Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Societal Culture and Leadership in Germany:
At the Interface between East and West
Felix C. Brodbeck & Michael Frese
In this chapter we provide an analysis of culture and
leadership in Germany based on the GLOBE study and relevant data
from other sources.
The first section describes the German societal culture by
considering German history, politics, economy and social issues.
We begin with a historical analysis of the changing meaning of
"German" and "Germany". Then, we concentrate on the two German
Nations that emerged as a result of World War II: the former
German Democratic Republic (East Germany) and the Federal Republic
of Germany (West Germany). The German Reunification process and
its economical and societal consequences are described
subsequently. The section ends with a description of contemporary
German societal culture by considering GLOBE data from East and
West German middle managers and relevant cultural artifacts.
The second section concentrates on leadership issues and
leadership perceptions in Germany. It begins with a description of
leadership practice and research in East and West Germany. Then,
culturally endorsed perceptions of excellent leadership in East
and West Germany are described. For this, results from the GLOBE
questionnaire survey are presented and supplemented by results
from content analyses of print media, semi-structured interviews,
focus group discussions, job postings analyses and biographical
analysis of popular leaders in Germany.
2
Section I: Societal Culture
1.1 The Changing Meaning of "German" and "Germany"
The words "Deutsch" (Engl.; German) and "Deutschland" (Engl.;
Germany, German Nation) underwent considerable semantic changes in
history. Their changing meanings document the various roots of the
idea of a German Nation (cf. Berschin, 1993). Its contradictory
nature is intimately related to the dramatic societal and
political changes in Central Europe associated with World War I
and II.
In 786, "theodiscus" (Engl.; "German". Ger.; "Deutsch") is first
documented to mean the language spoken by ordinary people in
contrast to the Latin language spoken by the scholars at the court
of Karl the Great. In 1090, "diutischin liute" (Engl.; "German
People". Ger.; "Deutsches Volk") is first documented to mean the
German people that live in the East Franconian Empire. Until the
nineteenths century the somewhat more general meaning of "German"
i.e. "the people of German language and where they live" remains
unchanged. The idea of a singular German Nation (Germ.;
"Deutschland") does not appear before the sixteenth century.
Usually the plural form, "German Countries" (Germ.; "Deutsche
Lande"), is used. It means, "the people of German language and the
regions where they live". Until the nineteenth century,
"Deutschland" and "Deutsche Nation" (Engl.; German Nation) means
the geographical area inhabited by the people that speak German,
no matter to what national state the geographical area they
inhabit belongs to. In combination with "German" the word "Nation"
did not refer to the idea of a political unit or a singular state.
3
It rather meant the cultural unity of German speaking people in
various states.
During 1770 to 1830 German was one of the predominant languages
in which Central European intellectuals expressed their
humanistic, liberal and cosmopolitan ideals. However, during the
nineteenth century the cultural concept of "German" changed into a
political one, partly due to the necessity to defend German
territory in the Napoleon Wars and partly due to the German
National Movement against feudalism that resulted in the
Constitutional Convention in Frankfurt in 1848. The practical
impossibility of a German Nation as a cultural and political unit
became apparent when the German Empire was founded in 1871. Many
people of German culture and language were not part of it (e.g.
Germans in Switzerland or in Austria) and some people of other
than German culture and language formed ethnical minorities within
the geographical boarders of the German Empire (e.g. French,
Danish and Polish minorities). In order to avoid difficulties with
the term "German nationality", an Austrian Germanic Scholar
suggested in 1876 to use the ethnic principle of biological
descendent (Ger.; "vˆlkisch"). Rather quickly this concept became
popular, especially in the Wilhelmenian Period of the German
Empire (1890 - 1918).
During the first three decades of the twentieth century, the
concept of a German Nation was highly ambiguous and allowed for
interpretations in various directions. First, it could mean the
"narrow" German state that was enforced after World War I
(Weimarer Republic, 1919 - 1932). Second, it could mean the
territory of German culture, including the geographical areas that
belonged to the German Empire before World War I. Third, it could
4
mean the even greater territory inhabited by people of German
language and cultural background. And fourth, it could mean the
"extended" territory inhabited by people of German descendent. The
ideal of an "extended" German nation became more and more popular
when the ethnical and territorial interpretations of "German" were
combined ("Ein Volk, ein Reich", Engl.; "One Nation, One Empire")
in the megalomaniac political program of the "Third Reich" by
Adolf Hitler and his followers resulting in the Holocaust!
Cross-cultural research from the early sixties to the eighties
suggests the existence of a Germanic cultural cluster in Central
Europe (for a review, see Ronen & Shenkar, 1985), comprising
Austria, Switzerland and West Germany (before 1990 data from
former East Germany were seldom reported). Even though, some
cultural differences between these countries are identifiable
their citizens seem to share work attitudes and leadership
perceptions to high extend, so that they are distinguishable as a
cultural unit from other cultural regions in Europe (cf. Jago, et
al., 1993). Of particular interest in this chapter is the
comparison of the two German Nations that emerged as a result of
World War II because their citizens were socialized in two rather
different economical and ideological systems for a period of about
40 years.
1.2 The Two German Nations
As a result of the second World War and the beginning of the
cold war between the communist and the western world, two rather
different German states emerged that were devided by economic
system and ideology: The Federal Republic of Germany (FRG, Germ.;
"Bundesrepublick Deutschland", also termed West Germany), embedded
5
in the western economic system and the NATO military alliance, and
the German Democratic Republic (GDR, Germ.; "Deutsche
Demokratische Republick", also termed East Germany) embedded in
the Communist Economic System (COMCON) and the Warsaw pact. In
1949 the concept of one German Nation, meaning the territorial
unity of the two German states within the boarders that resulted
from World War II, was made part of the West German Constitution
(Germ.; "Wiedervereinigungsgebot", Engl.; "Constitutional Law of
Reunification"). In the same year the Federal Republic of Germany
(24.5.1949) and the German Democratic Republic (7.10.1949) were
founded. The constitutional "Law of Reunification" formed the
legal basis on which the German unity, initiated by the highly
symbolic act of the fall of the wall in Berlin (9.11.1989), was
executed (3.10.1990). The political and economical systems of
Germany today are basically the same as for the Federal Republic
of Germany before 1989 (see below). Thus, for the West German
citizens the world hasn't changed that much. However, the former
East German citizens were subject to dramatic changes in their
political, economical and social environment.
1.2.1 West Germany
The political system of the Federal Republic of Germany was -
and still is - a constitutional, representative and pluralistic
democracy, similar to other western democracies. In the early days
after World War II, the western allies, especially the United
States of America, took major parts in helping the West Germans to
build a modern democracy. The GARIOA scheme (Government and Relief
in Occupied Areas) and most well known the Marshall Aid (ERP, i.e.
the European Recovery Program) granted financial aid, stability
6
and favorable conditions for building a constitutional democracy
granting the basic rights of freedom of opinion, freedom of the
press, liberty, and protection of the private sphere and their
recoverability by law.
The German constitution, though not specifying any particular
economic system, constrains a completely free market economy. The
doctrine of social market economy (Germ.; "soziale
Marktwirtschaft") defines legal obligations for the government,
the trade unions and the companies for maintaining public welfare
(e.g. education, health, retirement) social justice (e.g. social
security, equal opportunities, protection of minorities), and co-
operative industrial relations (e.g. the codetermination or
industrial democracy system). A key feature of industrial
relations is exemplified in the wage bargaining process. It is
simple in structure (only two partners, one trade union and one
employer), it is predictable (a time-table of industries and
states is sequentially followed) and it is stable (wage bargaining
has the force of law, and strikes inevitably occur in particular
seasons of the year, cf. Lawrence, 1994). Another key feature of
industrial relations is the system of codetermination that is
regulated by law. It grants mutual control and participation for
employees by defining rights and duties for worker representatives
in the companies¥ supervisory boards, for labor director in the
companies¥ executive committees, and for the elected employee
representatives on the work council. The social market economy is
one important factor for the stable and solid economical and
social developments in Germany. To some foreigners this system
appears to be overburdened with formal procedures. However, the
strengths are its high reliability, straight forwardness, and
7
legally enforced procedural justice. All these criteria meet the
formal and task oriented interaction style maintained in West
German companies (Lawrence, 1994).
1.2.2 Former East Germany
The constitution of the German Democratic Republic (according to
its revision from 7.10.1974) described a socialistic state of
workers and farmers under leadership of the marxistic-leninistic
unitary party, SED (Germ.; "Sozialistische Einheistpartei
Deutschland). Legally, this party was constructed according to the
principle of "democratic centralism", practically centralism
dominated. The polit-office, and its first secretary, decided
about the political, economical, educational and cultural life in
former East Germany by controlling the trade unions (the so called
"transmission belt of the party") in which 95 percent of German
work force were members, the German youth organization (FDJ) in
which about 70% of German 14-17 year olds were organized, the
people's own companies (VEBs and Combines), the educational system
(University entry was based on a subject quota basis, graduates
were located to jobs by the state) and the media (e.g. no foreign
print media, TV or Radio was officially allowed to be consumed).
The basic rights, freedom of opinion, freedom of the press,
liberty, and protection of the private sphere were constitutional,
however, practically they were not recoverable by law. In
contrast, the basic social rights, the right to work, the right
for health protection and the right for education were highly
estimated in theory and in practice.
8
The planned economy system determined the level of productivity
to be fulfilled by the VEBs and the aggregates of VEBs (Combines)
in all industries. Research and development activities were also
performed in VEBs and Combines. The structure was centralist,
meaning groups of Combines reported to industry ministers, the
ministers in turn reported to the Plan Commission which was an
organ of the SED polit-office. The planned market was controlled
the reverse way, the Plan Commission defined the expected
productivity output per industry and the Combines and VEBs had to
fulfill the plan. About 98% of the industries were "publicly
owned" in this manner, and only some private economy was allowed
for a very small proportion of entrepreneurs (e.g. craftsman) and
private gardeners.
1.3 The German Reunification
As a result of the German Reunification in 1990 the former
German Democratic Republic was no longer part of the COMCON and
the Warsaw Pact. It became part of the Federal Republic of
Germany. The two German nations did not merge, rather did West
Germany take over in all respects. As a consequence, the
productivity level of East German companies dropped drastically
and unemployment - unknown in the former East-Germany - raised
strongly. A significant problem was the privatization of the state
owned VEBs and Combines. Until the end of 1994 more than 20.000
organizations were transformed. From 1991 to 1995 West Germany
transferred about 1.000 Billion DM (about 650 Billion US $) to
East Germany, from which 25% percent went into the economy and 11%
were spent for developing infrastructure (e.g. transport,
telecommunications etc.). The largest proportion, however, went
9
into unemployment, health care and social welfare fonds. The
German Reunification exhausted the West German economy and private
households to considerable extend. However, the markedly lower
income level of East Germans as compared to West Germans (47% in
1991; 67% in 1994), justified by the lower productivity levels in
East Germany, created problems of differential social status
between East and West Germans and feelings of unfairness on part
of the East Germans.
The cultural change and social psychological consequences of the
German Reunification mainly concern the East Germans. They carried
the primary share of change ("modernization shock"). On the one
hand, they gained the basic constitutional rights as they are
practically implemented in western democratic societies and they
could hope that their living standard would raise in the near
future. On the other hand, the process of reunification lead to
disillusionment and to experiences of high uncertainty.
The procedure of privatization resulted in deindustrialization
and mass unemployment in many East German regions. Not seldom did
criminal activities and management errors result in destruction of
healthy organizations. The mass restitution of formerly
expropriated possession (2.7 million titles had to be processed)
created feelings of injustice. The enormous transfer of money to
East Germany along with a significant stagnation in economical and
financial growth created feelings of disillusionment and
helplessness, on both sides. Women, who were highly integrated in
the former East German work force, were more and more forced into
unemployment and family work (e.g. the well developed East German
Kindergarden system was deconstructed). One of the darkest
chapters in East German history was made public and millions of
10
secret personal files collected and used by the former East German
state security system (Germ.; Staatssicherheit) were released to
the people that were subject to prosecution. Thus, in addition to
the modernization shock, many East Germans learned that their best
friends, neighbors, co-workers or whoever were reporting highly
private and personal details to the "Staatsicherheit". In short,
the whole past and future life of many East Germans was questioned
- for some of them totally and virtually over night.
