Does Globalization Matter : The Change of Power Distance and Its Effects on Authoritarian Leadership

1
Does Globalization Matter The Change of
Power Distance and Its Effects on Authoritarian
Leadership in Chinese Organizations

• Li-Fang Chou
  Bor-Shiuan Cheng
• Kaohsiung Medical University National Taiwan
  University
• Globalization and Development in Chinese Economic
  Region Conference,
• June 22, 2006 in Taipei, R. O. C

2
Presentation Outline

• Introduction
• Research Purposes
• Theoretical Review
• Research framework
• 2 Studies (Results and Summary)
• Discussion

3
Introduction

• Globalization and Leadership
• Paternalistic Leadership (PL)
• Combines strong discipline and authority with
  fatherly benevolence and moral integrity couched
  in a personalistic atmosphere (Farh Cheng,
  2000)
• Authoritarian Leadership (AL) of PL
• Leader take rigorous control over subordinates
  and demands complete obedience .

4
Introduction

• Leadership and authoritarian values under
  Globalization
• The transformation of AL
• The Change of power distance values regarding
  authority
• The effectiveness of transformational AL and the
  key role of power distance within the
  relationship between transformational AL and
  individual outcome

5
Study Purpose

• To probe into the influencing factors that will
  affect the difference of employees power
  distance.
• To realize the effects of different power
  distance values upon transformational
  authoritarian leadership.
• To better understand the effectiveness of
  authoritarian leadership across individuals
  holding difference power distance

6
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• The impact of Globalization on Organizational
  Behavior--leadership
• Transcendence / compression of space and
  economic, technology and information circulation
• Cultural aspect, globalization ? values
  homogeneous or heterogeneous all over the world
  /nation /organization ?
• ?Globalization ?Culture values ? Leadership

7
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• What happen to Authoritarian Leadership in
  Chinese under Globalization ? Will be disappeared
  ? or transformed ?
• According to the content of AL, Farh Cheng
  (2000) suggested that
• AL behavior hurts subordinates dignity should
  and will be lessened.
• AL behavior about performance, principle, and
  core values should and will be retained or
  reinforced.

8
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• The Transformation of Authoritarian Leadership
  (Jen, Farh, Cheng, Chou,2003 Cheng
  Chou,2005).

• People-related AL
• - Emphasizing leaders personal authority
• - Control over Subordinate
• - Focus on subordinates compliance and fear
  toward leader.
• - Unwilling to delegate, ignore sub.
  suggestion, information manipulation

• Task-related AL
• - Emphasizing high performance standards, norms
  and core values which were built by leader or
  organization
• - Control over task or job process and detail
• - Focus on subordinates performance and work
  attitude.
• - Didactic behavior, monitor work process, high-
  goal setting

9
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• What will happen with the Transformation of AL?
• Do people and task related AL co-existed ?
• Convergence Hypothesis (Myer, 1975 Yang, 1988)
• The Challenge of Convergence hypothesis
• Cultural theory (Beck,1998)
• Traditionality and Modernity (Huang, 1995 Yang,
  1996)
• The relationships of people - and task related
  AL with subordinate effectiveness
• Work motivation or incentive, emotional feeling
• People-related AL ? effectiveness(-)
• Task-related AL ? effectiveness()

10
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• PD which the values regarding submission to
  authority have been gradually altered as the
  social modernization and industrial/ commercial
  development.
• Organizational Centralization (Janssens Brett,
  1994) ? PD ()
• Power distance theory (Mulder, 1977 Poppe,
  2003) leaders PD gt subordinates PD Male
  PD gt Female PD
• The emphases on egalitarian (Farh Cheng, 2000)
  Age (), Education (-)

11
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• The demonstrations of AL behaviors
• Trait theory Organizational characteristic
  (Yukl, 2003)
• Subordinates expectation and preference
  regarding leadership ( Hofstede, 1980 Dorfman,
  et. al, 1997)
• Organizational Centralization
• Leaders PD
  Leaders AL ()
• Subordinates PD

12
Relative theories and Previous Studies

• Power Distance (PD) and AL
• PD refers to peoples ideas about the what is
  acceptable in superior-subordinate relationship
  (Lee, Pillutla, Law, 2000) Accept authoritys
  decision uncritically (Begley, Lee, Fang Li,
  2002)
• PD shapes subordinates reactions to the
  supervisors leadership / decision / treatment
  (Farh, Liang, Hackett, 2006)
• ? The effect of AL on individual outcome will
  be moderated by PD

13
Research Framework
Organization char. Hierarchical position and
personal char.
Study 1
Power Distance
Study 2
AL -People related -Task - related
Subordinate Effectiveness
14
Study 1

• Subject
• 92 work team from business organization and 125
  battalions from military organizations (both are
  Taiwan sample)
• Business sample
• 92 leaders and 629 team members (one leaders with
  3-13 members) from 60 organizations
• Military sample
• 125 Battalion commanders (leaders), 402 company
  commanders (members) and 1121 platoon leader
  (members). One leaders with 12 members
• Measures
• Variables Subjects gender , age, education,
  leader position and type of organization
  (business / military organization)
• PD, People-related AL, and Task related AL

15
Organization chart. Hierarchical position and
personal chart.
Study 1
Power Distance
AL -People related -Task - related
16
Study 1 Draft Results
? Factors for PD difference ?
17
Study 1 Draft Results

• HLM Factors for demonstration of AL?

