1

Chapter 2

Theory and Literature Review

The purpose of this chapter is to review the literature on leadership in organizations and leadership theories. It

highlights the leadership instruments that could have informed the research and their applications and also discusses the culture

of Thai leaders.

The truth of leadership is: leadership exists within all of us, if we are learning to be a leader, training and regularly

practice. It is not difficult to inspire leadership in the person out. Khun Nutthawut Kietchaiyakorn (Team Leader of Targeted

Solution at APMGroup) said that the current Thailand lacks of good leaders. However, it does not refer to the meaning “leader”

in Thailand, whether at any level of any organization. The idea is cracked and quality management issues that come several

times, often no sustainable solution. More likely, the risk factors are near Thailand whether economic situation because thinking

is considered an important mechanism, dealing with the risk management and it allows the comprehensive thinking the vision

for the future.

The theatrical foundation for this study is comprised of conceptualizations of transformation leadership by Bass

(1985). Bass proposed that the concept of transaction and transformation leadership includes seven leadership factors that he

labeled as charisma, inspirational, intellectual stimulation, individualized, consideration, contingent reward, management-by-

exception, and laissez-faire leadership. Bass and his colleagues (1985) developed and modified the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaires (MLQ).

What is Leadership?

Leadership defined as the person that can lead a group of people or an organization or the ability to do this. Ward

(2012) gave the simple definition is that Leadership involves to establishing a clear vision, to sharing that vision with others so

that they will follow willingly, to providing the information, knowledge and methods to realize that vision, and to coordinating

and balancing the conflicting interests of all members and stakeholders. A leader steps up in times of crisis, and is able to think

and act creatively in difficult situations. Unlike management, leadership cannot be taught, although it may be learned and

enhanced through coaching or mentoring.

According to Burns (1978) leadership is considered as one of the most observed, but least understood and

comprehended phenomena in the world. For almost forever, several scholars and researchers mainly focus on studying the

2

subject or topic of leadership and those vital factors and elements related to it. Thus, several researches mainly focus on

understanding better the different approaches, methods and styles used and applied in leadership and their influences in an

organization and the entire society. Leadership is considered as the ability to influence or affect others and control the behaviors

of the members of the group by using different styles, approaches and methods, which include motivation and achieving

organizational goals (Rosette and Tost, 2010; Caldwell and Dixon, 2010).

Regards to Stogdill (1974) defines leadership behavior as that which leaders use to influence a group of people towards

the achievement of goals. Leadership is an interaction between two or more members of a group that often involves a structuring

or restructuring of the situation and this perceptions and expectations of members and concerned. As Yukl (2010) defined the

leadership as in terms of individual traits, behavior, influence over other people, interaction patterns, role relationships,

occupation of an administrative position and perception by others regarding legitimacy of influence.

According, Thye (2010) talked about the leadership is more concerned with people; the top of the top management is

the one who understand people. They had sympathy and listen to your emphatically. Means if the leaders know their own

people, they will know how to manage and how to work with them as well as know how to make them work for you. Smith

(2010) defined the leadership that the leadership is the ability to adapt the setting so everyone feels empowered to contribute

creatively to solving the problems. Leaders have capacity to do something through their talents and skills, many people whose

natural born with the leadership ability was very close to zero that can be really leaders, but through the training and experiences

are become a real great leaders. So, it doesn’t matter that you were born in big and famous family could be always a leader.

You can build up the leader behavior by training and learning from your previous experiences. A leader adjusts the state of

surroundings and people, looking for how to adapt the setting the most efficiently. A leader should inspire confidence and self-

esteem to their employees which called “empowerment”. A leader should be able to find the way link to people’s instinct.

Leaders help everyone feel empowered, but evidence usually comes after the leadership actions produce the desired results. A

leader encourage and create contribution every members sharing an idea and listen to their ideas. And be able to solve the

problems, faster, better and safer. Accountable and suitable leadership is essential to the success of any organization that leader

should be ethical, grounded in the mission of the organization and is emotionally engaged with employees, Conyers (2009) also

thought that leaders are not only the one who has talents and skills of management but also have to had the human resources

skills, to know how to manage their own people. Peterson (2012) found that the frequency for each managerial leadership

behavior is depicted “builds trust”. It is the credible as the managerial leadership behavior that a leader who can builds the trust

are be able to commands attention is authentic and credible.

Mayo and Nohria (2005), study of the great business executives who built the world in which we now live that the

leadership in context not leadership that emerges sole from the qualities of the human character but leadership that springs forth

3

form an appreciation and understanding of the one’s situation in the world. Economic, social and political condition change

over times and these change requires distinct leadership style and approaches for success. Most fields of human knowledge

seem to be imbibe Peal S.Buck’s view that “ Knowledge of history as details as possible is essential if we are owe to comprehend

the past and be prepared for the future”

With the general slow growing of Thai employees in many companies in Thailand, it is hardly surprising that the

language is the big impact of Thai people and to be in the management positions. According to Dhevabanchachai (2011) explain

about why there are many foreign GMs work in chained hotels in Thailand. This is a very big problem that Thai people barely

speak English. Some of them can speak English but not fluent and doesn’t know how to negotiate.

