The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx

The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116
Culture Differences in Leadership
This paper is a study of the impact culture has on leadership. It
gives a
comprehensive review of cultural differences in leadership and
emphasizes
the importance of understanding cultural differences between
countries by
examining the work of Geert Hofstede and the GLOBE (Global
Leadership
Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness). In earlier studies,
Bernard Bass
(1990) pointed out the different units of analysis in the study of
leadership
and culture: within and among countries, organizations and
groups.
In addition, he underscored the importance of understanding
cultural
differences, between countries. Studies such as Hofstede’s and
the GLOBE
project have shown that the success of the work of one nation’s
individual
in another culture is dependent upon understanding cultural
differences,
including the variations among attitudes towards and the
practice of
leadership styles. This article is a summary of the study of
leadership in
different cultures. The globalization of many organizations and
the

increasing interdependence of nations make the understanding
of culture
and its influence on leadership increasingly important.
© 2011 IUP. All Rights Reserved.
Almarie E Munley*
* Assistant Professor, 1705 Luxenbay Lane, Chesapeake, VA
23323, 1000 Regent University Drive,
CRB 241, Virginia Beach, VA 23464. E-mail: [email protected]
Introduction
There are many empirical studies on leadership; however, few
have been concerned
with the impact of cultural influence on leadership. In the
Handbook of Leadership:
Theory, Research and Managerial Applications compiled by
Bass and Stodgill and there
is an important discussion regarding the globalization of many
organizations and the
increase of interdependencies of nations that makes the
understanding of culture and
its influence on leadership increasingly important.
The field of leadership and cultural studies is abundant in
academic, corporate, and
research institute literature. In his work, “A Case for Comparing
Apples with Oranges:
International Differences in Values”, Hofstede explains that to
compare nations one
needs theoretical justification and framework. The question then
raised is, whether the
phenomenon that is studied is functionally equal. Hofstede
insists that any comparison
of values and attitudes across nations is in some way a
comparison of apples to oranges.

It is a fruitless effort, Hofstede remarks, without the proper
‘fruitology’. The cultural
attitudes, belief systems and values define the leader’s behavior
as well as those who
follow. Therefore, leadership changes across cultures
emphasizing that there are
Culture Differences on Leadership 17
particular traits that label a leader depending on the region or
society. One more concept
to consider is the cultural programming within an individual
that has to be examined
carefully when reviewing leadership effectiveness. Hofstede’s,
Cultures and
Organizations: Software of the Mind explains that every person
carries within himself
or herself patterns of thinking, feeling and potential acting
which was learnt through
a lifetime of experiences affecting the outcome or result of that
person’s leadership style.
In this article, two major works will be discussed briefly
regarding leadership cultures:
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions and the Global Leadership and
Organizational Behavioral
Effectiveness (GLOBE) research project on nine cultural
dimensions. The work of
Hofstede explained the influence of culture in the leadership
processes through a series
of cultural dimensions. These include, power distance,
masculinity, collectivism,
uncertainty avoidance and long term versus short-term
orientation. Three of these
dimensions in Hofstede’s work are defined here:

1. Individualism (IDV): Individualism on the one side versus its
opposite-
collectivism, on the other, that is the degree to which
individuals are integrated
into groups. On the individualist side, we find societies in
which the ties
between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look
after himself/herself
and his/her immediate family. On the collectivist side, we find
societies in
which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong,
cohesive in-groups,
often extended families (with uncles, aunts and grandparents)
which continue
protecting them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty. The
word ‘collectivism’
in this sense has no political meaning: it refers to the group, not
to the state.
Again, the issue addressed by this dimension is an extremely
fundamental one,
regarding all societies in the world.
2. Power Distance Index (PDI): That is the extent to which the
less powerful
members of organizations and institutions (like the family)
accept and expect
that power is distributed unequally. This represents inequality
(more versus
less), but defined from below, not from above. It suggests that
the followers
as much as the leaders endorse a society’s level of inequality.
Power and
inequality, of course, are extremely fundamental facts of any
society and
anybody with some international experience will be aware that

‘all societies are
unequal, but some are more unequal than others’.
3. Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI): UAI deals with a
society’s tolerance for
uncertainty and ambiguity; it ultimately refers to a man’s search
for Truth.
It indicates to what extent a culture programs its members to
feel either
uncomfortable or comfortable in unstructured situations.
Unstructured
situations are novel, unknown, surprising and different from
usual. Uncertainty
avoiding cultures try to minimize the possibility of such
situations by strict
laws and rules, safety and security measures, and on the
philosophical and
religious level by a belief in absolute Truth: ‘There can only be
one Truth and
we have it.’ People in uncertainty avoiding countries are also
more emotional,
and motivated by inner nervous energy. The opposite type,
uncertainty accepting
cultures, are more tolerant of opinions different from what they
are used to; they
try to have as few rules as possible, and on the philosophical
and religious level
they are relativist and allow many currents to flow side by side.
People within
these cultures are more phlegmatic and contemplative, and not
expected by their

environment to express emotions.
In addition, the GLOBE research program furthered the study of
the cultural
dimensions to include: future orientation, gender egalitarianism,
assertiveness, humane
orientation, in-group collectivism, institutional collectivism,
performance orientation,
power concentration (in some of the research referred to as
power distance).
Researchers have examined contemporary research in the field
of leadership
effectiveness across cultures. In comparing cultures the
question arises: To what extent
is leadership culturally contingent? A review on leadership
cultures is presented in
the following sections: (a) Brief overview of leadership and
current trends; (b) Culture
orientation and leadership style and contemporary leadership
research—to include
Hofstede’s work and the GLOBE study, and (c) Future research
in leadership
effectiveness across cultures.
A Brief Overview on Leadership
The word leadership can be a sophisticated and modern concept,
noted by Bass in the
Handbook of Leadership. At present, there is no consensually
agreed-upon definition
of leadership among scholars. Definitions vary in terms of
emphasis on leader abilities,
personality traits, influence relationships, cognitive versus
emotional orientation,
individual versus group orientation and appeal to self-versus
collective interest.

Bass defines leadership as a ‘universal phenomenon.’ There is
no society where it
is completely absent or where cultural norms have completely
substituted for it.
“Leadership has been conceived as the focus of group processes,
as a matter of
personality, as a matter of inducing compliance, as the
executive of influence, as a
particular behavior, as a form of persuasion, as a power
relation, as an instrument to
achieve goals, as an effect of interaction, as a differentiated
goal, as initiation of structure,
and as many combinations of these definitions” (Bass, 1990, p.
66). Stodgill (1948)
explains that a leader is a person who occupies a position of
responsibility in
coordinating the activities of the members of the group in their
task of attaining a common
goal.
The term ‘leadership’ is extremely general; however, literature
has defined leader as
an individual with status who exerts influence over other
individuals. Leadership can
also be defined as “the ability to influence a group toward the
achievement of goals”
(Robbins, 2001, p. 2); a leader is one who inspires
organizational members to want
to achieve. While there are numerous definitions of leadership,
most have the common
element that “it is a group process that involves interaction
between atleast two persons
in pursuit of a goal” (Yukl, 1989, p. 3). There are three
elements that can be discerned
from this definition, leadership is viewed as a process of

influence that takes place in
a group. Finally, obtaining the goal which the group has set.
The topic of leadership
brings about a wide variety of elements that define the various
behaviors of leaders.
Bass quotes Morris and Seeman who provide definitions of the
various classification.
One cluster of definitions makes leadership synonymous with
the importance of one
position. There is a second cluster that defines the leader as a
focus of attention, as
a representative of a group. A leader is often defined simply as
anyone who engages
in leadership acts. Finally, leadership has been defined as
influence. This is a positive
influence. Stodgill (1948) then supports that leadership is not a
matter of passive status,
or the mere combination of traits. Leadership is a working
relationship among members
of a group, in which the leader acquires status through active
participation.
From a scientific and theoretical perspective, compelling
reasons exist for considering
the role of culture in influencing leadership processes. Because
the general goal of
science is to develop universally valid theories, laws, and
principles, leadership
researchers should strive to develop leadership theories that
transcend cultures. Bass
(1997) explains that contingencies include the motivation of the

subordinates and the
situation.
Defining Culture and Leadership
Robert J House conceived the idea of global research program
concerned with leadership
and organization practices (form and processes) in the summer
of 1991. A proposal for
the project was written in the spring of 1993, following
substantial literature review
and development of an item pool containing 753 questionnaire
items. GLOBE began
in October, 1993 and eventually involved 127 investigators in
62 countries or regions.
Survey questionnaires were developed and collected from more
than 17,000 middle
managers in 951 organizations across three specific industries.
The GLOBE study resembled preceding studies in several ways.
It developed nine
cultural dimensions. House and his colleagues adopted three of
Hofstede’s dimensions-
individualism, power distance and uncertainty avoidance;
developed two dimensions,
gender egalitarianism and assertiveness in place of Hofstede’s
masculinity. The GLOBE
team also went back to the social anthropology work of
Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck to
develop a dimension-humane orientation, and to replace
Hofstede’s long-term
orientation with a dimension-future orientation. The GLOBE
team developed the last
two dimensions, in-group collectivism and institutional
collectivism, through a factor
analysis of responses of these related items. GLOBE resembles
other studies also in the

use of ten cultural clusters resulting from modification of the
eight cultural clusters that
Ronen and Shankar found and adding two, Eastern Europe and
Sub-Sahara Africa.
Like other studies then, GLOBE permits the distinction among
countries based on
different dimensions with substantial implications for the
practice and understanding
of leadership. On the dimension power distance, average scores
of respondents varied
from 2.41 to 3.10 on a scale of 7 (see Table 1). China,
Singapore and the nations in
the Germanic and Nordic clusters scored high in their power
distance. They tend to
formalize interactions, document agreements in contracts, keep
orderly and meticulous
records, make and follow rules, carefully calculate risks and
verify oral communication
in writing. Latin American and Eastern European counties
scored low. Respondents
from these countries indicated a preference for informality,
reliance on the words of
someone they trust rather than a contract, reliance on informal
interactions and norms
and comfort with ambiguity. House points out the evident utility
of this information.
If individuals from high and low power distance cultures are
aware of their
differences with respect to this cultural dimension, they will

more likely know what
to expect from each other, and possibly be able to negotiate
mutually agreeable
approaches to conflict resolution, problem solving, decision
making and management
practices (House et al., 2004, p. 6).
The GLOBE study broke considerable new ground in the
comparative study of
leadership cultures, as well as building on previous work. It
asked respondents
questions about the cultural dimensions as actual society
practice (As Is) and as stated
values (Should Be). Thus, GLOBE provides two measures on
each dimension within
each country: (1) The dimension as people see it in practice,
and (2) The dimension
as people understand it is supposed to be. This permits a third
measure of the leadership
Table 1: Scores for GLOBE Culture Factors
Austria 4.73 5.27 2.44
Brazil 5.62 5.15 2.35
China 4.56 5.09 3.10
Germany 4.68 5.22 2.69
Greece 5.40 5.46 2.39
Guatemala 5.23 6.14 2.35
India 4.71 5.32 2.64