The dramatic changes in East Germany have not lead to instant
adaptation of the western culture. Expressions of an East German
cultural identity can be seen in their voting behavior. The PDS
party, a successor of the former SED, was elected in the German
Federal Parliament and in all of the East German state
parliaments, not so, however, in the West German state
parliaments. Furthermore, in our survey of about 400 West German
and 50 East German middle level managers, the East German managers
tend to disagree with questionnaire statements like, "Citizens of
the former East Germany should learn as quickly as possible from
West Germans", West German managers tend to agree. On the other
side, East German managers tend to agree to statements like
"Citizens of the former East Germany should consider the strengths
of the former East German culture", West German managers tend to
disagree.
An East versus West polarization became visible, most strongly
during the first few years of the Reunification process.
Stereotyped attributions of responsibility for the social and
economical problems were often expressed in public media. West
Germans stereotyped East Germans as being lazy, unproductive and
as having a mentality of "passively taking from but not actively
11
giving to society". On the other hand, East Germans stereotyped
West Germans as pretending to know everything better, but not
actually knowing it better, as highly individualistic and as less
concerned with others. Today, these stereotypes are less often
expressed in public - as far as we can perceive it from our West
German perspective.
12
1.4 Germany Today
Today, Germany is the country with the highest population in
the European Union (81 million citizens). About 9% are foreigners
(mainly from Turkey, former Yugoslavia, Italy, Greece and Poland).
About 28 million confess to the Roman Catholic church, 28 million
to the Protestant churches, and about 2 million are Muslim. The
Gross National Productivity of Germany ranked on the third to
fifths positions in the world during the last few decades, and the
life standard is one of the highest in the world. The former West
Germany was, and the reunited Germany is, a pluralistic,
federalist, liberal, democratic, social market oriented modern
western society. Economically and politically, it is one of the
leading countries in the European Union. And, its central
position, at the interface between East and West Europe, is not
only geographically rooted but also historically and politically.
As was described above, historically there is no one-to-one
relationship between the German Nation and the German Culture.
There seems to be a Germanic cultural cluster identifiable in
Central Europe, mainly comprising Switzerland, Austria, and
Germany (e.g. Ronen & Shenkar, 1984). Therefore, the reader is
advised to refer to the country chapters from German speaking
Switzerland and Austria (***this volume) for more detailed
information about these countries¥ societal culture and leadership
perceptions.
East and West Germans in the reunited Germany may constitute
somewhat different societal cultures due to the differential
political, economical and societal environments they lived during
the 40 years of the cold war. Thus, they may perceive their
current environment differently and they may prefer different
13
cultural values as a consequence of their differential
experiences. However, one should keep in mind, that the process of
Reunification created an asymmetric situation. The reunification
was not a cultural merger, instead, the East German system was
substituted by the West German system - virtually over night.
Thus, the East Germans¥s views about the reunited Germany may be
also determined by what was above described as the "modernization
shock". In contrast, the West German respondents mainly represent
the cultural perceptions and values of the West German society
dominating after the Reunification.
1.5 The GLOBE Dimensions of Societal Culture
In the GLOBE research program, societal culture is
operationally defined by measuring the agreement among members of
a collective with respect to manifestations of commonly
experienced, observed and reported practices of entities such as
families, schools, work organizations, economic and legal systems,
political institutions, ideological belief systems and ethnic
heritage. Two emphases are distinguished, one is on values
(Kluckholm & Strodtbeck, 1961), measured by indicators assessing
"what should be", the other emphasis is on perceptions of modal
practices, measured by indicators assessing "what is" or "what
are" common behaviors, prescriptions and institutional practices.
Value-Belief theories of culture suggest that the commonly
shared values and beliefs held by members of a collective (e.g. an
organization, a nation, a cultural region) influence the behavior
of individuals, groups and institutions, and the degree to which
the behavior shown is viewed as legitimate, acceptable and
effective (Hofstede, 1980; Triandis, 1995). In accord with
14
Hofstede¥s work, GLOBE investigates the cultural dimensions of
Collectivism, Uncertainty Avoidance, Power Stratification and
Masculinity. Collectivism refers to the tendency of people to work
in groups and to identify with the larger social group to which
they belong, with the opposite of this being Individualism. In
GLOBE, the Collectivism scale from Triandis (1995) is used because
in recent studies the unidimensional nature of Hofstede's
dimension of Individualism - Collectivism has been criticized (cf.
Triandis, 1993). Uncertainty Avoidance refers to a culture's
tolerance of ambiguity. Power Stratification refers to the way
people deal with inequalities among themselves. Hofstede¥s
Masculinity dimension, the degree to which differential role
expectations are associated with gender, is substituted as a
result of the GLOBE research by Gender Egalitarianism and
Assertiveness (cf. House, et al., 1998). In addition to these five
scales, three dimensions relevant to cultural environments are
derived from McClelland's (1961, 1985) theories of implicit human
motivation and economic development: Humane Orientation,
Performance Orientation and Future Orientation. The altogether
eight societal level cultural dimensions were measured with two
different emphases ("as is" versus "should be") by using the
standardized GLOBE questionnaire (House et al., 1998).
1.6 Sample and Procedure
The samples for East and West Germany were drawn during the
years 1995 and 1996. They comprise middle managers in 18 companies
from three different industries (Food, Finance,
Telecommunications). Respondents were either citizens of the
former East Germany (N = 53, average age 46 years, 30% women) or
15
citizens of the former West Germany (N = 403, average age 42
years, 19% women).
The GLOBE standard questionnaire was used (cf. House et al.,
1998). Subjects were asked to rate statements about societal
culture (likert type scales from one to seven) while considering
reunited contemporary Germany. Furthermore, they were asked to
indicate on a rating scale from one to seven how strongly each of
about 100 leadership attributes facilitates or inhibits
outstanding leadership. Results about the societal culture in East
and West Germany are reported next. Results about perceptions of
excellent leadership are reported in the second section of this
chapter.
1.7 Dimensions of Societal Culture in East and West Germany
Figure 1a presents data for the cultural dimensions "As is".
Figure 1b presents data for the cultural dimensions "Should be".
In each Figure, East and West Germany¥s country means and their
positioning relative to each other and to the distribution of all
61 countries sampled by GLOBE are presented with Box-plot
statistics. A Boxplot graphically displays the summary statistics
of a distribution, its median (vertical center line), quartiles (<
25%, 25% - 50%, 50% - 75%, > 75%) and the largest and lowest
observed values that aren't outlier or extreme values (whiskers).
_____________________________
Figures 1a and 1b about here
_____________________________
For each dimension of societal culture "As is" and "Should be"
results for East and West Germany are compared to the
characteristics of the total sample of N = 61 countries (the exact
16
country mean values per dimension and the criteria for meaningful
differences between East and West Germany are described in
Appendix 1). Additional data from unobtrusive measures about
economical, political and societal characteristics of former East
and West Germany are supplemented for interpretative purposes.
1.7.1 Collectivism versus Individualism
The Triandis Collectivism scale measures the degree to which
people in society are perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should
be") to work in groups and to identify with the larger social
group to which they belong, with the opposite of this being
Individualism (High values = Collective Orientation). Results
obtained by the GLOBE study indicate that the East Germans (rank
46) perceive higher collectivism ("As is") than the West Germans
(rank 55) do (see Figure 1a). Both rank near or below the 25th
percentile which indicates a common perception of comparatively
low collectivism. Furthermore, East and West Germans rate
Collectivism "Should be" higher than Collectivism "As is". Thus,
in both parts of Germany there is an expectation of more
collectivism than is perceived as the current status quo. However,
when compared to all other countries the Collectivism "Should be"
rankings are again low (East: rank 52, West: rank 53, both are
below the 25th percentile, see Figure 1b).
The family is considered to be a central unit of German society
and it is specifically protected by law (e.g. tax reductions).
Help among family members and neighbors (especially in rural
areas) is quite common. However, family and neighbor help is not
perceived as a substitute for the institutionalized support
Germans are expecting from the social welfare system. Since the
17
60¥s the three to four person family predominates. Grandparents,
especially in industrialized regions, tended to not be part of an
extended family. Today, as more women are working outside the
family home, due to the fact that single income families cannot
reach high economical status anymore, grandparents are often
welcomed resources of child care. However, when family members are
not available, which is quite common in the industrialized areas,
professional services are sought, e.g. day care facilities,
household services and the like. In former East Germany, public
child and day care was 100% delivered because women were more
strongly integrated in the work force than in former West Germany.
However, this high standard was reduced to the lower West German
standards during reunification. In summary, the GLOBE results and
the cultural artifacts described speak to an individualistic
German society which relies mainly on an institutionalized social
welfare system.
1.7.2 Uncertainty Avoidance
Uncertainty Avoidance measures the degree to which people in a
society are perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to rely
on social norms and procedures to alleviate the unpredictability
of future events (Low values = tolerant of uncertainty; High
values = uncertainty avoiding). The GLOBE data indicates that East
and West Germans perceive their society to by very high in
Uncertainty Avoidance "As is" (East: rank 7, West: rank 5, both
are above the 75th percentile, see Figure 1a). And, both parts of
Germany aspire lower levels of Uncertainty Avoidance (West: rank
59, East, 52, both are below the 25th percentile, see Figure 1b).
The discrepancies between "As is" and "Should be" measures of
18
Uncertainty Avoidance in both parts of Germany are among the
highest compared to all other countries. Generally, societies with
high Uncertainty Avoidance (e.g. Switzerland, Sweden, Finland,
Austria, Germany, Great Britain) seem to share a Protestant work
ethic (e.g. differed gratification pattern) and are highly
developed in economy and public welfare.
In Germany, attempts to reduce the unpredictability of future
events based on formal principles and rules are quite common. For
instance, insurance policies for every possible event in life are
widely offered and consumed. The driving force of high uncertainty
avoidance seems to be a high need for economic security and
financial protection against unforeseen future events, rather than
traditional and religious factors. Both major churches in West
Germany, catholic and Protestant, are losing members. Inspection
of singular scale items reveals the strongest discrepancies
between "As is" and "Should be" for the following items to which
Germans tend to agree moderately to strongly: "In this society
people lead highly structured lives with few unexpected events"
("As is") versus, "I believe that a person who leads a structured
life that has few unexpected events is missing a lot of
excitement." ("Should be"); And, "Our society has rules and laws
to cover almost all situations" ("As is") versus, "I believe that
society should have rules or laws to cover few situations."
("Should be"). We have the impression that the discrepancies
between Uncertainty Avoidance "As is" and "Should be" do not
necessarily reflect strong ambitions to change the current status
quo of high uncertainty avoidance. Instead, the "Should be" items
seem to allow German respondents to express the psychological
costs involved when high uncertainty avoidance is maximally
19
fulfilled. These costs seem to be feelings of less excitement and
the feeling of being controlled by public regulations. The
quantitative data of GLOBE does not allow to determine the
preferences in a forced choice situation, e.g. by asking "Either
security or excitement, what do you prefer?". We assume, the
answer in East and West Germany is a clear preference for
security.
1.7.3 Gender Egalitarianism and Assertiveness
Gender Differentiation measures the degree to which a society
is perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to minimize
gender role differences (Low values = emphasis on male role; High
values = emphasis on gender equality). The Non-Assertiveness scale
measures the degree to which a society is perceived ("As is") and
expected ("Should be") to discourage decisive and assertive
individual conduct (High values = low Assertiveness). The results
obtained by the GLOBE study indicate that in East and West Germany
female role equality "As is" (East: rank 47, West: rank 44) and
Non-Assertiveness (East: rank 52, West: rank 49) are perceived to
be low (below or near the 25th percentile) as compared to other
countries (see Figure 1a). In sharp contrast is Germany's position
when the respective cultural values are measured. The ranking for
Gender Egalitarianism "Should be" (East: rank 14, West: rank 15)
and Non-Assertiveness "Should be" (East: rank 17, West: rank 15)
is much higher than for most of the other countries (near the 75th
percentile, see Figure 1b). Thus, the trend for an ideally less
sexist and less assertive society is strongly pronounced in both
parts of Germany.
