AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS

RESEARCH PROPOSAL:
AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND
CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF
21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS
© Oghenethoja Umuteme

Abstract
The relationship between leadership and culture, and how this affects the
sustainability of organisations in the 21st
century is an issue of debate. Several
research efforts in this direction have shown that there is a relationship between
leadership and culture, and how this relationship influences organisational growth and
performance. However, this research aims to show the extent of this relationship on a
ranking scale, and as it reflects leadership initiatives within developing regions of the
world. Using the United Nations sustainable development goals as a guide to
understanding what sustainability implies for organisations, this research will use
different scenarios to test respondents’ perception of the following three research
variables, namely: leadership initiatives, cultural imperatives, and sustainable
development. Two research propositions have equally been developed: first, if
effective leadership is highly dependent on cultural sustainability, and second, if
leadership initiatives should agree with cultural imperatives for organisations to strive
for sustainability in the 21st century. A multimethod methodology is proposed for use
in data gathering, such as survey questionnaires, interpersonal interview, and the
consultation of archival data. Statistical means will be employed to analyse the data
to enhance quantitative judgement. In the end, this proposal should profitably add to
the wealth of research knowledge in the area of the relationship between leadership
and culture, and how this relationship impacts the sustainable development of 21st
century organisations.

RESEARCH PROPOSAL: AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS
Introduction
In 1987, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) of the
United Nations, defined sustainable development as: “development that meets the
needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987). Though, this definition has its limitations,
such as developing the foundation for addressing the economic needs of
organisations and their social responsibilities in their operational environments, yet it
paves the way for the need for organisations to become environmentally and culturally
sustainable in the 21st
century. Already, there is increasing pressure on the leadership
of organisations to drive for sustainable development, in such a way that
organisational long term strategic plans must measure up with the demand for
sustainability (Hall & Vredenburg, 2003).
Since organisations thrive among people living in communities, one can
mention that leadership and culture can be integrated to help sustain organisations
from one human ideological and cultural era to the other (Edwards & Turnbull, 2012).
It is no news that many citizens within the labour age emigrate their home country to
other nations to seek for greener pastures. When this happens, there is the tendency
for the organisations in the emigrating nation to experience brain-drain, as often
noticed in African countries (Okoli, 2013). For the receiving nations, issues of
discrimination and inequality can arise (Snaebjornsson, Edvardsson, Zydziunaite &
Vaiman, 2015). Such incidents can have influence on the existing cultures in the
receiving organisations – thus creating room for new cultural mix. With time, one would
notice that leadership in these organisations would have to, from time to time, learn to
adapt to these dynamically emerging work cultures.

It is on the above concern, that one remembers 25 September 2015, when the
UN countries adopted a set of sustainable development goals to end poverty, protect
the planet, and ensure prosperity all over the world within a target period of 15 years.
Consequently, the above resolution has a leadership and cultural dimension, and
greater impact on the sustainability of organisations. Though, the 17 goals outlined at
2015 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA, 2015) are relevant to the operations
of organisations, the 8th
, 9th
, 10th
, 11th
, 12th
and 13th
goals are visibly significant to
understanding the impact of leadership and culture in the sustainability of 21st
century
organisations. As it stands, organisations must operate within the confines of the
above UNGA sustainable development goals to remain sustainable, else be found
wanting of breaking the laws. Since, leadership gives vision to organisations and also
drive them (Kotter, 1990), it can be agreed that cultural values within organisations will
tend to define the organisational day to day operations.
In line with UNGA (2015) declaration, the operations of organisations should
include the need for productive employment and decent work for employees (8th
goal),
building infrastructure, encouraging inclusiveness and sustainable industrialization
and innovations (9th
goal), fair remuneration among all employees; undermining their
nations as a means to sustaining equality among cultures (11th
goal), sustainable
production patterns (12th
goal), and ensuring the operations of organisations do not
impact negatively on the environment and climate (13th
goal). These will therefore,
define the culture and set in place, the rules of engagement within any global
multicultural organisation.
Sustainable development in organisations is a gradual process that advocates
for equitable distribution of economic resources (Hall, Daneke, & Lenox, 2010).
Noticeably, organisations in the 21st
century experienced some well-established forms