18
Study 2 Draft Results

• The effects of subordinates PD and organization
  type on people-related AL?

19
Study 2 Draft Results

• The effects of subordinates PD and leaders PD
  on task-related AL?

20
Study 1 Summary

• Values regarding submission to authority--PD has
  been gradually changed as the social change.
• Age ? PD() on age 50 group
• Education (years) ? PD (-)
• PD in Military org. gt PD in Business org.
• The demonstration of AL
• Main effects for people-related AL
• Military Org ? People-AL ()
• Leader PD , Subordinate PD ? People-AL ()
• Cross-level interaction on AL
• Subordinate PD organization type on People- AL
• Subordinate PD Leader PD on Task -AL

21
Study 1 Complement for Org. type
22
Study 2

• Subject
• 510 employee ( who cowork with CEO more than one
  year) each business
• Mainland China sample
• 375 employees from 53 China private businesses
• 61 were males 15 had college or higher
  education average seniority was about 4.57
  years, 53 were supervisors
• Taiwan sample
• 181 employees from 27 Taiwan private businesses
• 51 were female 24 had college or higher
  education average seniority was is about 7.60
  years 53 were supervisors
• Measures
• Outcome variables Affective Org. commitment
  (a.88, .95), Affective loyalty to CEO (a.86,
  .92), and Obligated Loyalty to CEO (a.80, 88).,
• Control variables employees gender, age,
  education, position, seniority

23
Study 2

• Measures EFA of AL
• Cheng, Farh, Chou(2005)
• People-related AL, 10 items, a.87 (China) and
  .89(Taiwan)
• He will not reveal any message to me.
• He will not let me aware of his real intension.
  
• He will make all company decisions on his own.
• He asks me to fully comply with his leadership.
• He will devaluate my contributions in work.
• The final decision in meeting will be made based
  on his attitude.
• He will underestimate my capability.

24
Study 2

• Task-related AL, 7 items, a.77 (China) and
  .84(Taiwan)
• He asks more work requirements on me than that I
  ask for myself.
• He requests that his subordinates should achieve
  higher performance than the ones from other
  companies.
• He asks me to report to him whenever theres any
  work progress change.
• He will seriously request my explanation once
  work goal is not achieved.
• He will take control on my work.
• His management style is extremely strict.
• He fully know well of the my work details.

25
Study 2

• Measures-- EFA of Power Distance
• Power distance Dorfman and Howell(1988), 5
  items, a.79 (China) and .80(Taiwan)
• Managers should seldom ask for the opinions of
  employees.
• Managers should make most decisions without
  consulting subordinates.
• Managers should avoid off-the-job social contacts
  with employees.
• Managers should not delegate important tasks to
  employees.
• It is frequently necessary for a manager to use
  authority and power when dealing with
  subordinates.

26
Power Distance
Study 2
AL -People related -Task - related
Subordinate Effectiveness
27
Study 2 Draft Results
? Correlations of all Variables ?
4.
4.
Top-right triangle matrix is correlations for
Taiwan sample , and Bottem-left triangle matrix
is correlations matrix for China sample.
28
Study 2 Draft Results
? Hierarchical regression analysis main and
moderating effects ?
29
Study 2 Draft Results
? Hierarchical regression analysis moderating
effects?
Affective Loyalty to supervisor
Taiwan Sample
30
Study 2 Draft Results
? Hierarchical regression analysis moderating
effects?
31
Study 2 Summary

• Authoritarian Leadership
• Correlation between People- related and
  Task-related AL ()
• People- related AL ? Outcome (-)
• Task-related AL ? Outcome ()
• The moderating effects of PD
• Only for People- related AL
• There are different pattern between Taiwan (-
  )(as predict) and Mainland China sample ()

32
Discussion-Preliminary Finding

• The impact o f Globalization on Chinese
  Leadership
• Authoritarian Leadership transformed into two
  type focus on People and Task
• Globalization ? organization design, social
  development ? employees power distance (values
  regarding leaders authority)
• Organizational type, PD of leader and sub. ? the
  demonstration of AL
• The effectiveness of AL and the moderated role of
  PD on outcome

33
Discussion

• Further Direction
• Longitudinal approach
• Individual level of globalization indictor
• individual subjective perception v.s. objective
  job characteristic
• impact on OB such as loyalty, the relationship
  between employee and organization, organizational
  identity, identification, the conflict/balance
  between work and family life

34
Thank you for being patient with this
presentation

• And
• Expect for getting insight from your inspiration
  and idea sharing.