Mexico 4.92 5.95 2.85
Netherlands 4.55 5.17 2.45
Nigeria 5.03 5.48 2.69
Russia 3.89 5.79 2.62
Slovenia 4.38 5.71 2.57
Spain 5.20 5.79 2.26
Taiwan 5.15 5.45 3.09
Turkey 5.26 5.77 2.41
Note: All scores are on 1-7 point scales with higher scores
indicating greater societal values.
Country Institutional
Collectivism
In-group
Collectivism
Power Distance
Source: House et al. (2004)
in each culture, the gap between the practice and the ideal
value. The GLOBE
researchers suggest we may not only distinguish one cultural

cluster from another
by the measure of avoidance of uncertainty, for example, but
also by the gap between
its practice and value. Anglo and Latin Europe clustered
cultures have near accord
score on the practice and value placed upon avoidance of
uncertainty. Germanic and
Nordic clusters score higher on the value placed on that
dimension than on its practice.
All other clustered cultures report higher scores on the practice
or avoidance of
uncertainty than its value.
The GLOBE team then began looking at the independent
variables of cultural
dimensions to explain the variation among countries on specific
leadership
characteristics. The clustering of these characteristics provided
House and his
colleagues six global leadership behaviors: (1)
Charismatic/values-based leadership;
(2) Team-oriented leadership; (3) Participative leadership; (4)
Humane-oriented
leadership; (5) Autonomous leadership; and (6) Self-protective
leadership. The valued
cultural dimensions had statistically significant correlation with
the global leadership
behaviors. For example, performance orientation, gender
egalitarianism and humane
orientation all seemed to provide strong support for a
participative leadership behavior
characterized by high participation and low autocracy.
Conversely, participative
leadership behavior had a negative relation to uncertainty
avoidance and power distance.
In another example, the cultural dimensions of performance

orientation had a
strong positive link to autonomous leadership, characterized by
individualism and
independence. Conversely, human orientation and institutional
collectivism had strong
negative links.
The GLOBE scholars were further to probe the possible
correlations of cultural
dimensions, as valued and practiced, with human conditions of
physical and
psychological health and with economic well-being. They
reported a positive
relationship between the practice of uncertainty avoidance and
four measures of human
conditions—as one went up, the others did so also. Conversely,
they found a negative
relationship between the value of uncertainty avoidance and the
same conditions; as
respondents expressed preference rules, their measures of well-
being decreased. This
may suggest that development efforts may inspire a desire to
avoid uncertainty but once
achieved, the culture of developed economies encourages risk.
The same held true for
economic well-being; a positive association with the practice of
uncertainty avoidance
and a negative association with the value placed upon it.
GLOBE continued to expand its multi-phased research to study
data that was both
qualitative and quantitative. In a more recent study which began
in the year 2000, CEOs
from around the world were interviewed and responded to
questions regarding their
leadership styles. Questions were asked, such as What are your

weaknesses? What are
your strengths? Do you have a plan of atleast 5 years for the
future of your organization?
The responses to these questions were recorded and transcribed.
In order to understand
further the value of each question, the content of the responses
were coded according
to the McClelland Motive Theory (see Winter, 1973). This
codification is a qualitative
method by which running text is studied. The motives coded
were: affiliation, power,
responsibility and achievement. You would naturally conclude
that a leader who
describes himself as being powerful would score high on a
power motive. However,
it was interesting to review the study more closely and find that
power was not necessary
linked to authority, but to the sense of belonging, affiliation to
others and achieving
great things. This particular motive coding provided a
qualitative description of some
of the current cultural dimensions and was also parallel to
describing leadership style
in regions around the world. A particularly interesting finding
was made in Latin
America when the highest motive to be expected was the
‘power-motive' while the data
revealed a high score in affiliation. We can conclude that the
reason for this was mostly
because the cultural patterns of the Latin American people were
more relational and

importance was given to working relationships rather than
hierarchies.
The GLOBE study posited that leadership is culturally
contingent, that the
importance and value of leadership may vary across cultures,
that the status and
influence of leaders vary considerably due to cultural forces in
the countries or regions
in which the leaders function. For example, Americans, Arabs,
Asians, British, Eastern
Europeans, French, Germans, Latin Americans and Russians
tend to romanticize the
concept of leadership and consider leadership to be both
important and political in
organizational arenas. In these cultures, leaders are
commemorated with statues, names
of major avenues or boulevards, or images on stamps. However,
Germanic countries,
such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia tend to
be skeptical about leaders
and tend to have the fear that they can accumulate or abuse
power. In these countries,
it is difficult to find public commemoration of leaders. These
cultural differences may
affect organizational performance in various ways. What may be
effective in one culture
may not prove to be so in another.
In the context of the GLOBE, research program (see House et
al., 2004), previous
work from GLOBE has shown how the characterization of
societal culture can be
somewhat complex as it includes both: (1) Ongoing practices
and behaviors, as well
as, (2) Values or strongly held beliefs of how the culture should

be. Cultural practices
inform us about the current perceptions of specific cultures,
whereas cultural values
tell of the aspirations and direction cultures wish to develop in.
While cultural practices
may be related to what people of a culture value, differences
between what people say
they value and what they actually practice often occurs. For
example, practices or
behaviors on a particular dimension of culture (e.g., power
distance) can be relatively
high, while values of what ‘should be’ occurring may be
relatively low for a given society.
Comparing and Contrasting GLOBE and Hofstede
The common point of cultural understanding has been provided
for many years by the
research studies of Hofstede. The work has been expanded more
recently by the GLOBE
study. This study reports on the relationship between its own
practice and value measures
and also on the relationship between its own dimensions and
those of Hofstede. Hofstede
is the pioneer researcher in culture and its effects on
management of business.
According to Smith (2006), Hofstede’s original work has
surveyed a large number
of employees of IBM between 1967 and 1973 in more than 70
countries to extract data
on their cultural attributes. This work is updated and expanded

in Hofstede (2001) and
it continues to be widely cited and used by management
scholars. Hofstede’s major
advance in the field of cultural research is primarily the
development of a set of
dimensions which can be measured through survey instruments
to obtain average values
for a particular group of people and hence a measure of their
national culture attributes.
The dimensions which he identifies are power distance,
uncertainty avoidance,
individualism, masculinity and long term orientation. By
drawing on the dimension
measures of different groups, one can develop an understanding
of the cultural
differences between these groups.
The GLOBE study (House et al., 2004) was conducted in the
mid-1990s and involved
127 investigators in 62 countries or regions. The study was
designed to replicate and
expand on Hofstede’s (1980a) work and to test various
hypotheses that had been
developed in particular on leadership topics. Survey
questionnaires were developed
and collected from more than 17,000 middle managers in 951
organizations across
3 specific industries.
The GLOBE study, in a similar manner to Hofstede, develops
nine cultural
dimensions across both actual society practice (As Is) and
values (Should Be) in the
different cultural settings. These dimensions are: (1)
Performance orientation, (2) Future
orientation, (3) Gender egalitarianism, (4) Assertiveness, (5)

Institutional collectivism,
(6) In-Group collectivism, (7) Power distance, (8) Humane
orientation, and
(9) Uncertainty avoidance. Again the dimension measures for
different societies allow
an analysis of the cultural differences that exist between these
groups.
There are a number of similarities as well as differences
between the two studies
in the way the concept of national culture is measured. For
example, both studies
include the dimensions of uncertainty avoidance and power
distance. However,
Hofstede’s masculinity dimension is measured with the two
dimensions of gender
egalitarianism and assertiveness in the GLOBE study. Similarly,
Hofstede’s collectivism
is measured with two constructs: Institutional collectivism
(collectivism I) and in-group
collectivism (collectivism II). Finally, whereas Hofstede’s long-
term orientation is similar
to GLOBE’s future orientation, there are two additional
dimensions of culture in GLOBE
—performance orientation and humane orientation—that are not
measured by Hofstede.
Besides differences in the number of dimensions, another key
difference is that the
GLOBE study separately measures two distinct aspects of
national culture—practices
and values—for each of the nine dimensions, there are 18
culture scores for each country
in GLOBE versus five in Hofstede.
Cultural Orientation and Leadership Style
Culture is said to play a strong role in the context of leadership

styles. To date, studies
by Gerstner and Day and the GLOBE project further examine
cross-cultural differences
in leadership prototypes. Hofstede conceptualized culture in
terms of meaning; he
therefore asserted the values of people studying culture level
rather than individual level.
Adler (2008) provides definitions by Kroeber and Kluckhohn,
“Culture consists of
patterns, explicit and implicit of and for behavior acquired and
transmitted by symbols,
constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups,
culture systems may be
considered as products of action and as conditioning elements
of future action”.
Consequently, culture is an attribute that develops within any
identity group enduring
over time (see Doney et al., 1998). The profound effect of
culture on leadership suggests
that we must understand it. There is great debate as to how to
define the term ‘culture’.
Hofstede’s further explains culture, is the collective
programming of the mind—
mental programs or software of the mind that distinguishes one
group of people from
another. Adler (2008) provides a number of definitions
regarding culture. First of all
Tylor in 1877 (p. 1) defined culture as “that complex whole
which includes knowledge,
belief art, law, morals, customs and any capabilities and habits

