Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Diversity
The study and analysis of culture in Africa and African management is faced with African society’s most important characteristic, namely the ethnic diversity of people making up and contributing to the collective notion of “the (South) African way” of management. Ethnic differences are predominantly culturally based because culture is a reflection of the knowledge, beliefs, customs, morals and values of an ethnic group (Theron, 1992: 53). These differences impact on corporate governance and as a result of the fact that different ethnicities differ in their perceptions of work and the work environment (Clegg & Redding, 1990: 187), the demands on effective leadership become more complex. Cultural differences exist in the work environment because employees bring their ethnic (cultural) differences to the work place. The fact that culture provides the context for employee behaviour, is emphasised by Kast & Rosenzweig (1985: 589): “organisational systems are cultural answers to the problems encountered by humans in achieving their collective ends”. Slabbert and Welsh (1979: 10) define ethnicity as “a group that is bounded off from other comparable groups or population categories in the society by a sense of its difference which may consist in some combination of a real or mythical ancestry and a common culture and experience”. The relation between ethnicity and culture is also reflected in Cross’s (1971: 487) definition: “ethnic groups are groups defined in relation to cultural features”.
The multi-cultural composition of the South African labour market was referred to in Chapter 2. Interpreted from the theoretical frameworks provided by Hofstede (1980) and Trompenaars (1993) it becomes clear that certain characteristics and preferences of some South African subcultures couldstand in total contrast with regards to the importance and relevance of many business and leadership principles and requirements for business excellence (see further discussion in section 5.3). However, being aware of the multitude of cultural and ethnic differences is not enough. An analysis of those values that are required to accomplish organisational goals (Cox, 1993: 11) and to take a company into the global market (van der Colff, 2001: 16) is needed. The complexity of the work force, which is directly related to the diverse nature of the South African society, needs to be understood in order for it to be successfully managed. Furthermore, an understanding of the effect of these cultural differences on the selection of appropriate leadership approaches and behaviours is needed. Cox (1993) emphasises that the urgency of getting to the right answers in respect of the management of diversity is reflected in the question practicing managers of organisations ask more than any other, namely how the bottom-line performance of organisations is affected by diversity and the management thereof. The answer is not an easy or singular one, but what needs to be accepted is that, if South African organisations want to achieve business excellence, leadership has to appreciate the diversity in organisational cultures as a given reality.
Afrocentric or Eurocentric
South African organisations are conceptualised and structured in a largely Western mould (Van der Wal, 2001: 14). Cultures of many organisations are still ignoring the fact that the largest proportion of the population is African, and not European or American. As a result many employees cannot identify with systems, structures and processes in their organisations and they find that there is little congruence between the goals of the work force and those of the organisation. In comparing African and Western cultures, Van der Walt (1997: 10) describes the African culture as “communalistic” rather than “naturalistic”. One of the important values impacting on motivation, morale and levels of satisfaction in organisations, is the individual’s perception of his own existence in relationship to others. In contrast to Western belief, man in Africa is not an individual who can make arrangements and agreements to his own advantage. His relationship to others is of primary importance and only as a member of society he has the right of existence. There is an absolution of the society (it always comes first) instead of the individual. The debate of whether to develop and follow a unique African way of solving problems and managing South African companies or to integrate proven Western values and principles in the (South) African context is an ongoing one. The danger in introducing effective organisational change in developing third-world countries lies in cultural bias. It is an inherent problem and, according to Jedlicka (1987: 64) could come from both the existing culture of the country finding itself in the change process and international countries offering help in the change process. When change assistance is offered to a third world (African) country there is always the possibility of introducing a Western bias into the process. This bias will not necessarily be a negative one, but what is vital is to incorporate the best of both organisations when designing a change process. Although cultural bias in organisational change might continue to be an inhibiting factor for the future, Jedlicka (1987) is convinced that it is not an insurmountable barrier. What is required is that people involved in organisational change have a thorough understanding of the effects of culture in the change process.
Van der Walt’s (1997) point of view is that neither Eurocentrism nor Afrocentrism could provide the ultimate solution in South Africa. With reference to the debate around the importance of excellence versus relevance, he is convinced that the one cannot exclude the other. Both can be regarded as relative terms. When looking at the Eurocentric importance of standards and excellence, one needs to clearly determine the criteria for excellence as well as define the context in which it is used. As an example he mentions that, according to Western standards, South Africans could do academic work of high standing quality, but it could be totally irrelevant and meaningless for the South African situation. Despite this, a pure Afrocentric approach to South African problems is not appropriate either. Van der Walt (1997: 42) notes that the belief held by many Africans that going back to the past as the only way of regaining their lost identity, is no longer possible. In this regard he refers to the many examples of Agyeman (1996) where a number of African countries realised that the modern African culture has become so intertwined with the Western, that going back is not an option. From what is happening in Africa one could form the impression that Western and African cultures are already in a process of influencing one another (a process of acculturation so that they are not sharply distinguishable from one another any more) and that the issue at hand is not whether either should dominate, but rather which attributes of both should be supported and reinforced to enhance organisational effectiveness and competitive performance in the global arena. Although significant differences in values, beliefs, expectations and customs do exist across cultures (Hofstede, 1980; Lessem, 1993; Trompenaars, 1993) one cannot generalise on any of these differences. Van der Walt (1997: 16,49) even go as far as to argue that the African culture and the Western culture do not exist – there is too huge a diversity in each. It is possible to find Westerners who from time to time would fit into the African trend much better and vica versa. The perception of time could serve as a good example. With some Western nations a mix of typical Western and African time views is found. They tend to be more Western oriented in their public appearance, but more African in personal life. Similarly it is argued (Van der Walt, 1997: 49), that there can be no question of one (single) traditional African view of time. Agyeman (1996) confirms this by referring to some Africans calling strongly for Africanisation while they are already exercising certain practices which are completely alien to the traditional African culture.