Leadership: “It’s not just about you” According to Welch and Harper (2007) what leaders do?

Leaders relentlessly upgrade their team, using every encounter as an opportunity to evaluate, coach, and build self-

confidence.

Leaders make sure people not only see the vision, they live and breathe it.

Leaders get into everyone’s skin, exuding positive energy and optimism.

Leaders establish trust with candor, transparency, and credit.

Leaders have the courage to make unpopular decisions and gut calls.

Leaders probe and push with a curiosity that borders on skepticism, making sure their questions are answered with

action.

Leaders inspire risk taking and learning by setting the example.

Leaders celebrate.

There is no easy formula for being a leader if only. Leadership is challenging all those balancing acts all the responsibility all

that pressure. And yet good leadership happens and it comes in all kinds of packages. There are quiet leaders and bombastic

ones. There are analytical leaders and more impulsive ones. Some are tough as nails with their teams, others more nurturing.

On the surface you would be hard-pressed to say what qualities these leaders share. Underneath, you would surely see that the

best care passionately about their people about their growth and success. And you would see that they themselves are

comfortable in their own skins. They’re real, filled with candor and integrity, optimism and humanity.

4

Creating on influence in an organization is difficult especially when there is no one who can lead towards the change.

Leadership in an organization is important to make the policies and regulations with the organization objectives. The leaders

are the people who understand both side of management and people.

Leadership Roles

Leadership is about getting results from the followers. In order to get results, the subordinated should support the

people. Leadership style to retain the followers and within the organization, leader should be balanced in order to increase the

value on the elements involved in the organization. Leaders should also provide the appropriate strategies in the organization

(Gandz, 2005).

The role of leader and followers

The increase in interest of the business leaders towards the efficiency of performance can be traced or the essential

roles of the leaders and followers. The focus of the leader is to examine the difference perspective in the transaction and

transformer approach. Also, followers of their relationship and partnership (Rosenbach, 2007) Leaders are important for they

can facilitate the people according to the goal and objectives of the organization. With the help of the experience, leaders can

effectively guide the people by adjusting their values, changing perspective, and learning new habit. Various theories of

leadership had been recognized in attempt to bring the best outcome of the people. But on the ongoing investigation of the

researchers in the leadership theory and the idea of “follower-centered” approach (Fujita, Aji, and Kyaw, 2009).

From the observation, the leaders are the people on which the subordinates or followers depend on and their words

can empower or destroy the role of the follower (Hantula, 2009). Leaders are responsible for building organizations where

people continually expand their capabilities to understand the complexity, clarify the vision, and facilitate the learning (Agashe

and Bratton, 2001). The followers are almost the same as the leaders for they also play a crucial role in the organization as well

as the analysis of the leadership. Obviously, there are no followers if there are no leaders to stand before them and be a model.

The followers are also attempting to find an opportunity to be a leader but this aspiration is impossible if there is no good leader

or leadership (Hantula, 2009). It seems like the power of a leader is to influence others most especially the followers. The

perspective of the followers to be influenced by others is part of the ideal characteristics. In the stay of the individuals in the

relationship, there is also a possibility that the both leaders and followers influence each other. In the strong belief of the

individuals regarding the goals of the organization, the follower could give an eager support with the leader. However, follower

should point out flows of leaders when leader fails to implement the organization’s goals or leader is doing unethical. The

differences of the leaders and the followers in behaviors are in the dimension of the two parties to support and be challenged.

5

The continuous development of the leader-follower can now be described as partners and the essential roles are being divided

among them (Rosenbach, 2007; Fujita, Aji, and Kyaw, 2009).

The Theory of Authority and Power

In the structure of the leadership and organization, the power theory and power-base formation became a model that

displays the both the dependent and interdependent relationships considered critical to power acquisition, power

transformations, power dynamics, and organization effectiveness. The model’s design can help examine both positive and

negative power outcomes and provide an accelerated dramatization of known power relationships in complex organizations.

Power in leadership is necessary in order to provide the authority. Power obviously is a pervasive reality in the life process of

all modern-day organizations. Leaders regularly acquire and use power to accomplish specific work goals and to strengthen

their own positions. In the exercise of power, there is a possible interaction and every social relationship in an organization

(Michelson, 2002). In health care settings, the main role of the leader is to take care, both people and the medical team. Leaders

need to understand their purpose and assess the environmental stress that affects the patients and staff and take action to alter

unhealthy situations. The idea of being a leader to give his all, skills, knowledge, time; and he can be very effective in promoting

the positive clinical interaction.