acquired by a man as
a member of society.” A more recent working definition is
Hofstede’s “culture is the
collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the
members of one human
group from another and the interactive aggregate of common
characteristics that influence
a human group’s response to its environment” (p. 25). The kind
of leadership attempted
and the level of leaderships success will depend on the
congruence between the cultural
values and leadership processes. The prevailing view is that the
core beliefs and values
consistent with these ‘cultural dimensions’ guide leadership
action (see Punnett and
Shenkar, 1996). Culture then influences the action not by
supplying the ultimate values
toward which action is oriented, but by shaping a repertoire or
‘tool kit’ of strategies
of actions in which certain patterns of actions are facilitated
while others are not.
It is our every day behavior, the mundane routines in life that
get to the heart of culture.
There are cultural dimensions that are important to leadership
that have not been
resolved completely. After years of cross-cultural research,
Hofstede suggests that
individualism and collectivism is one of the most important
dimensions of cultural
variation. His argument is that “leadership processes vary and
may differ in individualist
and collectivist societies”. In Hofstede’s study on assessing the
values of people,
produced four factors; individualism, power distance,
masculinity and uncertainty
avoidance. Individualism stands for societies in which the ties

between individuals are
loose; everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and
his or her immediate
family only”, and “collectivism stands for a society in which
people from birth onwards
are integrated into strong, cohesive in groups, which throughout
people’s lifetime
continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty”
(see Hofstede, 1991,
pp. 260-261).
For individualist cultures, support might be valued when
needed, but achievement-
oriented and participative leadership would be key leader’s
behaviors (see Punnett and
Shenkar, 1996). A strong case can be made for the importance
of the cultural dimension
labeled power stratification by House and power distance by
Hofstede (1980b).
Consistent with these notions is the speculation that charismatic
leadership will be
expected and effective in high power distance cultures. The
central role the group plays
in a collectivist cultures parallels some of the similar value
orientations associated with
transformational leadership (see Jung and Avolio, 1999) as
opposed to people in
individualist cultures who are expected to be more motivated to
satisfy their own self-
interests and personal goals. A conclusion can suggest that
congruence between

followers; cultural values and transformational leaders attempt
to build identification
with a collective vision is expected to enhance motivation and
performance among
followers. The GLOBE study’s prediction is that such leaders
would maximize the efforts
and performance of followers who have a collectivistic
orientation. There should be
careful consideration as to which cultural factors are most
important in any given
situation. There are important issues regarding the aspects of
culture that leadership
researchers should consider. First, cultures are not static; they
are dynamic and
continously evolving. The speed varies from culture to culture
but the associated beliefs,
values and other elements of culture at a single point in time
may not necessarily be
reflected in a later time period. Second, although cultures may
be characterized correctly
as being high, or low, on a specific dimension such as power
distance by Hofstede
(this orientation will not likely be characteristic of all issues or
situations). Third,
individual differences exist in the adoption of cultural values
such that not all
individuals of a culture will have attitudes of that culture.
Fourth, it is easy to look
over the significant differences that exist within a country as
well as the differences
between countries that belong to a cluster of countries (see
Ronen and Shenkar, 1985).
Careful consideration should be given to cultural entities,
organizational culture and
national culture. The arguments linking leadership process to
cultures are necessary

to advance the position that empirically derived cross-national
difference in leadership
process reflect cross-cultural differences.
Are there universally endorsed prototypes of effective/ideal
leader? Although it is
unlikely that there is a single prototype of an effective leader
that conforms equally across
societies, there may be universally endorsed attributes as well
as culturally specific
attributes. Initial studies provide the argument that culture plays
a strong role in the
content of leadership prototypes. Additional findings by
Gerstner and Day provide
evidence that leadership prototypes vary across cultures. There
are a number of
questions that are important regarding cross-cultural studies.
For instance, Does
leadership prototype differ among nations, are they equally
compelling and influential?
and what psychological mechanisms link the prototypes to
dominate cultural values?
(see Gerstner and Day, 1994, p. 285).
In recent studies, some researchers have been able to prove that
there are culturally
endorsed implicit leadership theories that are universal. In Den
Hartog’s 1999 research,
she focused on an implicit leadership study on leader behaviors
and attributes that are
effective and ineffective across cultures, specially relating to
transformational and
charismatic leadership. The findings provided a controversial
position to the current
leadership studies namely because the attributes associated with
transformational and

charismatic leadership will be universally endorsed as
contributing to outstanding
leadership. As with leadership, there is no universally agreed-
upon definition among
scholars regarding the term culture. For the purpose of this
study, culture will be
important regarding the influence factor, how leaders influence
others to help
accomplish group or organizational objectives. Studies by
Gerstner and Day in 1994
and the GLOBE project have examined cross-cultural
differences in leadership
prototypes. Hofstede conceptualized culture in terms of
meaning; he asserted that the
values of people are at the culture level rather than individual
level. Kroeber and
Kluckhohn suggest a definition, “Culture consists of patterns,
explicit and implicit of
and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols,
constituting the distinctive
achievement of human groups.... Culture systems may be
considered as products of
action and as conditioning elements of future action.”
Consequently, culture develops
within any identity group enduring over time.
Contemporary Leadership Research: Studies in Progress and
New
Conceptual Models
Currently the GLOBE project finds itself in the final phases of
collecting data. This phase

includes: investigating the impact and effectiveness of specific
leadership behavior and
styles on employee attitude and job performance. The
theoretical base for the GLOBE
research program is implicit leadership theory, value/belief
theory of culture, implicit
motivation theory and structural contingency theory of
organizational form and
effectiveness.
Event Management Leadership Theory: This model addresses
the way that events
in organization's life are interpreted. People in explicit
leadership roles compete with
other sources to shape the meaning given to events. Test of the
theory have assessed
that event management processes were related to cultural
dimensions. Using Hofstede’s
individualism and collectivism index Smith and Peterson (1994)
were able to report
experiences that showed the high and low of power distance in
different culture. This
resulted in most managers reporting interpreting events based
on their own experience
and training more than on any other source.
Culture, Self-Identity, and Work Theory: Erez and Early (1994)
promote a new
situational model of leadership that focuses on the role of
culture in influencing the
leader-follower(s) relationship. Their model assumes that
societal culture influences all
aspects of leadership but the basic interpersonal and
psychological mechanisms that
embody the leadership process are similar across cultures. This
model specifically

addresses how and why leaders are likely to engage in activities
and behaviors that
are consistent with their culture through self-representational
motives. This particular
study considers how leadership processes differ in individualist
versus collectivist
cultures. According to Punnett and Shenkar (1996) and Erez and
Early (1994) leadership
model signifies advancement into specific mechanism by which
the macro level of
cultural factors influences micro level leader-follower behaviors
in a culturally consistent
manner (Punnet and Shenkar, 1996).
Conclusion
The study of culture provides fascinating insights into the
common elements and
distinguishing variety of human experiences. The extensive
research in this area
provides rich data that invites one to make application and
generalization. Several
concerns suggest caution in doing so.
First, although we can make generalizations about a culture
within geographic
boundaries, we know that there are different cultures within
them as well.
The second caution relates to this one and has a formal name—
the ecological fallacy.
It suggests that it would be an error to attribute to an individual
member of a group,

the characteristics of a group. As a rule of thumb, one can find
that the extremes within
a group generally vary more that the average between groups.
Thus, the tallest and
shortest members of a group of men and women would have a
greater difference in
heights than the difference of the average man and woman.
Thus, one cannot know
beforehand that a specific, individual Latin American leader
will use less power than
a specific, individual Canadian leader whatever the profiles of
their respective cultures
might suggest. The opposite also applies; one cannot make valid
and accurate
inferences on a whole group based on only one or two members.
The sampling
procedures and statistical analysis of the scholarship we
discussed here intend to
prevent false or hasty generalizations. Nonetheless, discussions
of culture and
individuals invite the risk of stereotyping individuals because of
their group or a group
because of a few individuals. Culture may best be kept as a
background factor that
may help understand a particular situation and not so prominent
as to bias the
perception of that situation.
Another concern stems from the bias of the research. The
respondents to Hoftede’s
survey were mainly managers in for-profit businesses. This
presents the problem of
applying generalizations from this group to people in other
contexts—politics and civil
society. Another risk related to bias deals with creating norms
from one culture and

applying them to another in the manner of distinguishing better
and worse. Some of
these comparisons inevitably result in cross-cultural studies. In
high avoidance
uncertainty and low avoidance leadership styles, we inevitable
compare characteristics
of one with another. Having given the characteristics of the
first, we may then use terms
such as ‘less’ or ‘more.’ For eample, low avoidance leadership
styles are ‘more informal’
than high ones. Other comparisons may imply a preference and
thus a deficit in one
style. For example, low avoidance uncertainty leadership styles
are “less concerned with
orderliness and the maintenance of records” (like—do not
document the conclusions
drawn in meetings); and “tend to be less calculative when
taking risks” (House et al.,
2004, p. 6) which seem to be measures, calibrated by the high
avoidance of uncertainty
dimension and suggest the difference from them rather than the
purposes these
behaviors may serve. For example, less calculative while taking
risks may be a greater
willingness to accept the chance that conditions will change in
ways beyond our ability
to calculate. The correlation of the cultural dimensions with
economic and human
conditions does not imply that they cause them. There may be
many intervening
variables that account for the variation in both measures and

their direct and inverse
relationship.
Efforts to construct dimensions of leadership, measure them
within different nations,
and compare those measures nation by nation and by cultural
clusters of nations offer
an understanding of findings and new questions about the
national distinctions of
leadership concepts and practices. They provide a starting point
to explore universally
desired attributes of leadership among the many cultural
differences that exist. On a
much more practical level, these efforts provide a place to begin
understanding the
cultural variations of leadership and the cultural contexts that
may influence individual
leaders from different countries. That understanding, along with
precautions we have
offered may provide a necessary foundation for collaboration to
achieve mutual
objectives.
Bibliography
1. Adler N J (2008), International Dimensions of Organizational
Behavior, Boston,
Kent.
2. Atkinson J W (1958), Motive in Fantasy, Action and Society,
Princeton, Van, NJ.
3. Bass B M (1997), “Does the Transactional - Transformational
Leadership Paradigm
Transcend Organizational and National Boundaries?”, American
Psychologist,

Vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 130-139.
4. Bass B M and Stodgill R M (1990), Handbook of Leadership:
Theory, Research and
Managerial Applications, p. 11, 3rd Edition, Free Press, New
York.
5. Den Hartog D N, House R J, Quintanilla S A, Dorfman P and
Associates (1999),
“Culture Specific and Cross Culturally Generalizable Implicit
Leadership Theories:
Are Attributes of Charismatic/Transformational Leadership
Universally Endorsed?”,
Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 219-256.
6. Dorfman P W and Howell J P (1988), “Dimensions of
National Culture and Effective
Leadership Patterns: Hofstede Revisited”, in R Farmer and E
McGoun (Eds.),
Advances in International Comparative Management, Vol. 3, pp.
127-150.
7. Emmerik H Fisher D, Gardner W L and Wendt H (2008),
“McClelland’s Motives,
Culture, and Leadership: A Cross Cultural Study of Managers in
32 Countries”,
Paper presented at the Meeting of the Academy of Management,
Anaheim,
California.
8. Erez M (1994), “Toward a Model of Cross-Cultural Industrial
and Organizational
Psychology”, Handbook of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, Vol. 2,
No. 4, pp. 559-607, Consulting Psychology Press, Palo Alto,
CA.