20
The consideration of Gender Equality is rather high in Germany,
it has been an issue of public concern for at least two decades by
now: There is a comparatively "high" number of female middle
managers and politicians in higher positions (about 20%); Each
major company and state institution employees "Frauenbeauftragte"
(women's commissioners) who offer services specifically for women;
Professional equal opportunities are granted by law (e.g. there is
a legal requirement to prefer female candidates from equally
qualified job applicants); There are special financial programs to
support women (e.g. fellowships for single mothers). Germany's
rather low scores in the "As is" measures, on the one hand, and
high scores in the "Should be" measures of Gender Equality and
"Non-Assertiveness", on the other hand, seem to be an expression
of a critical attitude with high value standards in mind, rather
than an expression of an unquestioned male dominated assertive
society.
Interestingly, both female and male respondents agree on the
low values of the "As is" measures, however, the female
respondents display significantly more ambition (higher scores) in
the "Should be" measures of Gender Equality and Non-assertiveness
than the male respondents do.
1.7.4 Humane Orientation
Humane Orientation measures the degree to which a society is
perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to encourage and
reward individuals for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring,
and kind to others. For the "As is" - dimension the ranking of
East and West-Germany is remarkably low (East: 56, West: rank 61,
below the 25th percentile, see Figure 1a). As in all other
21
countries, also German's want their society to be more humane than
they perceive it to be. The Humane Orientation "Should be"
measures are much higher than the "As is" measures. However, the
"Should be" measure in both parts of Germany do not rank
particularly high as compared to the other countries (East: rank
32, West: rank 30, near the 50th percentile, see Figure 1b).
The particular aspects measured by the GLOBE scale "Humane
Orientation" need further consideration. The GLOBE items that
operationalize Humane Orientation address mainly pro-social
behavior in interpersonal situations ("concern about others",
"tolerance of errors", "being generous", "being friendly", "being
sensitive towards others"). This, however, is not the predominant
mode of social interaction in Germany, neither at work nor in
public. In both contexts a more formal, task oriented and straight
forward interaction style is used (e.g. as compared to the US
Americans or the British people). This doesn't mean that the
Germans are generally ruthless or inhumane. Instead we would say,
they express high standards of humane values in an interpersonal
distanced way. There are many public institutions that serve
humane functions, possibly a consequence of high uncertainty
avoidance (see above). Many of these institutions are financed by
income taxes and further insurance systems. For instance, the
percentage of income that goes into the obligatory health,
unemployment and retirement insurances sums up to an average of
about 30 to 35% of the total private income. Thus, high amounts of
private money are devoted to social security from which all
benefit equally, no matter how much money they can contribute
(social contract).
22
There is a strong belief in social justice (and also in the law
system) and in the institutionalized public welfare system
(German: Gemeinwohl, Wohlfahrt). Handicapped, homeless, jobless
and various low income class receive special public support to
provide for a decent life. It is not seldom that for jobless
people it is more attractive to live on the social welfare than to
work in a job with low income. There is a law to favor handicapped
when applicants for the same job are equally qualified. Another
example of the distanced and institutionalized way to treat
interpersonal relationships is the favored use of the courts and
other formal procedures to settle personal disputes. It seems that
personal suffer and conflict is sought to be treated by some
institutionalized program, instead of interpersonal conduct and
private initiative. However, not seldom this situation creates the
belief, especially in industrialized regions, that one of the
manifold public institutions is "responsible" to care for social
problems and not oneself.
Traditionally, social welfare used to be the leading principle
in West German social politics since 1949. Currently, this
fundamental principle seems to be seriously endangered, mainly due
to economical pressure (e.g. high unemployment rate, high depth
rate, high labor cost, high health care costs, high contributions
for the EU).
1.7.5 Performance Orientation
Performance Orientation measures the degree to which a society
is perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to encourage and
reward its members for performance improvement and excellence. The
GLOBE quantitative results indicate that East Germans (rank 33)
23
and West Germans (rank 22) perceive moderate to high Performance
Orientation ("As is"). West Germany's results are in line with
formal performance appraisal system to be found in most
organizations, with an educational system that is performance
oriented and social justice oriented. On the one side, high
performance is positively acknowledged (e.g. by rewards),
attractive University courses, e.g. medicine, psychology, are only
available with excellent grades. On the other side, primary and
higher education (e.g. University level) are cost free and
governmental fellowships are given to all eligible persons who
cannot afford higher education. The middle class people in West
Germany are highly motivated to support their children's careers
for a better living. The sports system is competitive and publicly
well supported.
Performance Orientation ("As is") is perceived by East Germans
to be somewhat lower as compared to West Germans. For East Germans
differences in perception of the "As is" culture as compared to
West Germans may be attributable to their pre-reunification
experience with the communist regime or to their post-
reunification experiences. In particular, the social and
economical disadvantages of East Germans (e.g. lower wages, more
difficulties to make a career in the western system) resulted in
feelings of a lack of social justice. This can explain the more
pessimistic perception of societal Performance Orientation by
East-Germans. They may suspect that in the West German culture
other factors than pure individual performance determine social
status.
Both, West and East Germans value higher levels of Performance
Orientation ("Should be") as compared to what they perceive (n
24
("As is"). The discrepancy between the "As is" and "Should be"
measures is about the magnitude than for most of the other
countries. East Germans and West Germans seem to value Performance
Orientation "Should be" similarly. Although in former East
Germany, performance appraisal was mainly based on plan
fulfillment of some collective entity (e.g. work groups, VEBs),
individual achievements seemed to be highly important for the
individual self-esteem. Needs for individual liberty and free
development were usually not acknowledged in the official politics
of communist ideological background. However, the general
principle of high performance orientation, though mostly regulated
by principles of a centralist planned economy system, was also
dominant in the East German society. Excellence at school and
universities was rewarded and supported, however, it was not the
only factor for career accomplishments. Freedom of job choice was
not practiced and successful career was dependent on showing the
"correct" political attitude at the appropriate time.
1.7.6 Future Orientation
Future Orientation measures the degree to which a society is
perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to encourage and
reward future-oriented behaviors such as planning, investing in
the future, and delaying gratification. The GLOBE results indicate
that West Germans¥ perceptions are among the highest ranking
countries (rank 12, above the 75th percentile). In contrast, based
on the East Germans¥ perceptions a mid position becomes evident
(rank 24, near the 50th percentile). Both, East and West Germans¥
expectations about Future Orientation are higher than their
perception of the "As is" Future Orientation. However, the
25
differences between "As is" and "Should be" measures is much less
pronounced in the two German cultures than in most of the other
countries. It seems, that in both parts of Germany skepticism
about the future is high when compared to all other nations
sampled in the GLOBE study.
For Future Orientation ("Should be") West Germans are
positioned only on rank 57 (below the 25th percentile), East
Germans rank on the 42nd position (between 25th and 50th
percentile). East Germans seem to aspire somewhat higher levels of
Future Orientation than West Germans do. Traditionally, East and
West Germans emphasize the future rather than the present or the
past. Growth in economy was perceived as a national strength since
the West German "Wirtschaftswunder" in the 50¥s and 60¥s. The
East-German's leading economy in the COMCON, from the late sixties
to the beginning eighties, was also considered as a national
strength. Since the early 80¥s, East and West Germany were
suffering reduced economical growth rates. Additional economical
burden resulted from the Reunification. Especially the West
Germans became more skeptical about the future. The situation for
the East Germans is different. Their living standard improved
considerably, and they haven't reached yet the status of their
primary comparison reference, the West Germans. This can explain
their somewhat higher Future Orientation.
1.7.7 Power Stratification
Power Distance measures the degree to which a society is
perceived ("As is") and expected ("Should be") to share power
unequally (High values = greater Power Distance). For the "As is"
- dimension West Germans perceive moderate levels of Power
26
Distance (rank 30, around the 50th percentile, see Figure 1a). In
contrast, according to the East Germans, the reunited Germany is
to be positioned among the highest ranking countries (rank 15,
above the 75th percentile). Both, East and West Germans expect low
Power Stratification ("Should be"), as respondents from all other
countries do as well (see Figure 1b).
East Germans tend to agree to the following Power Distance ("As
is") statements, "In this society a person's influence is based
primarily on the authority of ones position", "In this society,
followers are expected to obey their leaders without questions".
West Germans, in the average, neither agree nor disagree to the
same statements. The finding that East and West Germany differ in
the "As is" measure and not in the "Should be" measure of Power
Distance speaks to differential perceptions of power
relationships. East German respondents seem to perceive the
contemporary German society from a somewhat lower social status,
to which they do not agree. This cultural stratification is
reflected in our demographic data. When comparing East and West
German respondents that are located on the same hierarchical
level, East German respondents are significantly more experienced,
older and longer trained managers than their West German
counterparts. It is known that the East German "managerial"
establishment was mainly substituted by West German managers, and
that East German managers, if they remained in their company,
where downgraded because their education and experience did not
match the new affordances of a western economy.
In the West German society, Power Stratification has been
considerably reduced over the last five decades, especially due to
Anglo American influence in the early days after World War II. The
27
liberalization movements in the 60th, triggered by the student
revolt, further introduced more tolerance and social equality into
the West German culture. And, last but not least, industrial
modernization (e.g. group work, lean management, bottom up flow,
total quality management, organizational learning) has reached the
public sector, middle sized organizations and family companies.
Thus, the old fashioned hierarchical systems, e.g. indicated by
stratified position levels and job titles, that have survived to
some degree in the public sector and in business with long lasting
traditions (e.g. finance, insurance companies) have been changing
recently. No similar developments took place in former East
Germany. However, the question, whether the East Germans¥s
perception of high Power Distance for contemporary Germany is an
expression of their inherited societal cultural or a reaction to
their underprivileged status in the reunited Germany remains open.
1.7.8 Stocktaking
The measures of societal culture used in the GLOBE study
indicate that East and West Germans concordantly perceive the
reunited Germany to be a society that is very high in uncertainty
avoidance. Gender Equality and Non-Assertiveness are critically
perceived (low values), however, the respective cultural values,
expressed in the respective "Should be"-scales, are clearly
favoring high Gender Equality and Non-Assertiveness. East and West
Germans concordantly perceive and expect the reunited Germany to
be high in Individualism and to be low in (interpersonal) humane
orientation. East and West Germans perceive moderate to high
levels of Performance and Future Orientation which is consistent
with each country's high economic profile of the past decades
28
within its respective economical context. However, the values of
Future Orientation ("Should be") seem to be lower as compared to
the scores of all Nations sampled by GLOBE. Germany¥s currently
predominating orientation towards the present is possibly a
reaction to the manifold problems associated with reduced economic
growth in the eighties and nineties, and to the reunification.
Germany seems to be in a phase of critical self reflection. For
instance, it is questioned in public whether the excellent social
welfare system is still affordable. Furthermore, skepticism of
uncontrollable future events, e.g. the increase of global
competition and the substitution of the solid Deutschmark by the
European currency system, is publicly expressed.
Significant differences between East and West German
respondents are visible for the relationship between perceived
("As is") and expected ("Should be") Future Orientation. On the
one hand, East Germans perceive Future Orientation ("As is") in
the German society more critically (lower values) than West
Germans do. On the other hand, East Germans value higher levels of
Future Orientation ("Should be") than West Germans do. High Future
Orientation ("Should be") is typical for societies that hope to
benefit from future developments (e.g. because it can't get worse,
or an optimistic view is justifiable). This hope seems to be more
present for East Germans than for West Germans. East Germans use
the West Germans higher living standard as an upward comparison
reference. West Germans don't have this option. They are more
skeptical about the future and more inclined to preserve the
present status quo.