of global marketing of products and services, with the inclusion of global recruitments.
How the idea of sustainable wealth distribution affects the sustenance of
organisations, especially in the area of equal employment terms for staff irrespective
of their cultural backgrounds, is worth evaluating. Likewise, the influence of
globalization has also led many organisations to become involved in global
investments, in new frontiers. Consequently, the reasons why organisations establish
business branches in other countries are varied. Some have claimed it is to minimise
tax through a process of tax inversion and/or to minimise overhead costs and
maximize profits (Sahadi, 2014). Organisations, especially manufacturing industries,
prefer to establish businesses in countries where the environmental laws are less strict
(Henisz & Zelner, 2010). This said, the challenges that global organisations face in
some countries include obeying the employment laws which will not allow the company
to bring in all the workforce from the operational home country (Henisz & Zelner,
2010). Affected organisations will have no choice but to recruit locally, and will usually
not pay equal remunerations globally. This is often where cultural variance begin to
set in within the organisation leading to a ‘culture of class’ within the organisation.
In employment terms, various generations have also been classified.
Generations X, Y and Z, happens to be the most studied generations, and these three
generations of workforce are expected to converge on the workplace at the same time
in say from the year 2022 (Bresma & Rao, 2017). To understand the challenges that
leaders will face when this happens, one need to understand what these generations
stand for. According to Bresma and Rao (2017), the categorisation sees Generation
X, as the age of workers born before the 1980s; Generation Y or Millennials, as those
born between 1984 and 1996; and Generation Z, as those born after 1997. For
instance, it is suggested that while generations X and Y appreciates on-the-job

coaching and mentoring rather than the higher responsibilities that come with
leadership roles, generation Z prefers higher responsibilities and freedom as the
expected attributes of leadership (Bresma & Rao, 2017). These generational
classifications are the result of material, system and psychological cultural ideologies
in relation to the integration of organisational leadership and culture globally. Whether
one appreciates this fact, is not the issue for debate, but the fact that for organisations
to exist as sustainable entities, there must be a marriage between leadership and the
evolving work cultures globally. In the end, the global leader will have to make some
trade-off decisions depending on which option(s) can lead to sustainability and growth
(Neeley & Cekin, 2017).
Therefore, sustainability means the survival of an organisation in a culturally
diffused external environment, and internal integration among a workforce that have
diverse cultural backgrounds (Schein, 2004). Organisational culture exists but often
not recognised, though it plays a crucial role in shaping the behaviours of both leaders
and subordinates. The culture in an organisation is created by the leadership, usually
from the pioneer leader(s), and then it is dynamically modified by the people that
interacts with the activities of the organisation (Spector, 2012). It is believed that the
leader influences subordinates without compulsion creating trust, and respect
(Nikolovski & Markovska, 2017). One might have heard of the popular slogan that
says: ‘the customer is always right.’ Apart from the workforce, every customer is also
potential cultural nomenclature that can change how organisations does business.
One can mention that the reason why there is no universal definition for leadership is
because every leadership initiative is the outcome of the interaction between culture
and personality. Furthermore, organisational communication is an element of
organisation that also influences leadership. How a leader communicates with

subordinates depends on the communication skills of both the leader and the
subordinate. Variances in communication have been tied to cultural differences
(McLean & Moman, 2012). Implying, for global leadership initiatives to be sustainable,
every leader must learn and adapt to the various cultures that have evolved within the
organisation provided they are able to enhance growth, productivity, interrelationships,
and sustainability. Often this have led to several behavioural traits that leaders do
display. It then goes to mean that, if the concept of culture is well understood, one
would also understand the leadership drive in organisations, and the path of
sustainability the organisation is toeing. This is corroborated by Schein (2004), who
suggested that leadership evolves as the leader begin to adapt to the culture within
the organisation.
Purpose of Research Proposal
The rationale behind this research proposal is seen from the discussion above; to
clarify why some organisational cultural practices enables leaders to lead effectively,
and also, why some organisations do shut-down operations in some parts of the world.
It is on the above note that the finding of this research is expected to add a new
knowledge to existing ones; on the interrelationship between organisational leadership
and culture, and the issues of sustainability. To this end, this research proposal will be
limited to the following two research ideas: first, to investigate if effective leadership in
21st century organisations is highly dependent on cultural sustainability? second, to
assess if leadership initiatives must agree with cultural imperatives for organisations
to strive for sustainability in the 21st century? In agreement with the understanding
posited by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM, 2017),
organisational culture is used in this proposal to imply that which creates an enabling