Successful Leadership

Leadership skills have been sought by the people not only in workplace setting or managing the business affairs but

also in the political aspect. Many believed that an effective leader can create a great impact in the future of the country. Although

there is a slight difference in the management leadership and political leadership, both still promotes the right actions in leading

the people. However, leaders have unique characteristics and abilities in promoting and emphasizing their own ideas in leading

the people. The leadership in politics might be tricky because of the involvement of the commitment in serving the country and

the issues of self-interest. Generally, the power and influence of the leaders affects the entire organization. The success of a

leader in influencing others within the office is not determined solely by his skill in communicating, in the technical sense

(Mendoca & Kanungo, 2007). It is also much affected by the amount of power he has in the organization. Power has been

defined as the potential to influence the actions of another person in the direction desired by the influencer (Rodriguez &

Echanis, 1993). The capacity to influence, or power, that a person in the organization has is determined by many factors, the

formal authority of his position being only one of these:

It is important to understand the non-position based of influence in organizations for several reasons. One is that the

continuous exercise of position based power, especially punishment power, to influence others can generate resistance over

6

time. People do not generally enjoy being ordered to do things all the time. Secondly, subordinate actions are based on

commitment rather than mere compliance is often necessary, especially if the leader expects the subordinates to exercise

initiative and imagination in implementing his directives. Thirdly, managers are dependent in varying degrees on other persons

in the organization over whom they exercise no positional power. For an instance, a leader may need the cooperation of another

leader to make strategies in order to achieve the common goal. In such cases, the influence can still be exercised by the leader

based on non-positional power. Thus, the cultivation of the various sources of power increases a leader’s repertoire of influence

modes and increases his flexibility in exercising his directing function (Aronson, 2001).

According to Pierce and Newstram (2003, p.162) “Effective leaders take a personal interest in the long term

development of the employees”. They use motivation tactics and many skills or experiences to support their employees to

achieve organization goals. This is about tapping into individual motivations in the interests of furthering an organization-wide

goal. Figure 2.1 indicates a framework for understanding leadership effectiveness.

Figure 2.1 a Framework for understanding leadership

Source: adapted from Dubrin, Dalglish and Miller (2006, p.16)

Leadership Theories

There are several leadership theories which can be applied to a research focus on managers. These theories include Traits

theory, Contingency theory, Leader-Member-Exchange theory, Situational theory, and Path-Goal theory.

7

Leadership Trait: Trait leadership was grounded in the assumption that some people are natural leaders because they

have certain characteristics not possessed by others (Owen 2000). Leadership trait theory refers to the distinguishing

characteristics, be they personality, social and physical, that differentiate the leaders from the followers. The basic idea of this

is that leaders are born to lead and they possess certain unique traits (Latemore and Callan 1998). This leadership theory is

useful in identifying strengths and weaknesses of a person, so that strengths and weaknesses can be improved through

continuous learning and self-development identified the leadership traits that effective leaders possess. Stogdill's later work

builds on his conclusions from the literature search, and he presents an interesting analysis of the trait theorists. He suggests

that traits considered singly hold little diagnostic or predictive significance. In combination, however, they can generate

personality dynamics, or patterns, rather than specific traits that are advantageous to the person in a leadership role (Stogdill,

1985). These traits were found to have high correlations with leadership as following:

1. Intelligence

2. Dominance

3. Self-Confidence

4. Energy – Activity

5. Task-Relevant Knowledge

Contingency Theory: Fred Edward Fielder1 is a globally recognized guru in the fields of psychology and leadership.

Fiedler presented one of the most intuitive leadership models, which is known as the Contingency Theory. Fiedler proposes that

effective leadership is a function of a proper match between the leader’s style of interacting with followers and the degree to

which the situation gives control and influence to the leader. According to Fiedler, a leader’s style could be identified based on

how the leader describes an individual he or she last enjoyed working with. When a leader describes this person in favorable

terms, this indicates that the leader is interested in good relationships. Accordingly, that leader’s style would tend to be more

people-centered. On the other hand, describing the least-preferred individual in unfavorable terms indicates more of a task-

centered style. Fiedler felt that one’s style is fixed. Using three situational factors (degree of respect for employees; structured

jobs; and influence over the employment process) he identified eight situations where either the task-centered or people-centered

styles would work best. The situational factors according to Fiedler dictate which leadership style would be more effective

(Sims 2002). Within Contingency Theory, there are 3 major situational variables that determine whether a group situation is

favorable or unfavorable to a leader: (1) leader-member relation, (2) task structure, and (3) leader position power.

1 http://www.scribd.com/doc/81276688/Leadership-1-0

8

Leader-member relations concern the amount of tension involved in the interpersonal relationships between the

leader and group members and are in part, dependent upon the leader’s personality (Utrecht & Heier 1986).

Task structure refers to whether the job is done a certain way, such as a step-by-step procedure (structured), or

whether there is no particular way to do the task and the requirements are quite vague (unstructured) (Utrecht &

Heier 1986).

Position power is the degree to which the position itself enables the leader to get is group members to comply

with and accept his/her direction and leadership (Utrecht & Heier 1986).