Another finding is that East Germans perceive higher levels of
Power Stratification ("As is") than West Germans do. On the one
29
hand, this finding can be attributed to the reunification process
which resulted in lower economical and social status for East
Germans as compared to West Germans. Therefore, East Germans
perceive the "new hierarchies" from a somewhat lower and less
favorable position. On the other hand, the finding can also be
attributed to differences in cultural inheritage. The 40 years of
a centralist communist regime hindered East Germans to
institutionalize participative structures across hierarchical
levels (e.g. no codetermination system, no independent trade
unions, no liberalization movement in the sixties). And, the
former communist system, which theoretically should have
introduced a sense of equality across hierarchies, was in fact a
monopoly hierarchy of the political elite. Thus, the old fashioned
concept of a centralist hierarchy may have survived.
30
Section 2: Leadership
2.1 Leadership Practice and Research in Germany
Leadership practice and research in Germany can be classified
into three phases: First, the classic period of economical growth
and strength for West Germany as one of the leading economies in
the world, and for East Germany as the leading economy in the
COMCON. Second, the raise of post-materialistic values and the
intake of Anglo-American management philosophies in West Germany,
as compared to stagnation in East Germany. Third, the period of
mismatch between East and West German approaches to work and
leadership after the reunification.
2.1.1 The West German Approach to Leadership
Lawrence (1994) presents a concise and lucid non-German view of
the classic leadership period in West Germany based on empirical
research from the sixties to the eighties. He comes to the
following conclusions (p. 148):
- the interaction style in German companies is formal,
- the informal system is relatively weak,
- management is neither bureaucratic nor authoritarian,
- technical education predominates management training
- specialist rather than generalist management predominates
- "Technik" is emphasized as both means and end.
Lawrence (1994) perceives the underlying single minded brand of
management, "Well - made products will be eagerly bought" (p.
149), to be one of the major determinants of the success of post -
war West Germany.
31
In the period during the eighties and early nineties, West
German leadership research was concerned with the changing
personal values in the work force (from materialistic to post
materialistic values) and their consequences for leadership
practices and style (Rosenstiel, 1995). The more traditional work
values, e.g. fulfillment of materialistic needs, discipline and
orderliness declined and values such as self-fulfillment, life
satisfaction and personal growth became more popular (Rosenstiel,
1995; Zander, 1995; Maier, 1990). Therefore, in this period,
generalist rather than specialist managerial competencies, as they
have been trained for decades in the Anglo-American world, were
more strongly emphasized (e.g. social competency, delegation,
participation, motivating, inspiring, marketing, customer
orientation, c.f. Regnet, 1995, Lawrence, 1994; Windieck, 1990).
2.1.2 The East German Approach to Leadership
The major requirement for East German leaders was educating the
work force in the political-ideological doctrines of a socialistic
society (Hiebsch & Vorwerg, 1978; Zwarg, 1995). Some empirical
leadership research is reported by Hiebsch and Vorwerg (1971).
They describe factor analyses of leadership attributes that result
in three main psychological requirements for East German leaders:
First, "interpersonal cooperative tasks", second, "technical
cooperative tasks", and third, "political-ideological maturity".
East German leadership research was officially cut down at the
eighth SED-Parteitag in 1971 because leadership was perceived to
be an intimate and exclusive task of the SED (Zwarg, 1995).
Leadership requirements in East German VEBs can be
reconstructed to some degree on the basis of the major differences
32
to western companies. On the on side, VEBs were freed from
strategic and marketing tasks, from constructing distribution
systems, new product development, quality management and even from
making profit. All these tasks, except for the last one, were
substituted by the Plan Commission. On the other side, the VEBs
had to overcome all sorts of difficulties for maintaining simple
production. The plan to fulfill was often too demanding, raw
material was frequently lacking, reserve parts for the machinery
were not available, absenteeism rates were high, replacement of
poor workers was practically impossible, and the work force
discipline was poor, partly due to the high expenditures for
everyday life ("the prevailing ethos was one of bureaucratic
inefficiency", c.f. Lawrence, 1994).
The work of East German leaders with their employees was by no
means related to the requirements of the market. Management in the
VEB was mainly an implementation and maintenance task rather than
initiation and self contained goal setting. Furthermore, East
German leaders were less powerful than their West German
counterparts. On the one side, they were perceived as "primus
inter pares", due to the communist ideology. On the other side,
they were not able to decide at their own discretion. The strong
centralization of decision making lead to hierarchical thinking
and to low inclination to take and to delegate responsibility. The
so called "durchstellen" (Engl.; "relays") was the primary mode of
leadership conduct in VEBs (Zwarg, 1995). The centralist system
required an authoritarian leadership style that preserved power
and discipline. Thus, the leader was mainly a servant to enforce
the decisions made by the SED. The decreasing acceptance for the
SED politics during the eighties was also reflected in a
33
decreasing respect and trust for East German leaders, as Zwarg
(1995) describes it.
2.1.3 Comparative Research about Work Attitudes and Leadership
Styles
The post reunification period of leadership research was
characterized by comparisons between East and West German work
attitudes and leadership styles. The main purpose was to develop
management techniques that facilitate the integration and
activation of the East German work force within the West German
system.
In several comparative studies investigating work attitudes the
value systems in East and West Germany were found to be remarkably
similar (Heyse, 1994; Macharzina, 1993; Boehnke, Dettenborn,
Horstmann, & Schwartz, 1994). According to our own results
reported in the first section of this chapter, similarities in
work attitudes between East and West Germany are high for the
majority of the eight cultural dimensions measured. In a study
conducted shortly after the German Reunification in 1991,
technical competency and task orientation were found to be
leadership values that predominate in both, East and West German
companies (Wuppertaler Kreis, 1992). However, for the West German
respondents, generalist management competencies (e.g. motivation,
delegation, participation) were found to be more important
leadership attributes than for the East German respondents.
Schultz-Gambard and Altschuh (1993) report East German managers
to score higher in authority orientation and compliance than West
Germans do. This corresponds with our findings of East Germans to
score higher on perceptions of Power Distance ("As is").
34
Furthermore, Schultz-Gambard and Altschuh (1993) report East
German managers to score lower in competition and independence as
compared to West German managers. This finding corresponds with
our finding of lower Individualism in East Germany ("As is").
However, we found no differences for the Power Distance "Should
be" scale and the Individualism-Collectivism "Should be" scale.
Since the "Should be" scales are supposed to measure cultural
values, the differences found by Schultz-Gambard and Altshuh
(1993) might me a result of perceptional differences that are more
likely to result from post reunification differences in status and
perspectives on society.
In a study reported by Maier and his coworkers (1994) it was
found that materialistic values and the need for job security are
more pronounced for East than for West German management students.
These findings remained stable in a two year follow up study, when
the respondents had made some work experiences (Rappensberger and
Maier, 1998). Frese, Kring, Soose and Zempel (1996) demonstrated
in a longitudinal study with a representative sample, that
personal initiative, a concept akin to entrepreneurschip and
organizational spontaneity, is lower in East Germany as compared
to West Germany. Based on repeated measurement analyses (three
time periods within a two year period) the differences in personal
initiative were found to be determined by occupational
socialization (for the theoretical concept, see Frese, 1982). This
evidence speaks to the assumption that the bureaucratic socialism
results in work conditions (e.g. less job control and job
complexity) that constrain people to express and develop
initiative at work.
35
2.1.4 Stocktaking
So far, we have offered a characterization of societal culture
and leadership suggesting that:
- In both parts of Germany, high Individualism and economic
security are important societal values. Contemporary there is
an orientation towards the present (low Future Orientation).
The interactive style, at work and in public, is formal and
distanced rather than "interpersonal" humane oriented. And,
technical competency and task/product commitment are among the
main leadership values.
- In West Germany post-materialistic values predominate,
individualism is somewhat higher, and the orientation towards
the present is more pronounced than in East Germany. Leadership
values increasingly comprise generalist management
competencies, such as participation, motivation, team
orientation and delegation.
- In East Germany, job security is of particular importance,
materialistic values predominate and personal initiative is
significantly lower than in West Germany. Leadership values
comprise mainly specialist management competencies, high
authority orientation and low participation.
2.2 Perceptions of Excellent Leadership in East and West Germany
The remaining part of the chapter deals with leadership
perceptions and their association with societal culture and
leadership practice in East and West Germany. First, we give a
theoretical introduction to the concept of leadership perception.
Then we present the GLOBE results about perceptions of excellent
leadership by East and West German middle managers. Further
36
results are presented, based on content analysis of print media,
semi-structured interviews, focus group discussion, analysis of
job announcements and biographical documentation about popular
German leaders.
37
2.2.1 Leadership Perception
Shaw's (1990) theoretical work suggests the content of
preexisting leadership perceptions and expectations to be one
potential source of variance across cultures. The most
characteristic or prototypical attributes of a leader in one
culture may be very differently perceived in another culture. The
human information processor uses context specific implicit
theories (i.e. schemas or prototypes) to categorize perceptions
and to derive expectations and predictions. Cross cultural theory
suggests that implicit theories are codetermined by cultural
socialization.
For the context of leadership, implicit theories about traits
and behaviors of leaders have been shown to exist (cf. Lord &
Maher, 1991). They are used to distinguish leaders from non-
leaders, effective from ineffective and good from evil leaders.
The labeling of an individual as a leader or a non-leader is
important for the success of leadership attempts. Someone
recognized as a leader (as an effective or a excellent leader)
gains social power and influence (Cronshaw & Lord, 1987). Thus,
people are perceived and accepted as leaders the more their
behavior is congruent with the attributers' expectations about
effective or excellent leadership. Experimental evidence in
various settings supports the view that implicit leadership
theories guide leadership conduct. They constrain the acceptance
of leadership behavior and moderate relationships between
leadership behavior and leadership effectiveness (for a review,
see Lord & Maher, 1991).
38
Implicit theories of leadership are empirically shown to be
culturally endorsed (GLOBE: House, et al., 1998, in press).
Cultural differences in what is perceived as excellent or
effective leadership are of particular importance to the success
of cross-cultural leadership attempts. Thus, a characterization of
East and West German leadership perceptions is given in the next
few paragraphs based on a variety of different methodological
approaches.
2.2.2 Prototypicality Ratings of Excellent Leadership
In the GLOBE study, questionnaire items for measuring
leadership attributes that are differentially associated with
"unusually effective leadership", so called "leadership
prototypicality ratings" (cf. Gerstner & Day, 1994; Hollander &
Julian, 1969; Kenney, Blasovich & Shaver, 1994; Lord & Maher,
1991) were constructed and validated in two pilot studies (48
countries) and in the main study (61 countries, cf. House et al.,
1998). On the basis of exploratory factor analysis and prior
theorizing (cf. House et al., 1998) twenty one first order factors
and six second order factors were derived. The second order
factors are:
1 Charismatic/performance orientation
2 Team/collaborative orientation
3 Humane Orientation
4 Participative
5 Autonomous
6 Narcissistic.
The first order and second order factors represent culturally
endorsed dimensions of leadership perceptions (for detailed
39
descriptions of the first and second order factors and
questionnaire items, see Appendix 2).
Assumptions
Based on the characterization of German societal culture and
leadership practice five assumptions about perceptions of
excellent leadership in Germany can be derived:
1) Because in East and West Germany, societal individualism is
high, "Autonomy" in leadership should be positively valued in
both parts of Germany.
2) Because in East and West Germany (interpersonal) societal
humane orientation is low, task orientation is high and the
interaction style in work and public is formal, low
interpersonal "humane orientation" in leadership should be
perceived more positively (or not particularly negatively) in
both parts of Germany as compared to the total sample of
countries.
3) Because in East Germany, personal initiative at work is lower
than in West Germany (i.e. the mentality of "durchstellen
(Engl. "relays"), "administrative skill" and "procedural
conduct" in leadership should be more positively valued than in
West Germany.
4) Because in East Germany, the authority orientation is higher
than in West Germany, "autocratic behavior" and "status
orientation" in leadership should be more positively valued
than in West Germany.