environment for engaging, stimulating, and driving growth among the workforce in the
organization, and aligns this engagement with the organizational leadership mission.
Methodology
Several research literatures on leadership, culture and sustainability exist. Notably
among these is the research efforts of the Global Leadership and Organizational
Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) research project. The GLOBE project identified nine
global leadership dimensions related to cross-cultural leadership such as:
performance orientation, assertiveness, future orientation, humane orientation,
institutional collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, in-group collectivism, power distance,
and gender egalitarianism (Dorfman, Javidan, Hanges, Dastmalchian & House, 2012).
The hallmark of the GLOBE studies was the need to understand national cultures in
order to predict leadership initiatives within such cultures. Despite this elaborate
research effort, there is still need to emphasis the problem arising from the
sustainability of organisations from the UNGA (2015) sustainable development
perspective, especially in developing countries. This will enable the learning from
developed countries to be efficiently adapted to the challenges of cultural variance that
exists in less developed nations. Especially, with recent concern for the environment
as a result of climate change, and various ethnic and religious crisis that dominates
the political landscape in developing nations. The focus of this study will further enable
the survival of multinational organisations operating in developing nations, such as
Nigeria with high level of corruption, high bank lending rates, incessant communal
crisis and militancy, high poverty rate, and low standard of living (Achumba,
Ighomereho, & Akpor-Robaro, 2013; Emori, Obim, Eba, & Emefiele, 2017).

The first research proposal that will be investigated, is how effective leadership
is highly dependent on cultural sustainability in 21st century organisations. A measure
of high dependency would mean that leadership is interwoven into the cultural ideals
of organisations. As stated earlier, leadership is about how effective the path taken by
the leaders in an organisation is effectively communicated down to subordinates
(Scisco, Biech, & Halienbeck, 2017). One can mention that organisations can boast of
several cultural practices that are linked to leadership initiatives such as: performance
culture, employee progression culture, communication culture, employment culture,
employee retaining culture, diversity and inclusiveness culture, etc. These cultures are
directly linked to organisational goals, and herein the organisational drive for
sustainability is expressed. According to the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL,
2017), culture is needed to define leadership strategy. The question that one can ask
is the extent to which the existing culture in any organisation can influence leadership
steers. This research proposal aims to asset that the influence of culture on leadership
is high.
The second research proposal is, if leadership initiatives should agree with
cultural imperatives for organisations to strive for sustainability in the 21st century?
This question is linked to the first idea in that organisational sustainability is likely to
depend on the leadership initiatives within an organisation, and as suggested above,
these initiatives are in resonance with the organisational culture. As reported by Lerato
Mbele (2016, March 1), a case in hand is the failure of Britain's Barclays Bank to
sustain growth in Africa unlike the African indigenous banks such as Standard Bank,
Ecobank, and GT Bank, which have showed sustained growth despite the challenging
business landscape in Africa. This can imply that Barclays Bank did not adapt to the
challenging and changing business culture in Africa. However, the wider implication of

the Barclays’ unsustainable growth could also signify high business risks in Africa, and
low growth prospects. A study conducted by Nikolovski, Radevska and Petkovska
(2016) reported that good communication and ensuring that differences and diversity
are separated from the goals of the organisation is the main reason why some family
owned businesses have grown and succeeded across generations.
In addition, the finding also reported that those who inherited such businesses
where capable, qualified and skilled, and were not selected on favouritism. If this idea
is extrapolated, it implies that even for larger organisations, all communication efforts
should be linked to the goals of the organisation and that leaders with the capacity,
qualification and skill to manage multicultural organisations should be allowed to take
leadership roles. However, unlike family businesses, social identity tensions and
conflicts exist in multicultural organisations (Hannum, Gentry & Weber, 2010). In the
face of varied traditional cultures within an organisation, how will a leader unify
employees towards the shared goals of the organization? This then calls for a well-
defined culture that ties with the leadership initiative within the organisation, else it
would not be long before some employee will feel that they are being discriminated
against. As a consequence, there can be burn-out and demotivation, leading to low
productivity and unsustainable organisational growth (Spector, 2012). It is important
to mention that the goals of globalization, as they agree with the goals of sustainable
development, are a step in the direction of organisational sustainability, and the ability
to manage multicultural ideas that will enhance growth, performance and
sustainability.
This research proposal is conceived with the fact that in multicultural surveys,
some irregularities due to cultural variables can affect the gathering and interpretation
of the date sets. These irregularities have been recognised by Spector, Liu, and