Leader-Member-Exchange Theory: Yukl (1998) suggests that the Leader-Member-Exchange theory of leadership

explains that the relationship between managers and their subordinates develops over time as a result of role-making process

and social exchange between them. Managers always develop a more favorable relationship with some subordinates than with

others. When there is strong mutual trust and loyalty, subordinates are provided with more responsibility. A subordinate who is

seen as trustworthy by a manager is more likely to consult for advice and given more responsibilities.

Situational Theory: According to Pierce and Newstram (2003) effective leaders must correctly identify the behaviors

each situation requires and then be flexible enough to understand how they can be applied in that situation. Leaders who lack

the necessary leadership skills must be trained. Each situation requires a different leadership style. In every situation there is a

leadership style that will be effective. This theory accords with Contingency Theory. However, the environment often

counteracts the potential power of the leader, making it virtually impossible in some situations for leaders to have much impact

regardless of their style or how good the fit is between leader and situation (Pierce & Newstram 2003). Managers have to use

their strategies to solve any problem in any situation and must also always be aware of their employee’s emotion.

Path-Goal Theory: the main concept of this theory is that the leaders have to support their subordinates in achieving

the goals of their organizations. The leaders in an organization all have to provide similar pathways to achieve goals of the

organizations (Robbin, Bergman & Stagg 1997). The Path-Goal Theory of leadership was developed to describe the way that

leaders encourage and support their followers in achieving the goals they have been set by making the path that they should

take clear and easy.

In particular leaders: (House & Mitchell 1974)

Clarify the pathway so subordinates know with the best way to go.

Remove any obstructions that are stopping subordinate to reach the goals.

Increase the rewards when subordinates achieve excellent results

9

The theory proposes 4 different kinds of leadership styles: (Silverthorn 2001)

Directive leaders explain subordinates what is expected of them and give specific guidance and enforce rules and

procedures.

The supportive leader gives strong attention to the needs and well-being of their subordinates.

The achievement-oriented leader seeks to improve performance, set high standards and shows confidence to their

subordinates will achieve these standards.

If the task is well defended then less guidance is needed and the leader can give fewer directives, whereas if the task

is poorly defined, subordinates will require more guidance and direction from the leader. The Path-Goal Theory argues that a

leader should be able to be either task or relationship-oriented as the particular situation requires.

Leadership Ability

It is unquestionable that there are unlimited researches on how people acquire leadership ability. However, the

Aristocrats believe that it is in born (in the blood): just like monarchy. Most work known today attempts to describe leadership

act and techniques, theorize about why leaders emerge; understand people and the dynamics of interpersonal relations. Both

near and far, there exist highly talented people with leadership ability. Various informal groups: preparatory to university,

families to social institutions, traditional settings to modern setting all have distinguished set of people who have demonstrated

superior leadership act. However, teaching this process could be difficult. This could be due to the fact that leadership is a

dynamic personal process (Gerhard, 2002).

In business, excellent leadership ability appears rare. This may be partly due to the fact that great ability is rare,

employees could work without zeal, lack of alternatives for the employees, inability to finance a change, and the subordinates

are lazy or are hindered by a union (Budhwar and Yaw, 2001). In this situation, a manager does not need to use much leadership.

Therefore he may depend on negative motivation and authority to command (Budhwar and Yaw, 2001). Budhwar and Yaw

(2001) further stressed that this situation is unfortunate and unfriendly for both superior and subordinates. It leads to defensive

and unsupportive behavior on the part of the subordinates.

Nature of environment in which interpersonal group relationship occurs also affects quality of leadership. The

environment is affected by leader’s success and failures, which in turn is also affected partly by other external factors like

government policy (Cleland, 1998). Among the environmental factor is the hygienic factor. Supervision, working condition,

wages, policies, interpersonal relation, policies and job security are easy to come by during prosperity. During adversity, the

hygienic factors may gradually reduce in volume, scope and quality: benefits and salaries are reduced. However, human relations

10

and supervision may improve, certain efforts may yield better results than the others and their may be shift of attention as the

case may be. At this point, it may be important if reward and self-development aspects of motivation system become prominent

(Cleland, 1998).

Whatever the environment is, leaders emerge to make decisions and make positive impacts. Strategic planning is very

important while making decisions. According to Dubrin (2007), self-analysis of the company is needed to assess past

performance and present position of the organization. Strategic planning is designed based on realistic assessment of the

capacity: strength and weakness of the organization, which are of great managerial value (Dubrin, 2007).

Leadership Theories in Organizations

Leadership is vital in effective organizational and social functioning. Leadership mainly focuses on influencing other

people in order to achieve the desired outcome and goals. Thus, its moral reason and principal focus on generating an empowered

follower that will result to moral outcomes which can be achieved by moral means (Antonakis and Cianciolo, 2004).

Leadership has been widely studied and evaluated by different fields of knowledge such as education and business with the

changing focus, however, it is still considered as vague and unclear idea (Doh, 2003). Furthermore, researchers are focusing on

the different theories, practices and approaches in leadership in connection to extensive research, which enable leadership to

become legitimate discipline. But, until now, there are still many debates and arguments which focus on knowing what actually

leadership is (Elmuti and Minnis, 2005). On the other hand, transformational leadership or known as relationship theory, focus

on building upon the relationship between the leaders and followers. Leaders under this theory have a strong sense of mission

and the ability to influence the subordinates. They commonly lead the group from “what is” to “what is describable” to “what

ought to be”. Therefore, the main roles of transformational leaders are idealized leadership, inspirational motivation, intellectual

stimulation and individualized consideration (Martin, 2005).