9. Erez M and Early P (1993), “Culture, Self-Identity and Work,
Oxford University
Press, New York.
10. Frese M (1994), Taking a Fresh Look at the Elephant:
Intercultural Research
Assumptions, The New Lexington Press, San Francisco, CA.
11. Gerstner C R and Day D V (1994), “Cross-Cultural
Comparison of Leadership
Prototypes”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 121-134.
12. Hanges P M, Javidan M, Dorfman P and Gupta V (2004),
Culture, Leadership, and
Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
13. Hofstede G (1980a), Culture’s Consequences: International
Differences in Work-
Related Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.
14. Hofstede G (1980b), “Motivation Leadership and
Organization: Do American
Theories Apply Abroad”, Organizational Dynamics, Sage
Publications, Beverly
Hills, CA.
15. Hofstede G (1993), “Cultural Constraints in Management
Theories”, Academy of
Management, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 81-94.

16. Hofstede G (1998), “A Case for Comparing Apples with
Oranges: International
Differences in Values”, Journal of Social Science, IJCS, Vol. 1,
pp. 16-31.
17. Hofstede G (2001), “Culture’s Consequences: Comparing
Values, Behaviors”,
Institutions and Organizations Across Nations, Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
18. Hofstede G (2002), Culture’s Consequences. Comparing
Values Behaviors and
Institutions Across Nations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
19. House R J, Hanges P M and Javidan M (2004), Culture,
Leadership, and
Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
20. House R J, Spangler W D and Woycke J (1991),
“Personality and Charisma in the
US Presidency: A Psychological Theory of Leader
Effectiveness”, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 36, pp. 364-396.
21. Kluckhohn F R and Strodtbeck F L (1961), Variations in
Value Orientations,
HarperCollins, New York.
22. Kroeber A L and C Kluckhohn (1952), Culture: A Critical
Review of Concepts and
Definitions.
23. McClelland DC (1975), Power: The Inner Experience, Scott,
Foresman, Glenview, IL.

24. Mischel W (1973), “Toward a Cognitive Social Learning
Reconceptualization of
Personality”, Psychological Review, Vol. 80, pp. 252-283.
25. Munley A E and Martinez B (2002), “Leadership Across
Cultures: Extensions of
Lessons Learned from the GLOBE Project”, in K Klenke
(Chair), Managing Across
Reference # 50J-2011-03-02-01
Physical and Intellectual Borders, Symposium conducted at the
Meeting of the
International Western Academy of Management (IWAM), Lima,
Peru.
26. Winter Pearson D G (1973), The Power Motive, Free Press,
New York.
27. Robbins S P (2001), Organizational Behavior, 9th Edition,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
28. Ronen S and Shenkar O (1985), “Clustering Countries on
Attitudinal Dimensions:
A Review and Synthesis”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 10, pp. 435-454.
29. Smith P (2006), “When Elephants Fight, the Grass Gets
Trampled: The GLOBE
and Hofstede Projects”, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 37, No. 6,
pp. 915-921.

30. Stogdill R M (1948), “Personal Factors Associated with
Leadership: A Survey of
the Literature”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 35-71.
31. Yukl G (1989), “Managerial Leadership: A Review of
Theory and Research”, Journal
of Management, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 251-290.
Form IV
1. Place of publication : Hyderabad
2. Periodicity of its publication : Quarterly
3. Printer’s Name : E N Murthy
Nationality : Indian
(a) Whether a citizen of India? : Yes
Address : M/s. ICIT Software Center Pvt. Ltd.,
Plot Nos. 165 & 166 P, Phase-V, IDA,
Jeedimetla, Hyderabad 500055.
4. Publisher’s Name : E N Murthy
Address : # 126, Mahalaxmi Towers,
Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad 500073.
5. Editor’s Name : E N Murthy
Address : # 126, Mahalaxmi Towers,
Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad 500073.
6. Name and addresses of individuals who own the newspaper

and holding more than one
percent of the total capital – IUP Publications, # 126,
Mahalaxmi Towers, Srinagar
Colony, Hyderabad 500073.
I, E N Murthy, hereby declare that the particulars given above
are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief.
Date Sd/-
March 2011 Signature of Publisher
Copyright of IUP Journal of Soft Skills is the property of IUP
Publications and its content may not be copied or
emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.
Leadership and Effectiveness in the Context
of Gender: The Role of Leaders’
Verbal Behaviour*
Gisela Mohr and Hans-Joachim Wolfram
University of Leipzig, Institute of Psychology, Department of
Work and Organizational Psychology,

Seeburgstra�e 14-20, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
Corresponding author email: [email protected]
This field study focuses on verbal consideration, which is a
leadership behaviour that
expresses esteem for the follower and her or his work,
knowledge and opinion. It was
assumed that the relationship between verbal consideration and
various outcomes is
moderated by the leader’s gender. One-hundred-and-forty
leaders and 455 of their
direct followers were surveyed in a one-wave questionnaire
study in Germany. Male and
female leaders showed the same degree of verbal consideration
as rated by their
followers. Verbal consideration is related to three out of four
outcome variables for both
sexes. One unexpected moderating effect of leaders’ gender was
found: followers of
male leaders displaying verbal consideration report less
‘irritation’ (a state of
exhaustion considered a threat to good task fulfilment). One
explanation may be that
male leaders get ‘extra credit’ for showing verbal consideration
as it may be thought to
entail special effort, whereas for female leaders it may be seen
as normal and routine.
This assumption should be examined in further studies in order

to get more information
about the different mechanisms by which female and male
leaders reach the same
quality of outcomes.
Meta-analyses have shown that certain types of
leadership are positively related to outcomes (for
transformational leadership see Lowe, Kroeck
and Sivasubramaniam, 1996; for leader–member
exchange see Gerstner and Day, 1997). In
addition, there seem to be slight but consistent
differences between male and female leaders in
terms of leadership behaviour (Eagly, Johanne-
sen-Schmidt and van Engen, 2003; Trinidad and
Normore, 2005). There is some evidence that
leadership style and gender are jointly related to
outcomes (Eagly, Karau and Makhijani, 1995).
In this paper, a closer look is taken at the possible
moderating effects of gender on the relationship
between leadership and outcomes.
Leadership behaviour: the concept of verbal
consideration
Different views on leadership exist in literature
and research, with most of them focusing on an
interactive approach. A similar approach is taken
here, though this study focuses on a very specific
type of interaction, namely verbal communica-
tion. Managerial activities are, for the most part,
fragmented in nature and have an interactive
character (Yukl, 2002), and leading subordinates
is only one of a broad variety of managers’ roles
(Mintzberg, 1973). The study presented here is

focused on this aspect of managerial activity, and
as such the term leader seems to be more
appropriate than the term manager. Guest, as
*The authors thank Marc van Veldhoven, Birgit Schyns
and Tina Paul for their helpful comments on an earlier
version of this paper. The paper is based on research
funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
No. Mo 440/4-1.
British Journal of Management, Vol. 19, 4–16 (2008)
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2007.00521.x
r 2007 British Academy of Management. Published by
Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford
OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA.
early as 1956, had already reported that leaders at
the lower management level (foreman) used
nearly half of their daily working hours ‘simply’
talking to others. Mintzberg (1973) reported that
communication occupied 78% of the working
day. Yukl (2002, p. 24) argues that research of
managerial activities has shown that lower and
middle managers are involved in oral commu-
nication for anywhere between 27% and 82% of
their work time, during which they are busy
exchanging information or influencing people.
Presumably, leaders would engage less in com-
munication were it less crucial to the success of
their leadership. The importance of the role of
communication is evident when leaders carry out
activities such as communicating goals to their
followers, clarifying standards of fulfilment,

giving feedback etc., all of which can be done
effectively using (verbal) communication. Inter-
action and communication seem therefore to be
very important tools for leading successfully.
Leaders have different means of interaction, e.g.
the written word, the telephone, electronic
messages or different types of meetings. However,
leaders tend to prefer face-to-face interaction and
oral communication for receiving and giving the
up-to-date information needed to aid effective-
ness (Yukl, 2002). Consequently, followers’
perceptions of leaders’ behaviours will be based
to an important extent on the personal verbal
communication behaviour of their leaders.
Although many studies deal with the quantity
of communication in which leaders generally
engage, not much research concerns itself with
how followers perceive and rate their leaders’
verbal leadership behaviour and how this kind of
behaviour is related to performance. In this
study, a measurement of leadership behaviour,
especially designed to explore the verbal interac-
tion between leaders and followers from the
perspective of followers, was included. Even if
leaders are content with the way they are
communicating with followers, the effect of their
communication still depends on the evaluation of
this communication by the recipients (i.e. fol-
lowers). Therefore, it seems necessary to focus
on the followers’ perceptions of their leader’s
communication.
Communicative behaviours have two main
functions for the fulfilment of work demands.
To begin with, communicative behaviours convey