Sanchez (2015) to include culturally induced response bias. Equally noticed in their
finding, is the need to separate culture and location from other study variables when
conducting comparative studies. This research design will therefore, allow for the
comparisons of culture groups, while ensuring that the other two dependent variables:
leadership and sustainability, are treated as unique entities. Furthermore,
organisationally adopted cultural values will be treated as fixed variable, as defined by
the leadership objectives and organisational goals. In accordance with the suggestion
in Spector, Liu, and Sanchez (2015), this research will also adopt the process where
sampling methods are chosen to control for dissimilarities that confound the cultural
variables of interest with other characteristics of the acquired samples. One must also
take into account that translation and back-translation are equally essential in studies
that cut across linguistic boundaries (Spector, Liu, & Sanchez, 2015).
For the above reasons, a multimethod research design method that
encourages the gathering of survey using questionnaires, interpersonal interviews,
and archival data will be used. Surveys using questionnaires have been adjudged as
being able to capture large data for both qualitative and quantitative analysis (Spector,
2012). However, care will be taken to address the concern raised in Sullivan (2011),
that the reliability and validity of data sets from surveys and drawing useful conclusions
can be undermined if the questions in the survey instrument are poorly worded, with
confusing layout and inadequate response options. For a quick comparative response
purpose, which will help to inform the need to either modify or proceed with the
research as designed, the additional option of interpersonal interviews will be
conducted, as this form of data gathering method enables prompt feedback through
the interpretation of the body-language of respondents (Keltner, 2014). Also,
interpersonal interview is preferred for respondents who would not be able to read and

understand the survey questions (Spector, 2012). Archival data sets are planned to
be sourced from the websites of American Psychological Association (APA), World
Bank Group, United Nations, and US Bureau of Labour Statistics. On specific cultures,
the need to visit country specific government owned websites will be further evaluated
based on credibility assessment.
The above data gathering road map, will enhance the evaluation of various
organisational cultural frameworks, in order to understand cultural variance across
organisations and the reason for such variance. To improve the quality of the results,
qualitative methods aimed at characterizing culture-specific factors, will be paired with
quantitative methods, which are expected to separate the studied cultural variables
into their distinct influences (Spector, Liu, & Sanchez, 2015). The influence of culture
on the transformational leadership theory will be tested. The choice of transformational
leadership theory is because of the dynamic nature of 21st
century organisations,
which require that organisations must adapt quickly to cultural and technological
changes within organisations.
Participants shall be drawn from multinational organisations, especially leaders
who have served outside the home office in their organisations. The reason for this is
to harvest their wealth of experience in the multi-cultures where they have operated.
Also, some of the participants will be drawn from local employees, and their preference
to either interrelate with foreign nationals or indigenous leaders will be tested. This is
to examine if the locally recruited workforce believe that leadership can adapt to local
cultural requirements and needs. Question can be set to test the social aspects of
leadership adaptability to cultures as well. It has been reported that too small a sample
size can lead to waste of financial resources as the result might not be representative
of actual occurrences, while too large sample might lead to high ambiguity (Spector,

2012). For this reason, the estimated target participants will be limited to 200 leaders
and 100 subordinates in various functions, in order to improve the confidence level of
results. This estimated sample size will be fine-tuned after the pilot test, knowing that
not all respondents will return the survey instrument.
To test if the dependence of leadership on culture is high, initial sampling will
be carried out in Nigeria, because Nigeria is one nation with multiple ethnic and
culturally diverse groups (Global Affairs Canada, 2017). The choice of Nigeria as the
initial sampling ground is also informed by the ranking carried out by the Rand
Merchant Bank, as reported by Shakirudeen Taiwo (2017, October 10), where Nigeria
never made it to the 10 best destinations for investments in Africa. Also, the option of
using LinkedIn to contact various leaders and employees whose profile matches with
the research criteria for the preliminary data collection will be assessed. Moreno,
Goniu, Moreno, and Diekema (2013) raised the concern of the likelihood of breaching
the rights of respondents and that of their employers through the gathering of research
data from social media. Hence, for research ethical purpose, the privacy and identity
of LinkedIn respondents will be preserved in line with applicable national and state
laws. The choice of LinkedIn is to account for instances when physical access to
leaders and employees is not feasible. Pilot interviews will be conducted with
respondents from various cultures in order to set the background for the survey
questionnaires. At the end, the framework for the entire data set will be determined
within three scenarios to include: cultural imperatives scenarios, leadership initiatives
scenarios and sustainable development scenarios.
Firstly, cultural scenarios will present questions and events relating to religion,
leadership styles, noticeable leadership traits, social orientation, sports, gender
orientation, race, and such elements that are deemed necessary as the research