Thus, leadership can be categorized as explicit and implicit and formal and informal. Explicit is based on the actual

behavior of the leader or the over behavior which can be measured and evaluated and implicit theory of leadership is founded

on the conceptual structure, definition as well as expectations of the people regarding on how leader should behave or known

as the covert behavior. It is important to take note that evaluating the implicit leadership theory is always connected to different

explicit factors (Silverthrone, 2005).

Leadership in theories, in organizations and organizational behavior can go hand in hand into one definite project

activity as ideas and concepts that help in a manager is supported by a particular theory. One dimension of leadership behavior

that appears to be more or less equally practiced by other training coordinators or managers as idealized influence where I can

11

display charisma by expressing confidence in the organizational vision and personally taking responsibility for decisions and

actions. There can be compared on satisfaction with their own work performance (Schyns and Meindl, 2005).

Transferability of Western Management to the Asian Context

Management practices are not developed in a vacuum but within corporate organizations and social environments that

cannot be easily replicated. They cannot be introduced overnight like managerial directives but have to be integrated in corporate

visions and immersed in the appropriate social values and attitudes. Substantial progress has been made in cross-cultural and

comparative management studies depicting those differing values and practices (Richter 2002). Asian management has been

perceived as a counter body of thought in delimitation of Western management practices. Management of the firm in Asia is

different. In order to understand the differences between Asian and Western management, one must recognize that there is not

merely a cultural divide between two societies, but a civilizational chasm (Scarborough 1998). In the management of business

there are different values that are used as a basis to determine the best action for a company. Asian and Western values give

ideas on what are the acceptable and unacceptable actions for business. Asian values give importance to the welfare of

individuals while Western values focus on the idea of professionalism in the workplace. The leadership behavior in the west

will not be as well received or as effective in the east. In many western organizations there is a clear boundary between work

and life and leaders are aware not to get involved in the personal affairs of their employees. However, the east has a more

integrated approach to work and social life which is a further example of the impact of collectivism. Leaders in collective

cultures see their responsibilities as extending beyond the work environment to a much greater extent than those from individual

cultures. Other cross cultural studies of decision making introduced other important differences of leadership and decision

making. For example, Yates and Lee (1996) found that people of East Asian cultures were more confident than Americans that

their decisions were right. The authors suggest that people of South East Asia tend to select what appears to be the first adequate

solution as opposed considering a wide range of alternatives and narrowing down to the best solution. Therefore, to properly

frame an exploration of modern corporate leadership or management, the unique attributes of Thai culture must be incorporated.

This paper intends to validate the idea that Asian cultures are different to those in the West. Therefore, management

writings based on Western values and practices have limited application, if any, for Asian business managers in helping them

respond successfully to the challenges they face in early twenty-first century.

12

Comparison of Asian and Western Values on management2

Asian

The rapid economic development of Asia in recent decades is one of the most important events in history. This

development continues today and there is every reason to anticipate that it will continue indefinitely unless derailed by possible

but unlikely international conflicts. At the core of Asian economic development is its business leadership—managers and

entrepreneurs who sustain and create Asian companies. Do they exhibit the same leadership styles as top executives in the

West? In the culture of Japanese people, human being has special value according to Confucius instructions; they believe in

endless force of human being and put importance on human training and training innovators. Japanese organizations see their

staff as their asset in this culture and regard human resources development as a very important matter. Many organizations use

regulations and laws to lead their staff to perform tasks and some of them emphasize cultural norms and values as the mechanism

of dominance on staff. In Japan, if there are laws and regulations, norm orientation is dominant on legalism. According to some

researches, functionality of Japanese staff is controlled by their own colleagues in the working groups. Japanese managers spend

more time for solving problems of their inferiors that American managers do and they try to find the problem and help solve it.

Japanese managers enjoy more to support their superior managers than the American and Indian managers do.

Political connections and family control are more common in Asian businesses. Chinese people also have been

influenced by Confucius instructions for 5000 years. Most people in this country have unchanging Confucius thoughts in their

character. Chinese culture is significantly effective on the function of management. Some of the cultural specifications effective

on organizational behavior in this country are as follows:

1. Decision making concentration

2. Limited partnership

3. Dominance of “secondary groups” on the “primary groups”

4. Importance of relation orientation

5. Administrative corruption

6. Belief in grievance and necessity of coordination with nature

7. Importance of face and face-to-face conduct

2 http://lyndagrattonfutureofwork.typepad.com/lynda-gratton-future-of-work/2010/10/asia-and-the-west-

differences-the-four-reasons-why-its-a-tough-question.html

13

8. Special attitude to time

The powerful character which is illustrated by Confucius School plays an important role in centralization of power in

Chinese organizations (Constitution of the People’s Republic of China,1978). In this regard, supervisors are assumed to control

affairs and don’t allow the inferiors to participate effectively. Emphasis on secondary groups and decrease in the role of primary

group are also result of the same centralized system. Decisions about the key and major issues are made by considering the

interests of the decision makers (secondary groups) and the beneficiary groups. Primary groups which comprise most people

are forced to be silent. Due to the dominance of hierarchical relationship, progress and promotion of staff depend on their

relationship with higher levels of management or political powers rather than their individual function (Sun, 1980).