information that is needed to understand the
objective of work tasks, and they include feed-
back about the state of fulfilment of a task.
Furthermore, communication transmits attitudes
towards the interaction partner. For example, by
asking followers for their opinions or knowledge,
leaders are conveying their respect for the
expertise of their followers (or at least showing
that they take their followers seriously). With this
in mind, the main interest of this study was to
analyse the effectiveness of ‘verbal consideration’
which is more than just giving information.
Verbal consideration contains a positive attitude
towards the follower.
In addition to the advantages posed by the
specific focus mentioned above, several reasons
exist for not choosing well-established instru-
ments of leadership research, such as those used
for transformational leadership (Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), Bass and
Avolio, 1995) or leader–member exchange
(Liden and Maslyn, 1998). One main reason is
that these traditional scales merge leadership
behaviours and the effects of these behaviours
(mostly from the perspective of followers).
Leader–member exchange refers to the relation-
ship quality between leader and follower (Liden
and Maslyn, 1998), which is already an outcome
of leadership behaviour. Similarly, transforma-
tional leadership is defined ‘in terms of the
leader’s effect on the followers, and the behaviour
used to achieve this effect’ (Yukl, 1999, p. 286).
Thus, these leadership constructs, which already
include outcomes of leadership behaviour, cause

methodological problems to arise in research
focusing on leaders’ behaviour and outcomes, as
independent and dependent variables are not
separated. This methodological problem is ag-
gravated by the fact that the items of these scales
are highly evaluative. They do not ask for a
description of concrete behaviours but for highly
aggregated behaviour (e.g. transformational lea-
dership’s subscale ‘Idealized Influence Attribu-
ted’ refers to displaying a sense of power and
confidence; MLQ, Bass and Avolio, 1995).
Furthermore, such descriptions of aggregated
behaviour (by untrained observers like followers)
cannot be considered particularly ‘objective’, as
they might be influenced by a wide range of
perceptual distortions, e.g. assimilation and con-
trast effects (cf. Biernat, 2003). The latter issue
aside, the fact remains that the more aggregated a
category of description is, the more decisions
Leadership and Effectiveness in the Context of Gender 5
r 2007 British Academy of Management.
have to be made by the observer when labelling
an observable behaviour. That is, appraisals have
to be made, opening the door even wider for the
influence of the follower’s personal values. For
this reason, a more descriptive way of asking for
leaders’ behaviour was chosen in the present
study.
There is some empirical evidence suggesting
that transformational leadership is more effec-

tive in unstable environments (Podsakoff,
MacKenzie and Bommer, 1996) or in higher
level positions (cf. Lowe, Kroek and Sivasu-
bramaniam, 1996), but less successful in stress
and crisis situations (Halverson, Murphy and
Riggio, 2004). Verbal consideration is probably
less context dependent because it focuses on
what leaders do for most of the day: com-
munication (Yukl, 2002). Verbal consideration
applies to the daily work context for every
level of leadership and in both routine and
specific situations. It was assumed that the
construct of verbal consideration would relate
to other measures of leader–member exchange
and transformational leadership, because this
kind of communication between leader and
follower is also a means of transmitting the
respect a leader has for a follower as well
as the vision the leader has. These correlations
will be reported in the Preliminary Results
section.
When naming a scale ‘verbal consideration’,
the two subdimensions ‘consideration’ and ‘in-
itiating structure’, which stem from the early
work of the Michigan group (Fleishman, 1957),
may come to mind. This initial conception
involving two independent factors did not ulti-
mately find empirical support (Bass, 1990). The
above-mentioned twofold function of leaders’
communication – to give information for pur-
poses of better task fulfilment and to transmit the
leader’s attitude towards the followers – supports
the construction of a scale which includes
consideration (mostly considered to be a rather
feminine behaviour; Cann and Siegfried, 1990)

but also aspects of ‘initiating structure’, by means
of communication.
Verbal consideration and expectations towards
female leaders
Verbal consideration comprises communicative
behaviours such as asking for the views of others
and noting others’ contributions, which are
commonly seen as being more typical of women
than of men (Diekman and Eagly, 2000). Thus,
verbal consideration can be seen as being closer
to the communal than to the agentic dimension
of leadership behaviour and can therefore be
expected to be shown more by women (commu-
nal versus agentic, cf. Bakan, 1966; Parsons and
Bales, 1955). Therefore it can be assumed that
female leaders will receive higher ratings in verbal
consideration.
H1: Female leaders receive higher follower ratings
in verbal consideration.
Leadership and effectiveness
The concept of verbal consideration takes into
account that communication is always more than
giving or receiving information (cf. Watzlawick,
Beavin and Jackson, 1969). It seems reasonable
to assume that verbal behaviour expressing
esteem for another – which is what consideration
is – will also foster the acceptance of the content
of the message. Moreover, it should give
followers the feeling that the way they are

working is accepted, thus giving them a greater
sense of security. It seems logical then to expect
leaders whose communication style is assessed as
being positive in verbal consideration to be more
effective.
The question concerning the measurement of
leadership effectiveness is an ongoing debate.
Many definitions of leadership even incorporate
the notion of effectiveness, such as Yukl’s (2002)
definition: ‘Leadership is the process of influen-
cing others to understand and agree about what
needs to be done and how it can be done
effectively, and the process of facilitating indivi-
dual and collective efforts to accomplish the
shared objectives’ (p. 7). The discussion concern-
ing the selection of valid criteria has a long
history (Lent, Aurbach and Levin, 1971; Smith,
1976; Witte, 1995). Yukl (2002) proposed three
types of leadership effectiveness indicators: (a)
‘the extent to which a leader’s organizational unit
performs its task successfully and attains its
goals’ (p. 8), (b) the attitude of followers towards
the leader, and (c) the contribution of the leader
to the quality of group processes. These types of
indicators imply different sources of assessment
(e.g. groups, followers, leaders).
6 G. Mohr and H.-J. Wolfram
Outcomes of verbal consideration

It is, of course, impossible to assess all kinds of
effectiveness criteria in one study, and therefore a
reasonable choice has to be made. Follower and
leader rated outcomes were included in this study.
The leaders provided their evaluation of the
performance of the group (goal fulfilment). Fol-
lowers rated two prominent examples of followers’
attitudes (job satisfaction and commitment).
Moreover, a non-conventional criterion was added,
which has so far been under-represented in leader-
ship effectiveness studies and is an indicator of
followers’ well-being (irritation, see below).
In many studies, leadership has been shown to
influence job satisfaction (e.g. DeGroot, Kiker
and Cross, 2001; Podsakoff, MacKenzie and
Bommer, 1996). Presumably, verbal considera-
tion is related to job satisfaction because this style
refers to the positive communication between
leader and member wherein the leader indicates
that she or he values the follower’s opinion and
thus expresses esteem for the follower. The leader
thereby also shows an interest in getting to know
the follower’s area of expertise. Being taken
seriously in this way is a general human need
and, when it is experienced on the job, may lead
to job satisfaction.
H2: Verbal consideration is positively related to job
satisfaction.
Commitment refers to the emotional bond an
employee feels towards the organization for
which she or he works. Three forms of commit-
ment are generally distinguished in research:

normative, calculative and affective commitment
(Meyer, 1997; Meyer, Allen and Gellatly, 1990).
Leaders have the task of convincing their
followers of the value of the organization’s goals.
The goals of the organization should become the
followers’ goals. When this happens, a bond
develops between the follower and the organiza-
tion, and this is seen to be one of the primary
aims of leadership. Along with other researchers
(e.g. Mathieu and Zajac, 1990), the leader is
expected to influence employees’ affective re-
sponses, e.g. affective commitment.
H3: Verbal consideration is positively related to
commitment.
Irritation is a state of mental exhaustion from
which short daily breaks are no longer sufficient
for recovery, but recovery may nevertheless still
be possible by means of longer breaks, changes in
task assignments, changes of deadlines etc.
(Mohr et al., 2006). A longitudinal study has
shown that irritation is a precursor of depressive
reactions in situations where people experience
stress at work (Dormann and Zapf, 2002). The
inclusion of this variable as an effectiveness
criterion is in response to the fact that, particu-
larly in Germany (where the figure is 25%), a not
insignificant proportion of the working popula-
tion retires before reaching legal retirement age
due to health problems (Ruland, 2004), including
stress-related illness. The task of leaders is and
will increasingly be to prevent ‘exploiting’ of the
mental and physical health of their followers and

to protect followers from stressful over- or under-
stimulation in their workload. Communication
between a leader and her or his followers should
in general lessen stress, since leaders receive up-
to-date information concerning a follower’s
workload and can then adapt task assignments
to the follower’s present capacity and state of
exhaustion. As Kalimo, Pahkin and Mutanen
(2002) show in a longitudinal study, support from
a supervisor is one of the most important work-
related predictors of (low physiological) strain.
Thus, one aspect of instrumental support could
be the regulation of task assignments by taking
into account the existing workload of followers.
It can be assumed that verbal consideration gives
followers the chance to let leaders know about
their workload and gives leaders the chance to
adjust task assignments. This, in turn, can
prevent the development of irritation.
H4: Verbal consideration is negatively related to
irritation.
Communication between leader and follower
can be seen as a means of clarifying the task that
has to be done, how it has to be done and what
the standard of fulfilment will be. Verbal
consideration includes providing information
whenever asked, giving feedback in a constructive
way and encouraging followers to ask questions
when they are uncertain. In this way role
ambiguity or task unclarity for the follower is
reduced, and the followers have a better chance
of fulfilling the tasks in an effective way instead of
relying on trial and error. Consequently, goal

fulfilment should increase.
H5: Verbal consideration is positively related to
goal fulfilment.
Gender as a moderator between leadership and
outcomes
There is a wide range of literature concerning
the different evaluations of leaders depending on
the sex of both the leader and the evaluator and
also depending on whether the leader’s beha-
viour is considered to be congruent or in-
congruent with her or his gender role (e.g.
Eagly and Karau, 2002; Eagly, Makhijani and
Klonsky, 1992). Both women and men may be
punished for violating gender stereotypes (Cost-
rich et al., 1975). As stated above, verbal
consideration is assumed to be closer to the
communal and thus closer to the female stereo-
type than to the agentic male stereotype (Cann
and Siegfried, 1990). Women are rated as being
more popular when they behave in a gender role
congruent manner (Rudman, 1998; cf. Eagly
and Karau, 2002; Sczesny et al., 2004). Women’s
feminine leadership style could be rewarded
because it is in line with gender stereotypic
expectations. This positive effect may be miti-
gated, however, by the mismatch that their role

as a leader presents with respect to gender role
expectations: even today, the leadership role is
still conceived as being a male role (Schein,
2001; Sczesny, 2003), and this seems to be
especially true in Germany (Schein and Mueller,
1992; Sczesny et al., 2004). In the context of this
empirical research, it is assumed that verbal
consideration utilized by women – being more in
line with what followers expect from female
leaders – will be pertinent to feeling comfortable
and doing one’s job. No additional energy will
be required to cope with incongruent leaders’
behaviour, and this may contribute to satisfac-
tion and commitment and may also be helpful in
preventing irritation. Goal fulfilment may thus
be influenced in particular by female verbal
consideration. Verbal consideration is expected
to have a stronger relationship with these
dependent variables when shown by female
leaders.
H6: The relationship between verbal consideration
and effectiveness is moderated by leaders’ gender.
For female leaders the relationship is stronger than
for men.
Method
Sample
Participants from 46 German companies took
part in the study. Among these were 10 insurance
companies (22%), 11 housing companies (24%),