5) Because in East Germany, materialistic values are higher than
in West Germany, "performance orientation" in leadership should
be more positively valued.
40
Respondents were the same middle managers who also answered the
societal culture scales in the first part of the questionnaire
(East Germany, N = 53, average age 46 years, 30% women; West
Germany, N = 403, average age 42 years, 20% women). Again the
GLOBE standard questionnaire was used (cf. House et al., 1998).
The subjects were asked to indicate on a scale from one to seven
how strongly each of about 100 leadership attributes facilitates
or inhibits outstanding leadership.
Figure 2 presents the data for the second order leadership
dimensions (East and West German country means for all first and
second order factors are given in Appendix 3). The East and West
German country means and their positioning relative to each other
and to the distribution of all 61 countries sampled by GLOBE are
presented by use of Box-plot statistics, with the median (center
line), the 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles, and the largest and
lowest observed values that aren't outlier or extreme values
(whiskers).
__________________
Figure 2 about here
__________________
Charismatic and team oriented leadership are perceived as
facilitating excellent leadership in all 61 countries. The
respective boxes and whiskers are all in the upper third of the
seven point likert type scales. Narcissistic attributes are mainly
perceived to inhibit excellent leadership. These three dimensions
are seen as universal attributes of implicit leadership theories
(cf. House, et al., 1998). For the other dimensions there is
considerable cultural variance. For humane orientation,
41
participation and autocratic leadership the country means are
distributed above and below the mid-point of the response scale.
These dimensions seem to be culture specific.
Overall, the prototypes of excellent leadership endorsed in
East and West German cultures are rather similar to each other.
East and West Germans perceive charismatic and team oriented
attributes to moderately facilitate excellent leadership, and
narcissistic attributes to slightly inhibit excellent leadership.
In accord with our assumption 1, East and West Germans perceive
humane orientation to facilitate excellent leadership less than
most of the other countries do. Both means are near the
"neither/nor"-scale point and they rank below the 25th percentile
of the distribution (see Figure 2). In accord with our assumption
2, East and West Germans perceive attributes of autonomy (e.g.
individualistic, independent, unique) to facilitate (or to not
inhibit) excellent leadership more than most of the other
countries do. East and West Germany rank above the 75th
percentile.
West Germans, as compared to East Germans, perceive
Participation to facilitate excellent leadership somewhat more
strongly. This difference becomes evident when the GLOBE standard
procedure for grouping countries is used (see Appendix 3). West
Germans perceive Narcissism to more strongly inhibit excellent
leadership (below the 25th percentile) than East Germans do (near
the 50th percentile). A more detailed comparison of subscales (see
Appendix 3) reveals the East Germans to perceive "status
consciousness", "procedural conduct" and "administrative skill" to
facilitate excellent leadership more strongly than West Germans
do. These findings are in accord with our assumption 3. Assumption
42
4 is partially supported because the expected differences were
found for the participation subscale, however, no significant
differences were found for the subscale "autocratic"). Finally,
East Germans perceive performance orientation to more strongly
facilitate excellent leadership than West Germans do, as was
predicted in assumption 5. One unexpected results was the higher
score for visionary leadership for West Germans as compared to
East Germans.
Altogether, the profile of attributes associated with
excellent leadership matches closely with the profile of societal
culture dimensions and leadership practices in East and West
Germany. Implicit theories about excellent leadership seem to be
culturally endorsed in contemporary Germany. The prototypical
German leadership perceptions comprise a combination of values for
high participation, high autonomy and low (interpersonal) humane
orientation with the universally endorsed values of low
narcissism, high charismatic/performance and team collaborative
orientation.
2.2.3 Leadership Perceptions in East and West German Print Media
East and West German print media were analyzed in the 25th
and 29th week in 1996. The following media were chosen:
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (daily newspaper, mainly West-
German staff), Bild Zeitung (daily popular press, mainly West-
German staff), Die Zeit (weekly newspaper, mainly West-German
staff), Wirtschaftswoche (weekly business paper, mainly West-
German staff), Handelsblatt (weekly business paper, mainly West-
German staff), Wochenpost (weekly newspaper, mainly East-German
staff), Freie Presse Chemnitzer Zeitung (daily newspaper, mainly
43
East-German staff). The sections news, politics, economy, society,
comments, etc. were used for content analysis. Sports, Travel,
Theater, Cinema, and Foreign Issues were disregarded. Job
advertisements for executives are analyzed separately (see further
below). Every article's headline was read and classified whether
leadership issues are mentioned. Texts concerning either business
leadership or political leadership were selected. The selected
articles were read and central phrases that contained information
about what leaders should do or should be like or about leader
attributes and actions that were identifiably an accepted standard
were typed into a data file. A list of all phrases was created,
and to each phrase the central verb or adjective, representing the
predominant ideal leadership attribute, was added. Beginning with
the list of phrases from East German print media (N = 189)
categories were inductively generated. The same was done for the
West German sample(N = 360 phrases) 1. Most of the categories were
found in both samples, so that a common category system could be
used by two independent raters to categorized all 549 phrases
resulting in high reliability scores (Cohens Kappa = .96 for East
Germany and .98 for West Germany). Altogether 13 categories were
found (for their description see Appendix 4). The relative
frequencies and rankings per category for business leaders and
political leaders in West and East German print media are listed
in Table 1.
___________________
Table 1 about here
___________________
1 The contributions from Markus Schmidt are thankfully acknowledged.
44
Business leaders. In the predominant West German print media,
the three most often described attributes for business leaders are
"Determined" (13.1%), "High Integrity" (9.6%), and "Future
Orientation" (8.8%). For East German print media the three highest
ranking categories were "Evaluating" (14.0%), "Rational" (11.6%)
and "Confronting" (11.6%). Values and behaviors of business
leaders that imply personality characteristics of determination,
assertiveness and masculinity (altogether 21.9%) were four times
more often expressed in the West German print media than in the
East German print media (altogether 4.7%). In contrast, values and
behaviors that imply rationality, evaluation and opinion
expression (altogether 34.9%) were nearly three times more often
expressed in East German than in West German print media
(altogether 14.4%). It seems that prototypes for business
leadership in West German print media are expressed in terms of
personality characteristics speaking to high task commitment (e.g.
leaders are determined, assertive, masculine). In East German
print media, business leadership seems to be more a matter of
interpersonal exchange and rationality (e.g. leaders express their
opinions, evaluate the opinions of others, confront others with
their views). In short, West German journalists write about people
and their task commitment, East German journalists write about
opinions and their rationality. On part of the East German press,
the results may indicate a partial neglect of the business leader
as a self-determined person - possibly due to the non-existence of
"real" business leaders in former East Germany. On part of the
West German press, the results may indicate a partial neglect of
the dialectical nature of exchanging opinions in search for higher
45
levels of rationality in business - possibly due to the
professional use of mass media.
These findings can be related to the finding of visionary
leadership to be more strongly endorsed in West Germany as
compared to East Germany (see Appendix 3). Possibly, West Germans
are more inclined to attribute leadership in business to singular
persons, and thus perceive the attribut of a "personal vision" to
be more central to excellent leadership than East Germans do.
They, being less inclined to attribute leadership to a person
rather than to an abstract idea or some social aggregate (e.g. an
office or a commitee) perceive a "personal vision" to be less
central to excellent leadership. Interestingly, East Germans
perceive the attribute of "self-sacrifical" to be more strongly
related to excellent leadership than West Germans do (see Appendix
3).
Political Leaders. For political leadership the differences
between East and West German print media are less pronounced. In
both cultural regions, political leaders are most often described
to be "Confronting" (West: 18.6%; East 13.6%) and "Determined"
(West: 13.6%; East: 12.7%), followed by "Communicating" (9.0%) and
"Collaborating" (8.1%) in West German print media, and by
"Collaborating" (12.7%), and "Evaluating" (12.7%) in East German
print media. The higher communality of East and West German print
media for political leadership may be due to the target leaders
who are most often federal politicians of predominantly West
German descendent, thus, also being described more similarly in
East and West German print media than target leaders in business,
who are more likely to be of regional origin. It is also possible
that the public arena of politics more strongly implies task
46
commitment (i.e. determination) and exchange of ideas in search
for better solutions (e.g. confronting) than the arena of
business.
2.2.4 Excellent and Normal Leaders (Interviews and Focus Groups)
Six semi-structured interviews with West German managers (two
female, four male) from various branches and two focus group
discussions involving nine experienced managers and consultants
from different West German companies and branches were conducted.
The interviews and focus groups were constructed to evaluate
expectations about unusually effective leader versus normally
effective managers. Heterogeneity among respondents, e.g. in
organizational background, gender and age, was maximized on
purpose. This makes it less likely that prototypical attributes
for excellent leadership overlap among respondents due to similar
background. Written protocols from the tape recorded interviews
were analyzed and interpreted by an ethnologist who was unaware of
the GLOBE dimensions and hypotheses2. Her task was to identify and
categorize characteristic attributes for an unusually effective
leader versus a normally effective manager. Group discussions were
also tape recorded and all attributes and examples given were
listed and subsequently classified according to the categorical
system developed on the basis of the interviews.
Interviews
In table 2, on the left half, the eight categories found that
describe an unusually effective leader, are presented: Visionary,
inspiring or motivating, high integrity, collaborative or team
2 The contributions from Natalie Goeltenboth are thankfully acknowledged.
47
orientation, critical about him/herself, considerate of people,
high transparency and broad knowledge. On the right half in table
2, the categories found that describe a normally effective manager
are presented: Administrative, procedural, self-centered, face
saving, personal power oriented (autocratic), task oriented,
unclear, and specialized knowledge. The two halves of the table
read like the "hip" and the "square" of leadership in Germany.
This is due to the implicitly contrasting nature of the questions
asked which may have influenced respondents to polarize into "god"
and "bad" or "excellent" versus "standard" attributes of leaders.
The unusually effective leader is expected to develop and
attain higher order goals (visionary). In comparison, the normally
effective manager is expected to attain proximate or small goals
set by others (administrative). The unusually effective leader is
described as convinced and convincing (inspirational), the
normally effective manager is described to not display, or act
according to, his or her personal convictions (procedural). High
integrity of the unusually effective leader can be contrasted to
self-centeredness of the normally effective manager (narcissism).
The remaining contrasting categories are: Collaborative team
orientation versus autocratic and power orientation, self-critical
versus face saving and consideration versus task orientation. So
far, all the categories associated with excellent leadership match
perfectly with the leadership prototypicality dimensions found by
GLOBE. Interestingly, for the dominating West German culture, no
category was found for "humane orientation" comprising attributes
like generous, compassionate, being fair, altruistic, caring or
kind to others! This is another indication for the above reported
findings that interpersonal humane orientation is not associated
48
with excellent leadership in Germany. Two additional categories,
not represented in the GLOBE study, were found: High transparency
(e.g. straight forwardness, openly communicating, explaining
decisions) and broad knowledge extending beyond the technical
competency of a normally effective German manager (e.g. knowing
the essentials, wide mental and educational horizon).
___________________
Table 2 about here
___________________
When asked for examples of publicly known persons that
exemplify excellent leadership, some personal characteristics
(e.g. future oriented, visionary, disciplined) and many
interpersonal behaviors (e.g. inspirational, motivating,
transparency, straight forward, social welfare orientated) are
described. More detailed examples are:
- trend oriented and visionary (e.g. Nixdorf: a German manager,
formerly President of the Nixdorf Company; Beckenbauer:
President of Bayern M¸nchen, a famous "Fussball"-club),
- helping coworkers and employees to develop their abilities and
their career (e.g. Franz Josef Strau�: former minister
president of Bavaria),
- can present difficult things quite simple and clearly and is
also strong enough to stick to a temporarily unpopular opinion
(Bednartz: a German journalist),
- clear goal setting, result oriented controlling and
consequently persuading the goals, combined with a general
social welfare orientation (e.g. Abs: a German banker whose
tremendous amount of positions held at company boards resulted
49
in a change of government laws, so called "Lex Abs"; Konrad
Adenauer, former President of BRD).