The differences in practicing science between West and Africa are also brought into the discussion and a religious dimension is introduced too (Van der Walt, 1997: 60). He regards the autonomous power of man over his environment as one of the most important Western values. Through the application of science and technology man can do with the environment what he wants to. Quite often science knowledge is regarded as more important than any other form of knowledge, which has indeed led to huge wealth in the West. For the African, science can never be regarded as something separated from religion – the spiritual side of reality cannot be ignored. Wealth for Western man is measured in terms of science knowledge and commercial wealth. Development is only seen as technological and economic development. This in itself points to the poor side – poor in human relations, poor in the experience of real human fellowship. To bring the two cultures together, Van der Walt (1997) once again suggests a “to and fro affirmative pluralism” in which the two cultures influence each other in a correcting way.
This, of course, can only happen in intense dialogue with each other where one group does not try to enforce its own culture on the other.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO STUDY AND BACKGROUND
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
1.3 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH SETTING AND -OBJECTIVES
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 DEFENCE TRANSFORMATION IN DEMOCRATIC CONTEXT
2.3 CULTURE AND VALUE SYSTEMS
2.4 ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND LEADERSHIP
2.5 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AND TRANSFORMATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
2.6 LEADERSHIP AND LOCUS OF CONTROL
2.7 AIMOFTHESTUDY
2.8 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3: CULTURE, VALUES AND WORK RELATED VALUES – A THEORETICAL OVERVIEW
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 CULTURE
3.3 VALUES
3.4 THE PROTESTANT ETHIC
3.5 WORKVALUES
3.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4: LOCUS OF CONTROL: TO LEAD OR TO BE LEAD
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT
4.3 LOCUS OF CONTROL AND SOCIAL DOCTRINE
4.4 LOCUS OF CONTROL AND PERFORMANCE RELATED BEHAVIOUR
4.5 THE NATURE OF LOCUS OF CONTROL IN CERTAIN GROUPS OFPEOPLE
4.6 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCUS OF CONTROL AND CERTAIN ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR VARIABLES
4.7 MEASURING LOCUS OF CONTROL
4.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 5: LEADERSHIP
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 LEADERSHIP VERSUS MANAGEMENT
5.3 THE NEED FOR AN AFRICAN APPROACH TO LEADERSHIP
5.4 THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN FORMING A CULTURE
5.5 FROM CLASSICAL TO CONTEMPORARY: THE LEADERSHIP THEORIES
5.6 CURRENT THOUGHTS ON AFRICAN MANAGEMENT/LEADERSHIP
5.7 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
5.8 ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE IN THE SA AIR FORCE
5.9 A MOTIVATIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON LEADERSHIP
5.10 MEASUREMENT OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR
5.11 SUMMARY & CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6: VARIABLES OF IMPORTANCE IN THE STUDY OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 MAIN INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
6.3 NUISANCE VARIABLES
6.4 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 7: PSYCHOMETRIC CONSIDERATIONS OF THE STUDY
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.2 VALIDITY
7.3 SURVEY OF WORK VALUES
7.4 INTERNAL CONTROL INDEX
7.5 VALIDITY OF THE VALUE SURVEY MODULE
7.6 THE MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE
7.7 RELIABILITY
7.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 8 : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.2 RESEARCH STRATEGY
8.3 THE POPULATION
8.4 SAMPLING PROCEDURE
8.5 STATISTICAL METHODS IN DATA PROCESSING
8.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 9 : DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE BY MEANS OF FREQUENCY TABLES
9.3 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 10: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
10.1 INTRODUCTION
10.2 STATISTICS OF ASSOCIATION
10.3 INFERENTIAL STATISTICS
10.4 PRACTICAL SIGNIFICANCE RE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
10.5 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
10.6 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
10.7 MULTIPLE REGRESSION
10.8 SUMMARY
CHAPTER 11: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
11.1 INTRODUCTION
11.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
11.3 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE LITERATURE STUDY
11.4 CONCLUSIONS BASED ON EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
11.5 CONSEQUENCES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES AND POLICIES IN A TRANSFORMATIONAL PARADIGM
11.6 SOME FINAL COMMENTS
REFERENCES