12 banks (26%) and 13 other organizations
(28%) from a diverse range including the
engineering, electrical and optical industries.
Sixty-two female and 78 male leaders partici-
pated in this study. On average, they were 41.6
years of age (SD 5 8.3), had a tenure of 13.4
years (SD 5 8.6) and had worked for 9.8 years as
a supervisor (SD 5 7.4). Most of these leaders
came from the lowest level of organizational
hierarchy (82%). Seventy-four leaders had a
college of higher education diploma or a uni-
versity diploma (approximately 53%). This re-
flects that in Germany leaders from lower levels
often have a rather academic background. It is
assumed that – at this level – personal interaction
between leaders and followers is more frequent
than at higher levels, because at the lowest level
of hierarchy leaders must foster and monitor the
fulfilment of the tasks by their followers directly
in order to be able to report to their own
supervisors about reached targets.
Four-hundred-and-fifty-five followers were
questioned (286 women, 169 men). On average
they were 38.4 years of age (SD 5 10.2), had a
tenure of 12.1 years (SD 5 8.4) and had worked
for their supervisor for 3.5 years (SD 5 3.5). On
average, three followers per leader took part
(range 1–10 followers). Table 1 shows the
distribution of the sex of leaders with that of
followers.
Procedure
The followers’ questioning took place in small

groups of between two and ten followers. In all
groups one researcher was present in order to
Table 1. Distribution of followers’ sex across their leaders’ sex
Followers’ sex Leaders’ sex
Female Male
(S 5 62) (S 5 78)
Female n1 5 149 n3 5 137
Male n2 5 60 n4 5 109
explain the purpose of the study, the confidenti-
ality of data treatment and the procedure. In the
case of questions, she or he provided standar-
dized answers. The followers’ questionnaires
contained questions about the verbal considera-
tion of their leaders and about their own job
satisfaction, commitment and irritation. The
leaders were asked to answer their questionnaires
at home. Their questionnaires included items
concerning the performance of their work group.
Filled-in survey sheets were sent back via regular
mail. The leaders’ response rate was 76%.
Instruments

The data come from two data sources. The
independent variable (verbal consideration) and
three of the dependent variables are based on
data from the followers. Data for one of the
dependent variables, goal fulfilment, were based
on the responses given by the leaders.
In order to assess leadership, a scale referring
to verbal consideration was used (Mohr et al.,
2004). To develop the scale, a special pre-study
was conducted. Six teams were videotaped during
a routine meeting of their department. Half of the
teams had a female leader. The mean size of the
groups was nine followers. About 11 hours of
videotape were recorded. To analyse the data, a
combination of time- and event-sampling meth-
ods was chosen. A ten-minute sequence from the
beginning, another ten-minute sequence from the
middle, and one from the end of every meeting
were taken. The sequences were evaluated by
experts in leadership research with special focus
on verbal and non-verbal interaction. Out of a
broad pool of items, six were classified by experts
as having a special focus on verbal consideration.
These six items yielded a reliability of 0.81
(M 5 3.94, SD 5 0.61). A factor analysis (max-
imum likelihood) revealed one factor accounting
for 52.3% of the variance in the data. An
example of an item is ‘My supervisor encourages
me to speak up about matters that are important
to me’. The scaling ranged from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) (see the Appendix
for all items).
Job satisfaction was assessed using an instru-
ment tested by Baillod and Semmer (1994). The

instrument comprises eight items based on the
research of Oegerli (1984). An example of one of
these items is ‘I hope that my working situation
remains as good as it is at the moment’. The scale
ranges from 1 (virtually never) to 7 (virtually
always). The reliability for the eight items was
0.75 (M 5 5.35, SD 5 0.83).
In order to assess commitment, the affective
commitment scale by Allen and Meyer (1990;
German translation Schmidt, Hollmann and
Sodenkamp, 1998) was used. The instrument
focuses on the emotional bond a follower has
with her or his organization. An example item
reads ‘I would be very happy to spend the rest of
my career in this organization’. The scale ranges
from 1 (does not apply at all) to 7 (applies
completely). The eight items yielded an alpha of
0.70 (M 5 5.18, SD 5 0.96).
The scale ‘irritation’ (Mohr et al., 2006) was
included, which describes a state of mental
exhaustion that occurs before the onset of mental
illness. This scale was developed in the context of
occupational stress research. Good statistical
values have been demonstrated for many differ-
ent samples (Mohr, Müller and Rigotti, 2005).
Irritation is related to psychosomatic complaints
(Garst, Frese and Molenaar, 2000). The long-
itudinal data gathered by Grebner (2001) indicate
that systolic blood pressure – an indicator of
stress – is a predictor of irritation.
The five-item scale yielded a reliability of 0.78
(M 5 2.08, SD 5 0.84) on a seven-point Likert

scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree). An example item is ‘I get
grumpy when others approach me’.
Goal fulfilment was assessed with five items
referring to the fulfilment of goals set in advance.
A sample item is ‘We reach the goals set by the
top management’. The scale ranges from 1 (does
not apply at all) to 5 (applies completely). Data
for goal fulfilment had to be z-transformed for
technical reasons (a change of the scale’s range
during the study). The internal consistency was
0.79.
Table 2 shows the correlations between all
variables.
Analyses
In order to test H1–H4, followers’ data were
used. In order to test H5, the followers’ ratings of
their leaders’ verbal consideration were averaged
per group and correlated with the leaders’ rating
of the groups’ performance. H6 was tested using
moderated regression analyses.
Results
Preliminary results

In a first step, female and male leaders were
compared with respect to their followers’ job
satisfaction, commitment and irritation, as well
as their teams’ goal fulfilment. Results of t tests
do not show any significant difference between
female and male leaders (for job satisfaction,
female leaders M 5 5.34 (SD 5 0.85) versus male
leaders M 5 5.34 (SD 5 0.82), t(442) 5 �0.10,
p40.92; for commitment, female leaders
M 5 5.16 (SD 5 1.02) versus male leaders
M 5 5.20 (SD 5 0.91), t(432.52) 5 �0.52,
p40.60; for irritation, female leaders M 5 2.10
(SD 5 0.84) versus male leaders M 5 2.06
(SD 5 0.84), t(451) 5 0.53, p40.59; for goal
fulfilment, female leaders M 5 �0.18
(SD 5 1.02) versus male leaders M 5 0.12
(SD 5 0.97), t(136) 5 �1.77, p40.07).
Moreover, differences between female and
male followers’ ratings were tested. Although
female followers reported significantly higher job
satisfaction than male followers (M 5 5.41
(SD 5 0.82) versus M 5 5.24 (SD 5 0.58);
t(441) 5 2.01, po0.05), none of the remaining
differences was significant.
The intraclass correlation coefficient for fol-
lowers’ ratings of their leaders’ verbal considera-
tion was calculated to gain a measure of inter-
rater reliability (N 5 127 teams). A rather low
intraclass correlation was expected, because
verbal consideration has to be seen in the context
of dyadic interaction, i.e. leaders may show
different verbal consideration to each follower,
and leaders may in turn be perceived differently
by each follower. The ICC(1) result shows that

21% of a follower’s rating is due to group
membership. This value is – as expected – rather
low, indicating that there is considerable varia-
bility in the scores at the individual level.
The correlations between verbal consideration
and the well-known constructs transformational
leadership and leader–member exchange were
evaluated as well. As expected, considerable
intercorrelations exist (see Table 3), indicating
that verbal consideration is related to a follower’s
positive evaluation of the leader–follower rela-
tionship. The correlations are substantial, but not
so high that identity could be assumed between
these constructs and verbal consideration. Nearly
all correlations between verbal consideration and
the subscales of leader–member exchange and
transformational leadership are of similar
Table 2. Intercorrelations between independent and dependent
variables
Variable N 5 455 N 5 140
1 2 3 4 5
1. Verbal consideration 1.0 0.29** 0.16** �0.19** 0.04
2. Job satisfaction 1.0 0.50** �0.23** 0.08
3. Affective commitment 1.0 �0.05 �0.08
4. Irritation 1.0 �0.07
5. Goal fulfilment 1.0
*po0.05; **po0.01.
Table 3. Intercorrelations between verbal consideration and

other leadership constructs (transformational leadership, leader–
member exchange)
Variable Verbal consideration
1. Transformational leadership 0.60**
1a. Intellectual stimulation 0.57**
1b. Idealized influence attributed 0.56**
1c. Idealized influence behaviour 0.51**
1d. Inspirational motivation 0.47**
1e. Individual consideration 0.54**
2. Leader–member exchange 0.57**
2a. Contribution 0.33**
2b. Professional respect 0.44**
2c. Affect 0.55**
2d. Loyalty 0.53**
Notes: N 5 455 followers.
*po0.05; **po0.01.
The internal consistencies for transformational leadership
(Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), Bass and
Avolio, 1995; German translation and modification, Felfe,
2006) and leader–member exchange (leader–member exchange
multidimensional measure (LMX MDM), Liden and Maslyn,