When asked for critical incidents from the respondents¥
personal experience, leadership attributes that are relevant to
interpersonal relationships are predominantly given, e.g. open
minded, combines job and private life well, motivating, sensitive,
convinces others, overcoming hierarchy, trusting, showing weakness
and errors. More detailed examples are:
- "My superior managed to be a good leader and a good mother, she
was open minded, with broad interest, she could motivate me to
think further and work harder, she was sensitive to my
feelings",
- "He was convinced and showed personal investments in a project,
with high passion. He could convince others as well",
- "The leader was able to deal with a problem outside the company
rules. He trusted me and backed me up.",
- "The leader didn't stick to the companies hierarchical
structure",
- "The leader treated me with respect, he was open minded and
showed weaknesses and errors".
Focus Groups
The attributes of excellent versus normally effective
leadership from two focus group discussions are described in Table
3. They are categorized by using the schema from semi-structured
interviews (see table 3 above). The normally effective manager is
perceived as a somewhat autocratic, task oriented specialist who
controls a complex system by attaining the goals specified ("does
things right"). The excellent leader is mainly perceived to be
50
"more" than a competent manager, by being wise and visionary
("doing the right thing"), by dealing especially well with people
(considerate, empowering), by being an outstanding person in
character (integrity, authentic), in dedication and vision
(enthusiastic, innovative) and in education (broad knowledge).
These results are in line with the results found in the semi-
structured interviews.
___________________
Table 3 about here
___________________
A Methodological Note
The focus group discussions resulted in a less broad sample
of attributes. Also, fewer negatively valued attributes of a
normally effective manager than in the semi-structured interviews
were given. In particular, negative attributes concerning
interpersonal relations, e.g. self-centeredness, being unclear,
face-saving and personal power orientation, are more often
reported in the "private" context of the semi-structured
interviews than in the more "public" context of the focus group
discussions. In the focus group setting, the normally effective
manager is described to be basically a good person who is trying
to do things right, who is personally responsible for the correct
procedure, but who does not feel personally responsible to develop
a vision of what the right things are (no vision, not against
higher management). In the interview setting, the normally
effective manager is mainly described as a person who is "doing
things right", however, also as a person of questionable personal
characteristics (e.g. self centered, emotionally unstable) and of
51
questionable interpersonal qualities (e.g. non-participate,
instrumentalizes people), i.e. not treating people well.
Interpretations should be made carefully due to the nature of
the analytical method used. For instance, one can distinguish all
attributes found into two broad categories: Personality
characteristics (traits or abilities), and interpersonal
characteristics (e.g. social competency, motivates others,
considerate of others). By counting the number of attributes per
category, a ratio of about 60% to 40% (interpersonal versus
personality attributes) resulted from the interview setting. In
the focus groups the ratio is reverse, about 40% to 60%
(interpersonal versus personality attributes). It seems that
personal and interpersonal attributes of leader prototypes are
differentially salient depending on the evaluation method used.
For the print media analysis, we also counted the relative
frequencies of interpersonal categories (e.g. communicating,
collaborating) versus personal categories (e.g. rational,
optimistic). A ratio of about 35% to 65% respectively was found.
Thus, interpersonal aspects of implicit leadership prototypes seem
to be less salient in print media (35%) than in focus group
discussions (40%) and in semi-structured interviews (60%).
2.2.5 Job Requirements for Managers
Leadership requirements for German managers for a period of
15 years were analyzed and compared via content analysis of job
postings for executives published in three major German print
media (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Zeit, Handelsblatt).
For the year 1996 we used the print media that were text analyzed
52
(see above). For the year 1981 issues from same weeks of the year
were chosen.
Comparison with East German print media in 1981 and 1996 were
not possible. In 1981 job offerings for executives were not
announced in public print media, and in 1996 the number of
identifiably East German job advertisements was too small.
However, the comparison of 1981 and 1996 allows to investigate the
stability of job demands listed, particular changes and emerging
demands in the predominant West German culture should become
evident.
Advertisements from domestic companies offering an executive
position in Germany were selected. Up to 20 advertisements per
print media were randomly chosen, so that an approximately equal
sample size could be drawn for the years 1981 and 1996.
Graduate students in Social Science attending a course in
cross-cultural research methods at the University of Munich,
unaware of the GLOBE dimensions and hypotheses, conducted the data
analysis. They also developed the categorization system that was
used to classify leadership attributes3 on the basis of N = 402
items (sixteen categories emerged, for a description, see Appendix
5). Relative frequencies and rankings per category are shown in
Table 4. From 1981 to 1996 the average number of attributes listed
per advertisement is raised from 2.57 to 3.84. Despite this
quantitative increase in descriptions of job demands, the relative
frequencies and rankings are remarkably stable. In 1981 and in
1996 leaders are mainly expected to take initiative (13.5%,
11.8%), to be purposive (12.8%, 12.2%) and to communicate
effectively (11.5%, 10.2%).
3 The contributions from Silvia Specht de Huber, Gabriele Kessler, Oswald Moosmann, Alexandra Muz, and NadjaTöpper are thankfully acknolwedged.
53
___________________
Table 4 about here
___________________
The demand for collaborative qualities has increased
significantly, ranking on the fifths position in 1981 (7.7%), as
compared to the first position (14.2%) in the year 1996. In
contrast, "responsibility" is less often listed in 1996 (2.0%)
than in 1981 (6.4%). A similar trend is visible for administrative
skills (1981: 9.6%; 1996: 7.7). It seems, that the old fashioned
leadership ideal of individual responsibility within an
organization's hierarchy (bureaucratic, administrative
orientation) is changing towards a leadership ideal of
interpersonal responsibility for the more proximate needs of small
social aggregates (team and interpersonal orientation).
Furthermore, "Firmness" and "Future orientation" are listed nearly
twice as often today (6.5%; 6.9%) than fifteen years ago (3.8%,
3.8%). And, "willingness to learn" (2%) has emerged as a new
characteristic that was not listed in 1981.
2.2.6 Biographical Analysis of Commonly Known Leaders
Twelve persons of various age, gender, social and educational
background were interviewed to create a list of unusually
effective and commonly known leaders in politics and business from
the beginning of the Federal Republic of Germany until today. For
three approximate time periods (from 1945 to mid 60¥s, from mid
60¥s to early 80¥s, and from the mid 80¥s to the 90¥s) the most
often mentioned leaders were selected for biographical analysis.
54
Biographical books and articles were used to derive predominant
leadership attributes commonly attributed to these persons.4
As unusually effective political leaders 12 persons were
mentioned. In table 6 (left hand side) the predominant attributes
for the three most often named political leaders are described:
Ludwig Erhard (for the post war period), Willy Brandt (for the
70¥s to early 80¥s) and Helmut Kohl (for the mid 80¥s to the mid
90¥s). As unusually effective business leaders, altogether 16
different names were given. In table 6 (right hand side) the three
most often named persons were Axel Springer (for the post war
period and somewhat later), Alfred Herrhausen (for the 70¥s to
late 80¥s) and Leo Kirch (for the mid 80¥s to the late 90¥s). The
leadership attributes described in table 6 can by far not be
viewed as representative, however, each person seems to exemplify
a "Gestalt" of an outstanding leader in a certain historical or
contemporary period of Germany.
For the exception of Alfred Herrhausen, all leaders in politics
and business, are reported to have a vision. The vision is either
very appealing to all ("combining economic growth and social
justice" by Ludwig Erhard, or the "ideal of peace and
reconciliation" by Willy Brandt, or "supporting social economy" by
Axel Springer), or it is appealing to a very large proportion of
the public (e.g. "reunification of Germany and its integration in
Europe", by Helmut Kohl), or it is a vision of some megalomaniac
self-grandiosity that provoced suspicion and harsh critique from
various groups in society ("creating a media monopoly in Germany"
by Leo Kirch). All leaders gain admiration or at least respect for
4 The contribution from Claudia Sold is thankfully acknowledge.
55
mainly three different classes of personal leadership
characteristics:
- purposive goal attainment, high performance orientation
- high expertise, realism, rationality, and reliability,
- courage and straight forwardness.
Positively valued interpersonal attributes are mainly
associated with Willy Brand who is said to have displayed the
"most human form of power" (Eppler, 1992), e.g. trustworthiness,
collaborative and humane orientation, and somewhat associated with
Ludwig Erhard for his social justice and social welfare
orientation. Most of the interpersonal leadership behaviors
ascribed to the other leaders (e.g. instrumentalizing personal
relationships, "divide et impera", autocratic and patriarchal
behavior, micro management, high power orientation) are always
pointed out in the biographical publications to be questionable at
least. However, the popularity of the here chosen leaders as being
outstanding, gives some credit to the assumption that a neglect of
interpersonal humane orientation, at least to some degree, is
approved in German perceptions of leadership.
2.2.7 Stocktaking
For the reunited Germany, implicit theories of excellent
leadership comprise low narcissism, high charismatic/performance
orientation and team orientation. These are the leadership
attributes that are also universally endorsed (House et al.,
1998). The particular combination of high participation, high
autonomy and low (interpersonal) humane orientation seems to be
prototypical pattern of leadership values culturally endorsed in
56
East and West Germany. For West Germany a similar pattern was also
shown in semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions.
According to leader prototypicality ratings, East Germans
perceive status consciousness, procedural conduct, and
administrative skill to be more facilitative, and participation to
be less facilitative to excellent leadership than West Germans do.
For West Germany, semi-structured interviews and focus groups
resulted in high transparency and broad knowledge to be also
associated with excellent leadership. The print media analysis
reveals West German journalists to write preferably about the
personality of business leaders and the strength of their task
commitment. In contrast, East German journalists seem to write
preferably about the leaders¥ opinions and the degree of
rationality they display. For political leaders no such
differences were found. From a longitudinal analysis of job
postings for business executives we learn that high initiative,
purposive behavior and communication skills are among the most
frequently requested leader attributes in West Germany. These
requirements remained stable for a period of 15 years (from 1981
to 1996). It seems that in West Germany the old fashioned
leadership ideal of individual responsibility within an
organization's hierarchy (bureaucratic, administrative
orientation) was being substituted by the ideal of interpersonal
responsibility within team work settings and social relationships.
Last but not least, the six most popular West German leaders in
business and politics since 1949 seem to be admired mainly for
their personal characteristics, such as purposive behavior,
performance orientation, expertise, rationality, and courage, on
the one hand, and for their interpersonal characteristics such as
57
straight forwardness, trustworthiness, social justice and welfare
orientation, on the other hand. However, various data sources
converge in positive evidence for the assumption that a neglect of
interpersonal humane orientation is, at least to some degree,
approved in German perceptions of excellent leadership.
58
References
Berschin, H. (1993). Deutschlandbegriff im sprachlichen Wandel
[Semantic changes of the concept of Germany]. In W. Weidenfeld &
K.-R. Korte (Eds.), Handbuch zur deutschen Einheit [Handbook to
the German Reunification] (pp. 139-147). Frankfurt: Campus.
Boehnke, K., Dettenborn, H, Horstmann, K., & Schwartz, S.
(1994). Value priorities in the United Germany: Teachers and
students from East and West compared. European Journal of
Psychology of Education, 9, 191-202.
Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Effects of
categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership
perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 97-106.
Eppler, E. (1992). Die humanste Form der macht [The most human
form of power. Der Spiegel, 42, 26-28.
Frese, M. (1982). Occupational socialization and psychological
development: An underemphasized research perspective in industrial
psychology. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55, 209-224.
Frese, M. Kring, W., Soose, A., & Zempel J. (1996). Personal
initiative at work: Differences between East and West Germany.
Academy of Management Journal, 39, 37-63.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparison
of leadership prototypes. Leadership Quarterly, 5, 121-134.
Hollander, E. P., Julian, J. W. (1969). Contemporary trends in
the analysis of leadership perceptions. Psychological Bulletin,
71, 387-97.
