of their behaviour, and (iv) discuss their behaviour.
Material symbolic leadership: α = 0.801 0.839 0.662
(i) Technical device, (ii) status symbols, (iii) cloth, and (iv) artefacts.
Acceptance as leader: α = 0.949 CR = 0.964 AVE = 0.870
(i) Respect form respect Host Country National (HCN) workforce, (ii) recognition as leader, (iii) acceptance as leader, and (vi) HCN workforce response
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Linder, C. (2017). Symbolic Leadership in a Transnational Context: An Investigation on Leaders’ Adjustment and Acceptance. In: Muenjohn, N., McMurray, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Leadership in Transforming Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57940-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57940-9_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-57938-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-57940-9
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)