1998; German translation, Paul and Schyns, 2002) were 0.94
and 0.90 respectively.
strength. Thus, no further distinct information
could be derived from the interrelations between
verbal consideration and the aforementioned
subscales. However, the correlation pattern con-
firms that the scale has a positive connotation.
The comparatively low correlation between
verbal consideration and leader–member ex-
change’s subscale contribution might be due to
a specific of this subscale: it assesses the extent to
which one exerts oneself for one’s leader. This
extra-role behaviour might not necessarily mirror
the quality of the leader–follower relationship.
Hypotheses testing
In order to test H1 (male and female leaders differ
in verbal consideration), a t test was conducted.
No differences were found (female leaders
M 5 3.94 (SD 5 0.64) versus male leaders
M 5 3.93 (SD 5 0.59); t(447) 5 0.17, p40.86).
Thus, the first hypothesis was not confirmed.
Hypotheses 2–5 were tested using correlation
analyses. As expected, verbal consideration was
positively related to job satisfaction (r 5 0.29,
po0.01; Table 4) and commitment (r 5 0.16,
po0.01; Table 5), and negatively related to

irritation (r 5 �0.19, po0.01; Table 6).
In order to test H5 (verbal consideration is
positively related to goal fulfilment), the fol-
lowers’ data were averaged for each leader and
related to the leaders’ rating of goal fulfilment.
Thus, the data set was reduced from 455
followers to 140 teams. In general, data from
different sources and smaller samples provide
lower correlations. Contrary to our assumption,
there was no correlation at all (r 5 0.04, p40.62;
Table 7).
Before testing H6 (the relationship between
verbal consideration and effectiveness is moder-
ated by leaders’ gender), the variables involved
were centred (cf. Aiken and West, 1991), and
an interaction term for verbal consideration and
leaders’ gender was calculated. Regression
analyses for each effectiveness criterion were
conducted.
The interaction verbal consideration � leaders’
gender was significant only with regard to
followers’ irritation (po0.02), but not with
regard to any of the other remaining dependent
variables (job satisfaction p40.41; commitment
p40.87; goal fulfilment p40.91). As illustrated
in Figure 1, the relationship is negative for male
leaders and almost zero for female leaders. This
result indicates that women’s verbal considera-
tion is not related to the group’s irritation,
whereas men showing verbal consideration lower
the level of the group’s irritation. This finding is
contrary to our expectation.

Summary and discussion
This study focused on the effects of a communica-
tion-focused leadership style: verbal consideration.
Table 4. Moderated regression on job satisfaction
Variable B SE B b
Constant �0.02 0.05
Verbal consideration (vc) 0.30** 0.05 0.29
Leaders’ gender (lg) 0.00 0.05 0.00
vc * lg 0.04 0.05 0.04
Notes: N 5 441, R
2
corr 5 0.08.
*po0.05; **po0.01.
Table 5. Moderated regression on commitment
Variable B SE B b
Verbal consideration (vc) 0.16** 0.05 0.16
Leaders’ gender (lg) 0.03 0.05 0.03
vc * lg 0.00 0.05 �0.01
Notes: N 5 448, R
2

corr 5 0.02.
*po0.05; **po0.01.
Table 6. Moderated regression on irritation
Variable B SE B b
Constant 0.01 0.05
Verbal consideration (vc) �0.20** 0.05 �0.20
Leaders’ gender (lg) �0.02 0.05 �0.02
vc * lg �0.12* 0.05 �0.12
Notes: N 5 447, R
2
corr 5 0.04.
*po0.05; **po0.01.
Table 7. Moderated regression on goal fulfilment
Variable B SE B b
Verbal consideration (vc) 0.05 0.09 0.0
Leaders’ gender (lg) �0.15 0.09 �0.15
vc * lg 0.01 0.09 0.01
Notes: N 5 138, R
2
corr 5 0.03.
*po0.05; **po0.01.

Its main interest was to examine whether or not
this leadership behaviour is related to positive
outcomes and whether or not leaders’ gender has
a moderating effect on the relationship.
Contrary to stated expectations, the results
showed that verbal consideration is not a leader-
ship style that is shown especially by female
leaders.
Verbal consideration is indeed related to three
of the four effectiveness measures. The correla-
tions – though significant – were low. This is not
unexpected considering that outcome variables
are usually multi-determined, as Arvey, Carter
and Buerkley (1991) have shown for job satisfac-
tion and Mathieu and Zajac (1990) for commit-
ment. Also goal fulfilment depends not only on
leaders’ communicative behaviour, but also on
the resources available to fulfil a task (e.g. human
resources, proper tools, sufficiency and good
quality of raw materials). With regard to the
interrelation between verbal consideration and
goal fulfilment, the fact that data refer to
different levels of aggregation must be taken into
account. Furthermore, data have come from
different sources: the followers rated their leaders’
verbal consideration, while the leaders rated their
working groups’ goal fulfilment. A multi-source
approach generally leads to lower correlations

compared to correlations between two constructs
originating from the same source. Nevertheless
the zero correlation between verbal consideration
and goal fulfilment indicates that this is not
simply a reduction caused by the elimination of
common method and common source variance.
This zero correlation leads to the assumption that
verbal consideration has no direct influence on
goal fulfilment.
A moderating effect of leaders’ gender was
found only on the interrelation between verbal
consideration and followers’ irritation. The direc-
tion of this moderating effect was unexpected. It
was assumed that the relationship would be
stronger for female leaders than for male leaders.
However, followers of male leaders using verbal
consideration report less irritation. For female
leaders, using verbal consideration had no effect
on their followers’ irritation at all. Thus, con-
cerning the moderating effect of leaders’ gender,
it can be concluded that the same leadership
behaviour attributed by the follower has different
effects on followers’ irritation depending on who
is showing this behaviour: if the behaviour is
shown by a woman, it has no effect on followers’
irritation, but if it is shown by a man, a positive
effect on followers’ irritation can be found. It
should be borne in mind, however, that female
and male leaders are equally effective in overall
comparisons (see Preliminary Results section):
followers of male and female leaders do not differ
in irritation. This is true for the other dependent
variables as well. Two questions worthy of
further investigation arise from these results.

(1) How can the negative interrelation between
verbal consideration and irritation only for male
leaders be explained? Irritation was included
because leaders should influence the amount of
strain felt by their followers. Leaders have the
responsibility of assigning tasks to their followers
in an appropriate manner, so the follower is able
to fulfil the task at a high quality level and over a
long period of time without being too exhausted
or no longer being able to replenish mental
resources by normal breaks. Caution is advised
about interpreting the results in a causal way
because the study is cross-sectional. Nevertheless,
selection processes can be excluded, such as male
leaders in general having more mentally stable
followers. The followers of the female leaders are
not different in their general level of irritation.
Furthermore, a selection effect would not help to
Verbal consideration
1.51.00.50.0–0.5–1.0–1.5–2.0–2.5
Ir
ri
ta
tio
n
0.8
0.6
0.4

0.2
– 0.0
– 0.2
– 0.4
– 0.6
Leader's gender
male
female
Figure 1. Moderated regression on irritation
Note: Variables were centred before calculating the moder-
ated regression analysis.
explain why there is a negative correlation
between verbal consideration shown by male
leaders and their followers’ irritation. Perhaps
our unexpected result can be seen as a ‘male
advantage’. Followers may not expect their male
leaders to show verbal consideration whereas
such a behaviour may be expected as the norm
for female leaders. (We found that female and

male leaders do not differ in their level of verbal
consideration. But this does not contradict the
assumption above, because even when male and
female leaders show the same amount of verbal
consideration as rated by their followers, these
followers’ expectations can be different towards
male and female leaders.) When male leaders
show verbal consideration, because it is unex-
pected it may be regarded as particularly caring,
and followers may therefore value it more than
when female leaders behave this way. In such a
way, the ‘caring male leader’ could become an
extra source of mental strength in the workplace.
(2) If verbal consideration shown by male
leaders is important for the low irritation of their
followers, how should female leaders foster low
irritation in their followers? Again, it is worth
keeping in mind that followers of male and
female leaders do not differ in their level of
irritation. Thus, when it comes to female leaders
they must use means other than verbal considera-
tion to influence irritation. For example, fol-
lowers may exhibit less competitive behaviour
towards a female leader, or a female leader may
show more concern for work–family conflict and
help followers manage this more effectively etc.
As interesting as these questions may be, they are
tangential to the main focus of our study.
Therefore, returning to the present study, limita-
tions and need for future research have to be
discussed before coming to some conclusions.
Limitations and future research
To begin with, it should be borne in mind that the

presented results were based on leaders from low
levels of organizational hierarchy. These low-
level leaders were chosen because of the high
amount of interaction that occurs with their
followers. Verbal consideration captures the
quality of interaction, and as such the results
should not be generalized to leadership behaviour
in general. This is particularly true for the
puzzling result that only male leaders get the
credit of a positive relationship between verbal
consideration and their followers’ mental health
(i.e. irritation). Nevertheless, the results deserve
further investigation because interacting with
followers constitutes a large part of leadership
behaviour at low levels.
The study design was cross-sectional. The
possibility that followers’ low irritation, i.e. low
emotional exhaustion, evokes leaders’ verbal
consideration cannot be excluded. Then why
should this happen only with male leaders? And
would it not be much more plausible that a leader
shows concern when her or his follower shows
signs of exhaustion? It is also possible that high
goal fulfilment by the group evokes verbal
consideration. Verbal consideration could be
seen as a kind of reward for high goal fulfilment.
It makes sense to assume that verbal considera-
tion can be the beginning of a self-supporting
feedback loop: it helps to reach good goal
fulfilment and this, in turn, leads to even more
appreciation of the follower by further verbal
consideration from the leader. This idea can only
be proved with additional longitudinal data.
A follow-up study should make use of different

outcome criteria. Although a broad range of
outcomes was examined, ones with a stronger
interrelation with the communicative behaviour
of a leader could have been chosen. Outcomes
such as role conflict, problem-solving and social
stressors may be more related to the followers’
experience of the leaders’ verbal behaviour. In
addition, a different, more objective performance
assessment would be useful in a further study:
The assessment of goal fulfilment based on
leaders’ judgements is prone to bias, as leaders
may refrain from judging themselves and their
group as ineffective.
Furthermore, it would be worthwhile ascer-
taining whether or not followers rate verbal
consideration as a feminine or communal leader-
ship style and to check the assumption that
showing a feminine leadership style leads to more
credit for male than female leaders.
Pounder and Coleman (2002) emphasize the
necessity to control for the influence of national
culture in leadership research. Schein (2001),
Schein and Mueller (1992) and Sczesny et al.
(2004) showed that, especially in Germany,
leadership is still gender stereotyped (even when
ratings are given by women). Thus, a further step
could be to control for gender role attitudes when

analysing how followers perceive their leaders (cf.
Grinnell, 2002).
Conclusion and implications
The results allow the conclusion that verbal
consideration is an important leadership beha-
viour and should thus be taken seriously. A lot of
leadership training which focuses on communica-
tion with followers already appreciates its pro-
minent role. The concept of verbal consideration
is related to everyday interactive behaviour, not
specifically for managing crisis situations. It can
be directly observed by followers. Thus, it may be
more accessible for training than highly aggre-
gated concepts such as respect, trust etc.
Additionally, one can argue that male and
female leaders achieve positive consequences to
the same extent, but that the way in which they
are reached seems to be different. Finding out
more about the different ways female and male
leaders achieve the same effect may be a challenge
for further research and may give support for
more specific and thus more effective leadership
training. It seems that many roads lead to Rome,
and so it still remains to find out which way may
be more appropriate for male leaders and which
one for female leaders.
Appendix: Items of the verbal
consideration scale
1. My supervisor asks for the views of her or
his subordinates.