Heyse, V. (1994). Fuehrungskraefte-Orientierungen und
Weiterbildung in ostdeutschen Unternehmen [Leaders¥ orientations
and training in East German companies]. In L. v. Rosenstiel, T.
Lang & E. Sigl (Eds.), Auswahl des Fach- und
59
Fuerhungskraeftenachwuchses in den alten und neuen Bundeslaendern
[Selection of specialists and leaders in the East and West
Germany] (pp. 323-331). Landshut: Schriften der Sommerakademie.
Hiebsch, H., & Vorwerg, M. (1978). Sozialpsychologie [Social
psychology]. Berlin: VEB Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture¥s conseqeunces: International
differences in work-related values. London: Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dickson, M.
W. (1997). The development and validation of scalesto measure
societal and organizatoinal culture (Manuscript under review).
House, et al., 1998 *** the official paper).
House, R. J., Wright, N. S., & Aditya, R. N. (1997). Cross-
cultural research on organizational leadership: A critical
analysis and a proposed theory. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.),
New Perspectives in International Industrial Organizatinoal
Psychology.(pp. 535-625). San Francisco: New Lexington.
Jago, A. G., Reber, G., Bˆhnisch, W., Maczynski, J., Zavrel,
J., & Dudorkin, J. (1993). Culture¥s conseqeunces? A seven nations
study of participation. In D. F. Rogus & A. S. Ratmi (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Decision Sciences
Institute (pp. 451-454. Washington DC: Decisions Science
Institute.
Kluckholm, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in
value orientations. new York: Harper Collins.
Kenney, R. A., Blasovich, J., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Implicit
leadership theories: Prototypes for new leaders. Basic and Applied
Social Psychologiy, 15, 409-437.
Lawrence, P. (1994). German Management: At the interface
between Eastern and Western Europe. In R. Calori & P. de Wood
60
(Eds.), A European management model: Beyond diversity. New York:
Prentice Hall.
Lord, R., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information
processing: Linking preceptions to performance. Boston: Unwin
Hyman.
Maier, G. (1990). Fuehrungsgrundsaetze: Ein Ausdruck der
Unternehmenskultur [Principles of leadership: An expression of
organizational culture]. In S. Hoefling & W. Butollo (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 15th Congress for Applied Psychology of the
Germans Psychologial Association (BDP) (pp. 135-144). Bonn:
Deutscher Psychologen Verlag.
Macharzina, K. (1993). Werthaltungen in den neuen
Bundeslaendern: Strategien fuer das Personalmanagement [Values in
the new German states: Strategies for personnel management].
Wiebaden: Gabler.
Maier, G. W., Rappensberger, G., Rosenstiel, L. v., & Zwarg, I.
(1994). Berufliche Ziele und Werthaltungen des
Fuherungskraeftenachwuchses in den alten und neuen Bundeslaendern
[Vocational goals and values of managerial candidates in the old
and new states of Germany], Zeitschrift fuer Arbeits- und
Organisationspsychologie, 38, 4-12.
McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton: Van
Nostrand.
McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Glenview: Scott-
Foresman.
Rappensberger, G., & Maier, G. W. (1998). Arbeitsbezogene
Werthaltungen und berufliche Ziele beim Berufseinstieg: Ein
Vergleich von potentiellen Fuehrungsnachwuchskraeften aus den
alten und neuen Bundeslaendern [Work values and career goals when
61
entering a job: A comparison of applicants for management
positions from the old and the new states in Germany]. In L. v.
Rosenstiel, F. W. Nerdinger & E. Spiess (Eds.), Von der Hochschule
in den Beruf: Wechsel der Welten in Ost und West [From the
University to the job: Change of environments in East and West].
Goettingen: VAP.
Regnet, E. (1995). Der Weg in die Zukunft: Neue Anforderungen
and Fuehrungskraefte [Pathways to the future: New requirements for
managers]. In L. v. Rosenstiel, E. Regnet & M. Domsch (Eds.),
Fuehrung von Mitarbeitern: Handbuch fuer erfolgreiches
Personalmanagement [Leadership of co-workers: Handbook for
succesful personnel management] (pp. 43-54). Stuttgart.
Schaefer,Poeschel.
Ronen, S., & Shenkar, O. (1985). Clustering countries on
attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis. Academy of
Management Review, 10, 435-454.
Rosenstiel, v. L. (1995). Fuehrung durch Motivation in Zeiten
sich wandelnder Wertorientierungen [Management via motivation in
times of changing value orientations]. In H. Kasper (Ed.), Post-
Graduate-Management-Wissen.(pp. 75-146).Wien: Wirtschaftsverlag
Ueberreuter.
Shaw, J. B. (1990). A cognitive categorization model for the
study of intercultural management. Academy of Management Review,
15, 626-645.
Schultz-Gambard, J., & Altschuh, E. (1993). Unterschiedliche
Fuehrungsstile im geeinten Deutschland [Different leadership
styles in the united Germany]. Zeitschrift fuer Sozialpsychologie,
24, 167-175.
62
Triandis, H. C. (1993). The contingency model in cross-cultural
perspective. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory
and research: Perspectives and directions (pp. 167-188). San
Diego: Academic Press.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism.
Boulder: Westview Press.
Windieck, G. (1990). Fuehrung im Wandel. Neue Perspektiven fuer
Fuehrungsforschung und Fuehrungspraxis [Leadership under changing
conditions. New perspectives of leadership research and leadership
practice]. Stuttgart: Enke.
Wuppertaler Kreis, (1992). Fuehrungsverstaendnis in Ost und
West [Concepts of leadership in East and West]. Koeln: Deutscher
Wirtschaftsdienst.
Zander, E. (1995). Fuehrungsstil und personalpolitik im Wandel.
Changes in leadership style and personell policy. Personal, 47,
238-241.
Zwarg, I. (1995). Fuehrung in den neuen Bundeslaendern
[leadership in the new states of Germany]. In L. v. Rosenstiel, E.
Regnet & M. Domsch (Eds.), Fuehrung von Mitarbeitern: Handbuch
fuer erfolgreiches Personalmanagement [Leadership of co-workers:
Handbook for succesful personnel management] (pp. 739-750).
Stuttgart. Schaefer,Poeschel.
63
Table 1:
Frequencies and Rankings of Leadership Attribute Categories Found in West and
East German Print Media (Business and Political Leaders are Distinguished)
Business Leaders
West-German East German
% Rank % Rank
Determined 13.1 1 4.7 9High Integrity 9.6 2 9.3 4Future Oriented 8.8 3 7.0 7Firm 6.4 6 0.0 13
Confronting 6.4 6 11.6 2Communicating 6.4 6 9.3 4Rational 6.4 6 11.6 2Evaluating 5.6 8 14.0 1
Visionary 5.6 8 2.3 10Collaborating 4.0 10 7.0 7Optimistic 3.2 11 0.0 13Opinion Expression 2.4 12 9.3 4Masculine 2.4 12 0.0 13
Total % % 80.3 % 85.5N of Phrases 125 43
Political Leaders
West-German East German
% Rank % Rank
Confronting 18.6 1 13.6 1Determined 13.6 2 12.7 2Communicating 9.0 3 3.4 8Collaborating 8.1 4 12.7 2
High Integrity 8.1 4 5.1 6Firm 7.2 6 1.7 10Evaluating 5.4 7 12.7 2Future Oriented 5.0 8 1.7 10
Rational 4.5 9 7.6 5Masculine 4.1 10 1.7 10Opinion Expression 3.6 11 4.2 7Visionary 1.8 12 3.4 8Optimistic 0.9 13 0.0 13
Total % 92.4 % 80.5Total N 221 118
64
Note: Categories with less than 1 % in the total sample are not listed and phrases not concordantly rated bytwo independent raters are excluded. Therefore, the sum percentage per column is lower than 100%.
65
Table 2:
Attributes of Outstanding versus Normally Effective Leaders (Interview Results)
Outstanding Leader Normally Effective Manager
Visionary Administrative - attains higher order goals - attains proximate goals - has personal convictions & charisma - has small goals and plans in mind - sensitive for new developments - sticks to rules and traditions - can abandon old structures and secure paths - passes the pressure from above to - knows a lot about recent trends his/her employees
Inspirational & motivating Procedural - convincing, shows and gives security - not really convinced about goals - supports employee identification - doesn't display personal convictions - raises intrinsic motivation - has problems in making own decisions - presents him/herself positively to others
High integrity Self-centered - stable self-concept, calm, self-possessed - emotionally unstable - sure of him/herself, not fearful - insensitive, superficial, inflexible - modesty, high integrity, trustworthy - switches "chief" and "companion" role - a strong sole and mind - tries to attribute responsibility - disciplined in work and private for errors to others
Collaborative and team oriented Personal power oriented (Autocratic) - delegates responsibility - doesn't critique higher management levels - participative - leads by command, status oriented - able to compromise - doesn't or can't delegate responsibility - empowering - non-participate, feels as a "king" - social responsibility - wants to do everything by him/herself - solves conflicts win/win - doesn't trust others to do the job correctly
Critical about him/herself Face-saving - can take critique, shows weakness - hides errors - admits errors or deficiencies - changes direction without explicitly telling - knows his/her limits - indirect
Considerate of people Task orientation on the cost of people - committed to his/her employees - seldom has time to talk with employees - doesn't give employees a feeling - instrumentalizes employees to be used for something - constantly puts pressure on employees - defines attainable goals - backs one up, caring, sensible, open - develops employees differentially - personal interest, sympathy, respect
Transparency Unclear - clear communicator, explains decisions - doesn't explain goals, decisions or motives - straight forward, relentless when necessary - unclear, distanced - openly communicates task criteria and - keeps information secret controlling mechanisms - misses to control results (no feedback) - displays the paths to the goal clearly - actions are not clearly understandable
Broad knowledge Specialized knowledge - high competence in field of expertise - knows much about company - knows the essentials right away - knows much about market - wide mental and educational horizon
66
- talented, genius
67
Table 3:
Attributes of Outstanding versus Normally Effective Leaders (Focus Group Results)
Outstanding Leader Normally Effective Manager
Visionary Administrative - clear vision, - organizes and commands - knows about new trends - encourages new ideas but not
against the higher management
Inspirational & motivating Procedural - enthusiastic - keeps things going - charismatic - controls a complex system
High Integrity - trustworthy, authentic, modest - high discipline - can deal with a chaos while not being chaotic - brave - non-materialistic orientation
Collaborative and team orientation Personal power oriented (Autocratic) - delegates by task not by formal procedures - dominating - doesn't rely on formal power - a person who wants power - conflict resolving - a servant of the company - team work competency - empowers others - committed to others
Considerate of people Task orientation - sensitive - some social competency - supports ideas of employees - delegates - trusting employees - not very good in criticizing - loyal towards employees - flexible - open, tolerant and fair - communicative
Transparency - shares vision with others
Broad knowledge Specialized knowledge - broad education - specific knowledge - creative - specialist - multi-cultural oriented - knows his/her own culture quite well but - spirited when it becomes difficult not the culture of others - wise
Achievement Orientation - highly goal oriented - achievement oriented
Does the right thing Does things right
68
Table 4:
Percent of Attributes per Category in East and West German Job Postings
1981 1996
% Rank % Rank
Initiative 13,5 1 11,8 3Purposive 12,8 2 12,2 2Communicating 11,5 3 10,2 4Administrative Skill 9,6 4 7,7 5
Inspirational 7,7 5 6,9 7Collaborative 7,7 5 14,2 1Leader Experience 7,1 7 6,9 5Responsible 6,4 8 2,0 12
Motivating 5,8 9 3,3 11Firm 3,8 11 6,5 9Flexible 3,8 11 4,9 10Future Oriented 3,8 11 6,9 7
Rational 3,2 13 2,0 12Enthusiastic 1,9 14 1,2 15Directive 1,3 15 0,8 16Willingness to Learn 0,0 - 2,0 12
N of categorized attributes 156 246Total N of attributes 177 261Total N of advertisements 69 68Attributes per advertisement 2,57 3,84
69
Table 5:
Leader Attributes of Publicly Known Outstanding Leaders in West Germany
Political Leaders Business Leaders
1945 to 1960¥s:Post World War II, a period of privation and beginning economic growth
Ludwig Erhard (1897-1977): German Axel Springer (1912 - 1985): Most success-Minister of Economy (1945-63) as a member full publisher (popular press, e.g. Bild-Zeitung)of the conservative party (CDU). Known as during the German post war area and the 60¥sthe father of the "soziale Marktwirtschaft" and 70¥s. Known for his conservative attitudes, his(social economy) and the German fight for the German Reunification, reconciliation"Wirtschaftswunder" (economic mystery). with Israel and supporting the social economy.