The gist of Fiedler’s theory focuses on the need for a good relationship between the leader and the personnel but there

is neglect for what the personnel feels and what should be the proper reward for personnel. The gist of Japanese management

is the concern for the personnel and proper reward for their loyalty. The use of Fiedler’s theory will lead to a company to focus

well on the welfare of the clients since there are lesser issues within a certain workplace. On the other hand such leadership

practice causes an employee to be not loyal since they will have a notion that no matter how long they stay within the company

they will not receive their just rewards. The use of Fiedler’s theory creates a good relationship between the personnel and the

managers wherein there is decentralized decision making. When there is decentralized decision making the tendency is too

many ideas coming from various parties. This creates new conflicts and poor decisions. The use of Japanese management tends

to create loyal and trustworthy employees. This in turn will cause the personnel to lose their desire to give the proper service to

clients since they have already work security. When employee believes that their job is intact once they acquired significant

years of service to the company the result is the loss of drive and motivation to provide an excellent service to clients. Japanese

management focuses on centralized decisions wherein only one serves as the main decision making body of the company. It

results to lesser input but lesser ideas on how to solve a problem. When centralized decisions are implemented, decision makers

tend to focus on their idea on what is the best for the firm.

Western

American CEOs tend to use one of five leadership styles: directive, participative, empowering, charismatic, or

celebrity. There is less freedom of action for executives and boards in America than in Asia. US has no congruent culture since

different individuals with different culture records have immigrated to this country. However group of general tendencies are

observable in common history of Americans. Some of these tendencies are as follows:

1. Categorizing human being as good or bad

2. Noncompulsory thinking

14

3. Dominance on nature

4. Individualism

5. Functionalism

6. Attention to present and future instead of past

In summary, Americans know human beings either good or bad (in contrary to Confucius communities which regard

nature of all human being good). In USA, government has imposed severe penal laws for regulating behaviors of the people.

Americans have noncompulsory thought, and believe in performance of work and change rather than acceptance of fate.

American people know themselves dominant on the nature, have tendency to solution of problems and emphasize on three

variables of structure, strategy and system. Hofstede has recognized Americans as the most individualist nation in the world.

In recent years, Germany and France have forged a tumultuous alliance, first driving the introduction of the Euro, and

now defining the political agenda for the European Union. The differences in approach are not surprising when we look at the

differences in leadership style. The German managers in this study rate themselves among the highest in Europe at setting

direction for the future. They are second only to the Swedes in their ability to embrace new ideas and perspectives. But unlike

the Swedish managers, these ideas are weighed against past practices, minimizing risk by building on knowledge gained through

experience as well as current expertise. For Germans, plans are made after in-depth study, taking a long-range and broad

approach, and thinking through the implications of decisions by projecting into the future. In France, participatory methods in

decision making and aiming are not common and wisdom and smartness are the most important criteria for leadership in all

fields (Birnbaum 1987). Although more highly educated, they are less technically oriented than the Germans tend to be, and

more likely to take a short-term view. And, like the Swedish managers, the French tend to use instincts rather than analysis. The

French personal style is outgoing, operating with a good deal of energy, intensity, and emotional expression. The French

manager will be found in the center of the action. The Germans are more understated and subdued. Where the French manager

would project warmth and acceptance, the German would tend to maintain distance and be more aloof. German managers

display less energy, are more difficult to get to know, and have a more formal style that is based on role and responsibility

within the hierarchy rather than personal magnetism. While the Germans are skeptical of those in authority, the French are loyal

to the organization and will consult superiors and defer to people above them. Of all the European managers, the French are the

least comfortable in the management position, placing less emphasis on taking charge and more emphasis on seeking the advice

of others, creating and valuing close supportive relationships. The Germans, on the other hand, are comfortable in a leadership

role and are willing to take command, and may in fact have difficulty when required to function as a team member rather than

a team leader.