2. My supervisor encourages me to speak up
about matters that are important to me.
3. My supervisor precisely notes my contributions.
4. My supervisor gives me opportunities to ask
questions.
5. My supervisor constructively criticizes me.
6. My supervisor willingly explains when I ask.
Note: The items were translated into English for this manu-
script. Reported results refer to a German version of the scale.
References
Aiken, L. S. and S. G. West (1991). Multiple Regression:
Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Allen, N. J. and J. P. Meyer (1990). ‘The measurement and
antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commit-
ment to the organization’, Journal of Occupational Psychol-
ogy, 63, pp. 1–18.
Arvey, R. D., G. W. Carter and D. K. Buerkley (1991). ‘Job
satisfaction: dispositional and situational influences’, Inter-
national Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology,

6, pp. 359–383.
Baillod, J. and N. Semmer (1994). ‘Fluktuation und Berufsver-
läufe bei Computerfachleuten [Turnover and career paths of
computer specialists]’, Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisa-
tionspsychologie, 38, pp. 152–163.
Bakan, D. (1966). The Duality of Human Existence. Chicago,
IL: Rand McNally.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory,
Research and Managerial Applications. New York, NY: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M. and B. Avolio (1995). MLQ Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Technical Report. Redwood City, CA: Mind
Garden.
Biernat, M. (2003). ‘Toward a broader view of social
stereotyping’, American Psychologist, 58, pp. 1019–1027.
Cann, A. and W. D. Siegfried (1990). ‘Gender stereotypes and
dimension of effective leader behavior’, Sex Roles, 23, pp.
412–419.

Costrich, N., J. Feinstein, L. Kidder, J. Maracek and L. Pascale
(1975). ‘When stereotypes hurt: three studies of penalties for
sex-role reversals’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychol-
ogy, 11, pp. 520–530.
DeGroot, T., D. S. Kiker and T. C. Cross (2001). ‘A meta-
analysis to review organizational outcomes related to
charismatic leadership’, Canadian Journal of Administrative
Sciences, 17 (4), pp. 356–371.
Diekman, A. B. and A. H. Eagly (2000). ‘Stereotypes as
dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present and
future’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, pp.
1171–1181.
Dormann, C. and D. Zapf (2002). ‘Social stressors at work,
irritation, and depressive symptoms: accounting for unmea-
sured third variables in a multi-wave study’, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, pp. 33–58.
Eagly, A. H. and S. J. Karau (2002). ‘Role congruity theory of
prejudice toward female leaders’, Psychological Review, 109

(3), pp. 573–598.
Eagly, A. H., M. C. Johannesen-Schmidt and M. L. van Engen
(2003). ‘Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire
leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and
men’, Psychological Bulletin, 129 (4), pp. 569–591.
Eagly, A. H., S. J. Karau and M. G. Makhijani (1995). ‘Gender
and the effectiveness of leaders: a meta-analysis’, Psycholo-
gical Bulletin, 117 (1), pp. 125–145.
Eagly, A. H., M. G. Makhijani and B. G. Klonsky (1992).
‘Gender and the evaluation of leaders: a meta-analysis’,
Psychological Bulletin, 111 (1), pp. 3–22.
Felfe, J. (2006). ‘Validierung einer deutschen Version des
‘‘Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire’’ (MLQ 5 X Short)
von Bass und Avolio (1995) [Validation of a German version
of the ‘‘Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire’’]’, Zeitschrift
für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, 50 (2), pp.
61–78.
Fleishman, E. A. (1957). ‘Leader behavior description for

industry’. In R. M. Stogdill and A. E. Coons (eds), Leader
Behavior: Its Description and Measurement, pp. 103–119.
Columbus, GA: Columbus State University.
Garst, H., M. Frese and P. C. M. Molenaar (2000). ‘The
temporal factor of change in stressor–strain relation-
ship: a growth-curve model on a longitudinal study in
East Germany’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, pp.
417–438.
Gerstner, C. R. and D. V. Day (1997). ‘Meta-analytic review
of leader–member exchange theory: correlates and con-
struct issues’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (6), pp.
827–844.
Grebner, S. (2001). ‘Stress at work, well-being, blood pressure
and cortisol: two field studies’. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of Berne, Switzerland.

Grinnell, J. P. (2002). ‘Effects of leaders’ and evaluators’ sex-
role stereotyping of charismatic leaders’, Psychological
Reports, 91, pp. 1247–1252.
Guest, R. H. (1956). ‘Of time and the foreman’, Personnel, 32,
pp. 478–486.
Halverson, S. K., S. E. Murphy and R. E. Riggio (2004).
‘Charismatic leadership in crisis situations: a laboratory
investigation of stress and crisis’, Small Group Research, 35,
pp. 495–514.
Kalimo, R., K. Pahkin and P. Mutanen (2002). ‘Work and
personal resources as long-term predictors of well-being’,
Stress and Health, 18 (5), pp. 227–234.
Lent, R. H., H. A. Aurbach and L. S. Levin (1971). ‘Predictors,
criteria, and significant results’, Personnel Psychology, 24, pp.
519–533.
Liden, R. C. and J. M. Maslyn (1998). ‘Multidimensionality of
leader–membership exchange: an empirical assessment
through scale development’, Journal of Management, 24,

pp. 43–72.
Lowe, K. B., K. G. Kroeck and N. Sivasubramaniam (1996).
‘Effectiveness correlates of transformational and transac-
tional leadership: a meta-analytic review of the MLQ
literature’, Leadership Quarterly, 7 (3), pp. 385–425.
Mathieu, J. E. and D. M. Zajac (1990). ‘A review and meta-
analysis of the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of
organizational commitment’, Psychological Bulletin, 108 (2),
pp. 171–194.
Meyer, J. P. (1997). ‘Organizational commitment’. In C. L.
Cooper and I. T. Robertson (eds), International Review of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 12, pp.
176–228. New York: Wiley.
Meyer, J. P., N. J. Allen and I. R. Gellatly (1990). ‘Affective
and continuance commitment to the organization: evaluation
of measures and analysis of concurrent and time-
lagged relations’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 (6), pp.
710–720.

Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. New
York: Harper and Row.
Mohr, G., A. Müller and T. Rigotti (2005). ‘Normwerte
der Skala Irritation: Zwei Dimensionen psychischer Bean-
spruchung [Standardization data of the irritation scale:
two dimensions of mental strain]’, Diagnostica, 51, pp.
12–20.
Mohr, G., H.-J. Wolfram, B. Schyns and T. Paul (2004).
‘Verbales
Führungsverhalten aus Sicht der MitarbeiterInnen (VFV-MA)
[Verbal consideration of the leader from the follower’s
perspective]’. In A. Glöckner-Rist (ed.), ZUMA-Informations-
system. Elektronisches Handbuch sozialwissenschaftlicher Er-
hebungsinstrumente, ZIS Version 8.00. Mannheim: Zentrum
für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen.
Mohr, G., A. Müller, T. Rigotti, Z. Aycan and F. Tschan
(2006). ‘The cross-cultural assessment of psychological strain
in work contexts: concerning the measurement equivalency of

11 adaptations of the irritation scale’, European Journal of
Psychological Assessment, 22 (3), pp. 198–206.
Oegerli, K. (1984). ‘Arbeitszufriedenheit. Versuche einer
qualitativen Bestimmung [Job satisfaction. A qualitative
approach]’. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University
of Berne, Switzerland.
Parsons, T. and R. F. Bales (1955). Family, Socialization and
Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Paul, T. and B. Schyns (2002). ‘Mehrdimensionale Skala zur
Erfassung des Leader–Member-Exchange (LMX-MDM
nach Liden and Maslyn, 1998) – Übersetzung [Multidimen-
sional scale for the assessment of leader–member exchange
(LMX MDM according to Liden and Maslyn, 1998) –
translation]’. In A. Glöckner-Rist (ed.), ZUMA-Informa-
tionssystem. Ein elektronisches Handbuch sozial-wissenschaf-
tlicher Erhebungsinstrumente, Version 6.00. Mannheim:
Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen.
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie and W. H. Bommer (1996).

‘Transformational leader behaviors and substitutes for
leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction, commit-
ment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors’,
Journal of Management, 22 (2), pp. 259–298.
Pounder, J. S. and M. Coleman (2002). ‘Women – better leaders
than men? In general and educational management it still ‘‘all
depends’’’, Leadership and Organization Development Jour-
nal, 23, pp. 122–133.
Rudman, L. A. (1998). ‘Self-promotion as a risk factor for
women. The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical
impression management’, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74 (3), pp. 629–645.
Ruland, F. (2004). ‘Aktuelle Ergebnisse zu den Wirkungen der
bisherigen Rentenreformen auf den Übergang von der
Erwerbs- in die Ruhestandsphase [The latest results on the
influence of the pension reform on the transition from
working life to retirement]’, Deutsche Rentenversicherung, 57,
pp. 34–53.

The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx

The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx

Similar to The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx (20)

More from cherry686017

More from cherry686017 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, Vol. V, No. 1, 201116Cultu.docx