Leader attributes: Leader attributes:- Visionary, "highly prognostic in economics" - Visionary, missionary- Realistic and constructive optimist - Moralist, religious- Performance orientation - Patriarchal, micro manager- Social justice orientation, "Gemeinwohl" - Seeking for harmony- Firm, imperturbable - "The publishers task (...) of "grounding" ideals- High expertise in economics often excludes materialistic thought and action".
1960¥s to 1970¥s:A period of social change (e.g. student revolt) and steady economic growth
Willy Brandt (1913-1992): German Alfred Herrhausen (1930-1989): Known asChancellor (1969-1974) as a member President of the Deutsche Bank who wasof the social-democratic party (SPD). murdered in 1989. He became member of theKnown for his "Versˆhnungspolitik" board of directors of the Deutsche Bank in 1970.(politics of reconciliation) with East Germany. His high rise career extended until the late 80¥sReceived the Peace Nobel Price in 1971. when he became President of the Deutsche Bank.
Leader attributes: Leader attributes:- Visionary, "Ideal of Peace", Inspirational - Risk taker, courageous, straight forward- High Integrity, trustworthy, loyalty - Energetic, enforcing, purposive- Collaborative, cooperative, mediator - Performance oriented, individualist, outsider- Social and humane orientation - High need for recognition and confirmation- Convincing speaker, excellent listener - Micro-manager, power oriented, autocratic- Ambitious, highly self-critical - Rational, reserved, distanced.
1980¥s and 1990¥s:A period of geo-political change (e.g. German Reunification) and reduced economic growth
Helmut Kohl (1928): German Leo Kirch (1927): Known as "Media Tycoon"Chancellor (since 1982) as a member who created an empire consisting of severalof the conservative party (CDU). Known private TV stations and a group of TV-productionto be the driving force of the Reunification and trading companies. His activities were subjectof Germany in 1989 and its integration to public suspicion in the early 90¥s.in the European Union.
Leader attributes: Leader attributes:- Politically instinctive and far-sighted - Vision of himself as a media monopolist- Purposive, enforcing, "a doer" - Instrumentalizing personal relationships- Firm, consistent, reliable - Firm, hard- "divide et impera"-strategy - Personal power and status oriented- Ambitious and autocratic - Patriarchal, autocratic, micro manager- Realistic with common sense - Smart, cunning
70
71
Appendix 1
Country Means for Societal Culture Dimensions (GLOBE Study)
Culture Dimensions Society "As is"
West Germany East Germany
Mean Groupa %-tileb Mean Groupa %-tileb
Collectivism 4,02 C IV << 4,52 B III Power Distance 5,25 B III << 5,54 A I Uncertainty Avoid. 5,22 A I 5,16 A I Humane Orient. 3,18 D IV 3,40 D IV Performance O. 4,25 B II > 4,09 B III Future Orient. 4,27 B I > 3,95 B II Non-Assertiveness 3,49 B IV 3,37 B IV Gender Egalitarian 3,10 B II 3,06 C III
Culture Dimensions Society "Should be"
West Germany East Germany
Mean Groupa %-tileb Mean Groupa %-tileb
Collectivism 5,22 C IV 5,18 C IV Power Distance 2,54 C III 2,69 C III Uncertainty Avoid. 3,32 D IV < 3,94 C IV Humane Orient. 5,46 B II 5,44 B II Performance O. 6,01 A II 6,09 A II Future Orient. 4,85 B IV < 5,23 B III Non-Assertiveness 4,21 B II 4,13 B II Gender Egalitarian 4,90 A I 4,89 A I
Notes:a) Group membership (A,B,C,D,E) is determined by calculating the grand mean and standarddeviations across all society "As is" and "Should be"-scales respectively for the N = 61 countries.These means and standard deviations were than used to calculate low, medium and high groupsof countries per "As is" and "Should be"-scales respectively (GLOBE standard procedure): lowgroup (C) < (mean - sd), medium group (B) > (mean - sd) and < (mean + sd), high group (A) >(mean + sd). In case of wide distributions, E < (mean - 2*sd), D < (mean - sd), C > (mean -sd) and< (mean + sd), B > (mean + sd) and A > (mean + 2*sd).
b) Percentiles are calculated on the basis of quartiles for each scale for the N = 61 countries. i.e.below 25% (IV), 25% to 50% (III), 50% to 75% (II), and above 75% (I). Differences between Eastand West are taken as meaningful if country means differ in magnitude and are positioned indifferent groups or quartiles. Meaningful differences and their direction are indicated by the
72
symbols ">" or "<". In case the same differences result from both grouping methods, the symbols">>" or "<<" are used.
73
Appendix 2
Global Culturally Endorsed Implicit Leadership Dimensions (GLOBE Study)
Leadership Dimensions Questionnaire Items
Charismatic/Value Based
Visionary Visionary, foresight, anticipatory, prepared, intellectuallystimulating, future-oriented, plans ahead, inspirational
Inspirational Enthusiastic, positive, encouraging, morale booster, motivearouser, confidence builder, dynamic, motivational
Self Sacrificial Risk taker, self-sacrificial, convincing Integrity Honest, sincere, just, trustworthy Decisive Willful, decisive, logical, intuitive Performance Oriented Improvement-, excellence-, performance-oriented
Team Oriented
Collaborative Orientation Group-oriented, collaborative, loyal,Consultative, mediator, fraternal
Team Integrator Clear, integrator, subdued, informed, communicative,coordinator, team builder
Diplomatic Diplomatic, worldly, win/win problem-solver, effective bargainer Malevolent (reversed) Irritable, vindictive, egoistic, non-cooperative, cynical,
hostile, dishonest, non-dependable, intelligent Administratively Competent Orderly, administratively skilled, organized, good administrator
Narcissistic
Self-centered Self-interested, non-participative, loner, asocial Status Consciousness Status-conscious, class conscious Conflict inducer (reversed) Intra-group competitor, secretive, normative Face-saver Indirect, avoids negatives, evasive Procedural Ritualistic, formal, habitual, cautious, procedural
Participative
Autocratic (reversed) autocratic, dictatorial, bossy, elitist, ruler, domineering Participative Individual, non-egalitarian, micro manager, non-delegator
Humane
Humane Orientation Generous, compassionate Modesty Modest, self-effacing, patient
Autonomous
Autonomous Individualistic, independent, autonomous, unique
74
Appendix 3
Country Means for Leadership Dimensions and Subdimensions (GLOBE Study)
West Germany East Germany
Dimensions- subscales Mean Groupa %-tileb Mean Groupa %-tileb
Charismatic 5,84 B III 5,88 B III- Visionary 5,99 B III >> 5,86 C IV- Inspirational 6,15 B III 6,10 B III- Self sacrificial 4,87 B III < 5,08 B II- Integrity 6,12 B II 6,11 B II- Decisive 5,78 A III 5,81 A III- Performance O. 6,11 B II << 6,33 A I
Team Oriented 5,29 B IV 5,32 B IV- Collaborative O. 5,05 B IV 5,08 B IV- Team integrator 5,48 B IV 5,37 B IV- Diplomatic 5,08 B IV 5,10 B IV- Malevolent 1,68 D III 1,71 D III- Administrat. skill 5,51 C IV << 5,74 B III
Narcissistic 2,95 C IV << 3,33 B II- Self-centered 2,10 C II 2,20 C II- Status conscious 3,72 C IV << 4,45 B II- Conflict inducer r 3,59 B IV < 4,14 B II- Face-saver 2,36 C IV 2,46 C IV- Procedural 3,00 D IV << 3,40 C III
Participative 4,89 A II > 4,71 B II- Autocratic r 1,95 D IV 2,06 D IV- Nonparticipative r 2,28 C IV << 2,53 B III
Humane 4,44 B IV 4,58 B IV- Humane 4,27 B IV 4,36 B IV- Modesty 4,61 B IV < 4,81 B III
Autonomous 4,30 A I 4,35 A I
Notes:a) Group membership (A,B,C,D) is determined by calculating the grand mean and standarddeviations across all society "As is" and "Should be"-scales respectively for the N = 61 countries.These means and standard deviations were than used to calculate low, medium and high groupsof countries per "As is" and "Should be"-scales respectively (GLOBE standard procedure): lowgroup (C) < (mean - sd), medium group (B) > (mean - sd) and < (mean + sd), high group (A) >(mean + sd). In case of wide distributions, E < (mean - 2*sd), D < (mean - sd), C > (mean -sd) and< (mean + sd), B > (mean + sd) and A > (mean + 2*sd).b) Percentiles are calculated on the basis of quartiles for each scale for the N = 61 countries, i.e.below 25% (IV), 25% to 50% (III), 50% to 75% (II), and above 75% (I). Differences between Eastand West are taken as meaningful if country means differ in magnitude and are positioned indifferent groups or quartiles. Meaningful differences and their direction are indicated by the
75
symbols ">" or "<". In case the same differences result from both grouping methods the symbols">>" or "<<" are used.r) Scale is reverse coded for calculating higher order dimension.
76
Appendix 4
Category Descriptions for Leadership Attributes (Print Media Analysis)
Category Text phrases contain descriptions of ...
Determined ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that imply determined decisions and actions.
Firm ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that imply firm defense or resolute execution of goals, plans, ideas and beliefs.
Masculine ... attributes like strength, courage, fighting, fatherly or paternal.
High Integrity ... attributes like modesty, socially responsible, humane, loyalty, trustworthiness or sense of responsibility.
Future Oriented ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that aim towards the future, planning for the future, anticipation of future events, or preparing for the future.
Visionary ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that inspire or stimulate others, e.g. to surpass their limits, to change their attitudes and behavior.
Optimistic ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that imply confidence in, or generally positive views of facts, events and future developments.
Confronting ... attitude expressions in a highly confronting or agitating manner.
Rational ... behaviors and expressed attitudes that imply objectivity, pertinence, rationality, realism, analytical competency and informedness.
Evaluating ... attitude expressions in an assessing or evaluative manner.
Opinion Expression ... attitude expression in a neutral manner.
Communicating ... behaviors and attitudes that imply communication with others, informing oneself and others, and maintaining good relationships.
Collaborating ... behaviors and attitudes that imply cooperation, or stress common goals, win/win situations and compromise.
77
Appendix 5
Category Descriptions for Leadership Attributes (Job Posting Analysis)
Category Descriptions of traits and skills that imply ...
Initiative ... engagement, entrepreneurship, intrinsic and performance motivation.
Purposive ... high energetic impetus and strength in goal attainment.
Communicating ... effective interaction and bargaining, affiliate motives, intercultural interests.
Administrative Skill ... structuring and controlling complex systems, implementing goals and plans.
Inspirational ... convincing, being a positive model and thus influential "a real personality".
Collaborative ... cooperative, participative, social competency and team orientation.
Leader Experience ... experience in leadership.
Responsible ... willingness and awareness of taking responsibility seriously, committed, liable.
Motivating ... motivating, supporting and developing employees.
Firm ... persistence and stress resistance.
Flexible ... adaptability, creativity, being nimble and movable.
Future Oriented ... planning ahead, prepared, modern, being a "signpost".
Rational ... thinking analytically, critical and realistic, broad knowledge.
Enthusiastic ... enjoying to work.
Directive ... straight, strict, and controlling leadership style.
Willingness to Learn ... motivation to learn, to acquaint with new tasks.