15

Thai Organization Culture

As noted by Schwartz and Davis (1981), “organizations cannot function without some degree of regularized, formal

information flow, policies, procedures, meetings through which the essential takes of the business are carried out. Organizations

are also built upon the skills, experience, and needs of the people who compose them.” Thus, organization culture is associated

with the shared behavior of employees with regard to the job and organization (Rampersad 2003). An organization’s culture

can be explained by its management in term of the way their tasks are managed, such as the management style, and

organizational structures (Smith 1998). Thailand is a country3 of natural scenic views, a tropical climate, and a lot of hospitable

people. As a result of a rich history and recent exchanges with the Western world, one can find a good balance of foreign and

local influences in the place. Such a fact is especially true of its business environment. If you wish to expand your company in

the kingdom, you must first orient yourself with its unique corporate culture. Normal office hours are from 8:00 to 17:00 with

lunch break generally set from 12:00 to 13:00. Moreover, it is often considered acceptable to be a little late for meetings and

conferences, due to the traffic jams that often occur in the place. When occasions like this arise, calling to say that you will be

running late would be much appreciated by your colleagues.

Furthermore, the local culture is very dominant in many business transactions, with hierarchy and respect for seniors

considered of the utmost importance when making corporate decisions and negotiations. Thus, you must first gain an

understanding of the social status of your local associates as well as the vertical company structure before you commence any

kind of deal. There is a natural symbiotic relationship between work culture and national culture. Generally when people

refer to their work culture they are talking about the experience they are having with their immediate team and managers. This

culture impacts the organizations ability to change, to respond to market or administrative challenges and to comply with laws

and regulations. For example a culture that is ‘uncontrolled and unmanaged’ risks accidents to employees or contravention of

quality standards. Culture also impacts the organization’s ability to retain and attract the best people from its talent pools. People

constantly talk about an organization’s culture (without even knowing it). For example when a person meets someone new they

will ask ’where do you work?’ and ‘how is it?’ or ‘what is it like to work in that organization? Inquiries such as these are often

seeking information regarding leadership and culture. Culture also impacts on the organization’s ability to achieve high

performance from teams and individuals. Performance may be at the individual, team or organizational level. A fundamental

contributing factor to performance is motivation. A culture may be negatively motivating for an individual if it doesn’t meet or

surpass their expectations. Culture’s influence on behavior is tremendous and it was with this understanding that culture studies

flourished.

3 http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Journal-International-Business-Economics/237358541.html

16

In the 1960s, the IBM Corporation enlisted the assistance of an engineer and cross-cultural researcher, Geert Hofstede,

to perform a long term study of cultural differences among the employees at IBM. Hofstede chose to define culture as ‘collective

mental programming of the people in a social environment in which one grew up and collected one’s life experiences’ (Hofstede,

1980, 1983). His work has had a great impact on the study of culture both in academia as well as in the corporate or private

sector. Hofstede identified four characteristics which shed light on the various differences in national culture; power distance,

uncertainty avoidance, individualism-collectivism and masculinity-femininity. Hofstede categorized Thailand as a nation which

is high on power distance, high on collectivism, high on uncertainty avoidance and high on femininity. Each of these cultural

dimensions has a profound influence on and assists in the analysis of management and leadership in Thailand. Previous blog

discussed the impact of power distance, so I thought it best to begin a discussion of the impact of individualism and collectivism.

Thailand is characterized as having a strong collective culture. Within this mindset one must consider the needs of the

group as superseding the needs of the individual. Emphasis is placed on group orientation and teamwork. This collectivism is

also bolstered by the patronage system which enables the formation of strong strategic alliances and coalitions. This pervades

all aspects of life in Thailand from deciding which people to hire or which administrator should be promoted to a position of

higher authority and thus status. Individuals must conform to this Thai cultural ideal and change their perspective or face social

ostracism. When faced with a choice it is seen as best to look to the referent social groups to understand the best course of action

and role within the particular activity. For instance, in a predominantly Thai department, when discussing the next head or

manager, it is important for those low on the organizational hierarchy to keep opinions to oneself and wait for a consensus

among the group prior to revealing their ideal candidate. Mid-level managers who have chosen to ignore this aspect of Thai

culture often find themselves unemployed or ostracized when their chosen candidate was not given the position discussed.

Within a collective culture word of dissenting opinions travels quickly and immediate action is often taken to excise dissent.

With high power distance, employees always agree with any decision made by their boss and are also reluctant to trust

one another (Harrison 1995). In contrast, with low power distance, employees have a chance to cooperate with their managers

and are also less afraid of disagreeing with their boss. In Thailand, leaders have in the past been Authoritarian. A high power

distance, people have a less freedom in making decisions with those in power. Decision-making in Thailand is always top-down

(Raoprasert & Zeidan 2006). Furthermore, Fu (2000) finds that Hofstede’s results from 6 countries have differences along all 4

dimensions (See Table 2.1 below).

17

Table 2.1 Hofstede’s findings in table form

The literature relates to Thai culture and Western culture and Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions and can provide some

ideas about leadership. Little research has been done about leadership styles in Thai organization. So, it is a great chance for

this research to study this area and produce a model to improve the leadership in Thai organization.

Thai Traditional Leadership

Traditional leadership refers to values such as respect for authority, hierarchical order, valuing harmonious

relationships (Farh and Cheng, 1999), and usually manifests analogously as leader as head of the family (Tjosvold et al., 2004).