progresses. For instance, it is reported that gender bias and stereotypes have
consistently attributed female leaders with feminine traits of being nice and
understanding when in leadership roles, while male leaders display more
organisational qualities of personal confidence and competitiveness (Paustian-
Underdahl, Walker & Woehr, 2014). In disagreeing with the above gender bias,
Nikolovski and Markovska (2017) suggests that if women are adequately trained to
handle leadership demands, they will perform above expectation. Hence, this proposal
will tend to also asses the viability of the above claim. Secondly, leadership initiatives
scenarios will present questions relating to transformation, remuneration, employment
strategies, performance appraisal, coaching and mentoring. Thirdly, sustainable
development scenarios will provide respondents the opportunity to link the leadership
initiatives within their organisations to the goals advocated by the United Nations as
contained in UNGA (2015). Scenarios responses will be tested on three levels of how
the relationship between the tested variables plays out in each organisation; whether
high, medium or low.
The time frame proposed for this research is one year, including field sampling,
results gathering/categorization based on the developed scenarios, and analysis, and
the interpretation of findings. It is important to note that not all respondents will
complete all items in the questionnaires. However, care will be taken to adequately
assess the impact on the overall conclusion. Once the responses are received, the
results will be collated, separated into the two distinct research questions, and
analysed. Also, the number of respondents on each data sets will also be recorded.
Furthermore, analyses will be done using simple statistical means to compute the
mean, mode, median, standard deviation and the variance of the responses.

Analysis of Results
Moreover, as mentioned in the methodology, and suggested in Spector, Liu and
Sanchez (2015) all measurements that compare multicultural responses will be
assessed for equivalence/invariance using confirmatory factor analysis or item
response theory. Also, to ensure that multicultural variances are empirically assessed
to minimise cultural biases, Ones, et al. (2012) suggest the use of meta-analytic
techniques that help to examine cross-cultural generalizability of relationships. This
method may be adopted as it will be useful in defining the cultural strength that can
create the bond of relationship and organisational identity among employees.
Conclusion
In the end, this proposal would have been able to show the actual relationship between
leadership, culture and the sustainable development of 21st
century organisations.
Approval is hereby sought from the management to implement this research proposal.

References:
Achumba, I. C., Ighomereho, O. S., & Akpor-Robaro, M. O. M. (2013). Security
challenges in Nigeria and the implications for business activities and sustainable
development. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 4(2). 79-99.
Retrieved from http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEDS/article/view/4129
Bresma, H., & Rao, V. D. (2017). A Survey of 19 countries shows how generations
X, Y, and Z are — and aren’t — different. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved
from https://hbr.org/2017/08/a-survey-of-19-countries-shows-how-generations-x-y-
and-z-are-and-arent-different
Center for Creative Leadership (CCL). (2017). Leadership culture: Culture that
makes strategy happen. Retrieved from https://www.ccl.org/leadership-
solutions/organizational-leadership/leadership-culture/.
Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., Dastmalchian, A., & House, R. (2012).
GLOBE: A twenty year journey into the intriguing world of culture and leadership.
Journal of World Business, 47, 504-518. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2012.01.004.
Edwards, G., & Turnbull, S. (2012). A cultural approach to evaluating leadership
development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 15(1), 46-60. doi:
10.1177/1523422312467144.
Emori, E. G., Obim, E. N., Eba, A. O., & Emefiele, C. C. (2017). Effect of bank
lending rates on the performance of Nigerian economy. European Journal of
Business and Management, 9(21), 92-95. Retrieved from
http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/view/37825/38908.
Global Affairs Canada. (2017). Cultural information – Nigeria. Retrieved from
https://www.international.gc.ca/cil-cai/country_insights-apercus_pays/ci-
ic_ng.aspx?lang=eng

