Leader-organization fit: comparing the effectiveness of paternalistic and transformational leadership in different organizational cultures

Research on paternalistic leadership (PL) has been based exclusively on national cultures´ differences. However there are cues that other contextual variables can add to the explanation of this construct. Due to its capacity to influence expectations of individuals in organizations, organizational culture can contribute to fill this gap. To test if organizational culture influences the effectiveness of leadership style, we conducted two experimental studies using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, comparing effects of paternalistic and transformational leadership on followers’ outcomes. Using video clips and vignettes, we found that PL is better related to followers´ outcomes in cultures oriented to people than outcome, and that TL has a better relationship in cultures oriented to innovation than stability. The results suggest that organizational culture helps in explaining PL endorsement, and that further analysis of the influence of this variable to PL can provide a better understanding of the expression of this leadership style in organizations.

On paternalistic leadership fit: exploring cross-cultural endorsement, leader-follower fit, and the boundary role of organizational culture

Although cross-cultural leadership research has thrived in international business literature, little attention has been devoted to understanding the effectiveness of non-western theories beyond their original contexts. The purpose of this study is to examine the cross-cultural endorsement of paternalistic leadership, an emerging non-western leadership theory, using data from GLOBE project. Using multigroup confirmatory factor analyses we found measurement equivalence of a scale derived from GLOBE’s data, which enabled us to compare the endorsement of paternalistic leadership dimensions across 10 cultural clusters and 55 societies. Our study revealed that there are significant differences in the importance societies give to each dimension, suggesting that paternalism as leadership style is not universally nor homogeneously endorsed. Furthermore, results suggest that different patterns of endorsement of each of these dimensions give rise to idiosyncratic shades of paternalistic leadership across societies. Implications for theory and future research on international business are discussed.