Leadership across cultures: attachment style influences.

As organizations are challenged to global leadership competence and to manage increasing diversity, it is critical to select and develop effective cross-cultural leaders. Technical competence and organizational experience are inadequate criteria; among the most crucial leadership characteristics are relationship competence and openness to new perspectives. These are difficult to train or develop in leaders because they derive from personal relationship tendencies called attachment styles, based on relatively enduring assumptions about self and others. Attachment styles affect work relationships and, thus, cross-cultural leadership effectiveness, and need to be considered by managers and their organizations in leadership selection and development programs.

Introduction

"It's not our differences that divide us; it's our judgments about each other that do" (Wheatley, 2002). Cultural or personality differences are rarely the source of interpersonal or inter-group conflict. The most common source is what might be called "mindsets," filters through which people view the world, self and others (e.g. Rhinesmith, 1992). Influenced by their mindsets, some people appreciate and work effectively with individual and cultural differences, while others are awkward, threatened or uncomfortable (Hopkins & Hopkins, 1998). Successful global or diversity leaders are open to new experiences and have excellent relationship skills (e.g. Black & Gregersen, 1999), drawn from their underlying positive mindsets about self and others (Manning, 2001). This paper argues that organizations which factor in these personal and cognitive criteria will select and develop more effective cross-cultural leaders, and that managers who direct change efforts towards their own mindsets can strengthen their interpersonal leadership capability.

The Cross-Cultural Challenge

The cry for effective leadership for cross-cultural organizations is both urgent and widespread. Gregersen, Morrison and Black (1998) reported that 85% of the Fortune 500 companies surveyed didn't think they had "an adequate number of global leaders, 67% of the firms think their existing leaders need additional skills and knowledge before they meet or exceed needed capabilities." Typically organizations have selected or promoted leaders for international assignments based on technical expertise and organizational commitment (e.g. Fish, 1999). The negative consequences have often been well-publicized and costly, including premature termination of the assignment, disappointing manager functioning, reduced organizational morale, cohesion and performance, (cf. Black & Gregersen, 1999; Hopkins & Hopkins, 1998). For instance, a recent cross-national study of 750 companies found that "between 10% and 20% of US managers sent abroad returned early because of job dissatisfaction or difficulties in adjusting to a foreign country. Of those who stayed for the duration, nearly one-third did not perform up to the expectations of their superiors" (Black & Gregersen, 1999).