Hall, J., & Vredenburg, H. (2003). The challenge of innovating for sustainable
development. MITSloan Management Review, 45(1), 61-68.
Hall, J. K., Daneke, G. A., & Lenox, M. J. (2010). Sustainable development and
entrepreneurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business
Venturing, 25(5), 439-448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.01.002.
Hannum, K. M., Gentry, W. A., & Weber, T. J. (2010). Leadership Across
Differences: A report on research and findings. USA: Center for Creative
Leadership. ISBN 978-1-60491-082-7 (ebook).
Henisz, W. J., & Zelner, B. A. (2010). The hidden risks in emerging markets. Harvard
Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2010/04/the-hidden-risks-in-
emerging-markets.
Keltner, D. (2014). Nonverbal Communication and its Connection to Emotion,
Emotional health and Relationships. American Psychological Association.
Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/action/careers/understanding-
world/dacherkeltner.pdf.
Kotter, J. P. (1990). A Force for Change: How leadership differs from management.
New York: Free Press.
McLean, S., & Moman, M. (2012). Communication for Business Success.
(Canadian Edition) V.1.0.
Mbele, L. (2016). Why is Britain's Barclays Bank pulling out of Africa? BBC News
Report. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35695601.
Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S., & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of social
media research: Common concerns and practical considerations.
Cyberpsychology, Behaviour and Social Networking, 16(9), 708–713.
doi:10.1089%2Fcyber.2012.0334

Neeley, T., & Cekin, E. (2017). Global leadership in a dynamic and evolving region:
Molinas @ The coca-cola company (A). Harvard Business School Case 417-068.
Retrieved from https://hbr.org/product/global-leadership-in-a-dynamic-and-
evolving-region-molinas-the-coca-cola-company-a/417068-PDF-ENG
Nikolovski, L. & Markovska, M. (2017). The impact of female leaders on
management and implementation of organisational goals and objectives. Journal of
Sustainable Development, 7(17),105-118. Retrieved from
http://www.fbe.edu.mk/JSDv17.pdf.
Nikolovski, L., Radevska, M., & Petkovska, E. (2016). Professional management of
family enterprises in function of adequate adjustment of diversity of interest of
family and business. Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(16), 32-44. Retrieved
from http://www.fbe.edu.mk/JSDv16.pdf.
Okoli, N. (2013). Universities and globalization flows: African experience. American
Journal of Educational Research, 1(2), 58-62. Retrieved from
http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/1/2/4/#.
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Deller, J., Albrecht, A.-G., Duehr, E. E., & Paulus, F. M.
(2012). Cross-cultural generalization: Using meta-analysis to test hypotheses
about cultural variability. In A. M. Ryan, F. T. L. Leong, & F. L. Oswald (Eds.),
Conducting multinational research projects in organizational psychology:
Challenges and opportunities (pp. 91-122). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., Walker, L. S., & Woehr, D. J. (2014). Gender and
perceptions of leadership effectiveness: A meta-analysis of contextual moderators.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), pp. 1129-1145. doi:10.1037/a0036751.

United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2015). Transforming our world: The
2030 Agenda for sustainable development. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership (3rd Ed.). ISBN 0-7879-
6845-5. Jossey-Bass (imprint of John Wiley & Sons, Inc).
Sahadi, J. (2014). 7 Things you absolutely must know about corporate taxes. CNN
Money. New York: CNN. Retrieved from
http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/14/news/economy/corporate-taxes-
inversion/index.html.
Scisco, P., Biech, E., & Halienbeck, G. (2017). Compass: Your Guide for Leadership
Development and Coaching. UAS: Center for Creative Leadership. ISBN-13: 978-
1604916515.
Snaebjornsson I. M., Edvardsson I. R., Zydziunaite, V., & Vaiman, V. (2015). Cross-
cultural leadership: Expectations on gendered leaders’ behaviour. SAGE Open,
5(2),1-8. doi: 10.1177/2158244015579727.
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). (2017). Understanding and
developing organizational culture. Retrieved from
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-
samples/toolkits/pages/understandinganddevelopingorganizationalculture.aspx
Spector, P. E., Liu, C., & Sanchez, J. I. (2015). Methodological and substantive
issues in conducting multinational and cross-cultural research. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 101-131.
doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111310.
Spector, P. E. (2012). Industrial and organizational psychology: Research and
Practice (6th ed.). US: Wiley.

Sullivan, G. M. (2011). A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. Journal of
Graduate Medical Education, 3(2),119–120. doi:10.4300%2FJGME-D-11-00075.1
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our
Common Future: Towards sustainable development. Retrieved from http://www.un-
documents.net/ocf-02.htm.

AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS

Similar to AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS (20)

More from Lisa Graves

More from Lisa Graves (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

AN EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP AND CULTURE ON THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF 21ST CENTURY ORGANIZATIONS