The Thai social system is traditional in many ways. It is strongly hierarchical (Komin, 1991) and Thai employees refer often to

others higher in the hierarchy because they feel this establishes legitimacy (Noypayak and Speece, 1998). Fieg (1989) describes

the typical Thai organization as a vertical structural system characterized by an unbroken upward flow of documents where the

ultimate superior uses his/her power and authority to make decisions. Indeed, an "effective" Thai subordinate is one who carries

out the boss's orders without question (Bakalis and Joiner, 2003; Sriussadaporn-Charoenngam and Jablin, 1999). These views

are consistent with the findings of Hofstede (1980) who classified the Thai culture as large power distance. Organizations in

large power distance cultures are characterized by the acceptance of human inequality and individuals show deep respect for

authority that results in a paternalistic work relationship between superior and subordinate.

18

Asian cultures view power as the responsibility to nurture and support the less powerful (Hofstede, 2005; Pye, 1985).

Thus, while Thai employees customarily do not assertively challenge the authority of their boss, the Thai leadership style can

be described as benevolent paternalism, which emphasizes the quality of the relationship between employees and their leader

(Sriussadaporn-Charoenngam and Jablin, 1999; Feig, 1989). Thai employees are expected to respect and are obedient to their

boss, but at the same time the leader (or boss) has the responsibility to protect and assist employees (Syamanda, 1986).

Employee-leader relationships in Thai organizations are often closer and more paternalistic than those found in Western

organizations. For example, it is common for the employee to become involved in his/her boss' personal projects. The more the

boss gets the subordinate involved the more the subordinate is viewed as a valuable resource for the organization (Sriussadaporn-

Charoenngam and Jablin, 1999).

The Thai context, power is not viewed as coercive domination of leaders over employees. Traditional, paternalistic

Thai values held by leaders’ manifests as a responsibility to assist and support employees within a close personal relationship.

Characteristics of Leadership style

The characteristics of managers include those such as gender, age, level of education and experience. Pimapunsri

(2008) reports that demographic variables such as gender and age have a significant effect on hotel employees‟ assessments of

their hotels as learning organizations and on subordinates‟ perceptions of managers‟ leadership style. Barbuto et al. (2007)

reveal that gender has only a small effect on Transformational and Transactional Leadership behavior, but the interaction of

gender and education produced consistent differences in employees‟ assessments of leadership behaviors. Eagly (2007) reveals

that in the US, women are increasingly praised for having excellent leadership skills. However, more people prefer male than

female bosses and it is more difficult for women than men to become leaders and to succeed in male-dominated leadership

environments. Burke and Collins (2001) reveal that females are more likely than males to be Transformational Leaders. Females

had a higher perceived effectiveness in three management skills: coaching and developing and communicating. Female receive

more developmental opportunities than male colleagues. Layraman (2004) finds that Transformational Leadership has been

identified as one leadership style which data suggests is indicative of success for women leaders and managers in organizations.

Leaders who demonstrated a Transformational Leadership style tended to motivate their subordinates to work hard within their

organizations. This style of leadership was therefore beneficial within their organizations. Her study is supported by other

research. Rosener (1990) finds that men are more likely to adopt an Authoritarian style while women tend to adopt a

Transformational style, relying heavily on interpersonal skills. Moreover, men tend to manage by punishment while women

manage by rewards and usually care for the feelings of people (Cooper 1992). However, Eagly and Schmidt find that after two

years in their positions, female leaders are more likely to have an Autocratic style than male leaders (Eagly & Schmidt 2001).

Eagly and Carli (2003) report that women have some advantages in typical leadership style but suffer some disadvantages from

19

prejudicial evaluations of their competence as leaders, particularly in masculine contexts. However, more women are rising into

leadership roles at all levels including elite executive roles. Sarker, Crossman and Chinmeteeptuck (2003) report that

employees‟ ages are not significantly associated with job satisfaction levels and there is a significant relationship between

tenure and facets of satisfaction. However, the effects of tenure on satisfaction are significantly modified by age. Oshagbemi

(2004) suggests that younger and older managers have different profiles in their consultative and participative leadership styles.

Older managers consult more widely and favor more participation in comparison with younger managers. However, both groups

practice directive and delegating leadership styles to about the same degree.

The characteristics of Thai workplace norms and behaviors are different from those in other countries. For example,

although Thailand and Japan are Asian countries, they have differences in cultural norms and behaviors in the workplace.

Japanese managers who work with Thai subordinates have to learn a lot about the culture, norms and behavior of Thai people

before they can work effectively. Raoprasert and Zeidan (2006) identify some of the key characteristics of Thai workplace

norms and behaviors which may conflict with Japanese management practices. See Table 2.2.

Table 2.2. The Key Characteristics of Thai Workplace Norms and Behaviors.

William and Onishi (2003) Thai subordinates prefer recognition from their supervisors, and expect

Japanese managers to be humorous.

Hasegawa (1986); William and Onishi

(2003)

Thai subordinates prefer punctuality and freedom to adopt their own

approach. Relationships between bosses are important. In turn, Japanese

managers focus on a preference for equality, being innovative and use of

the quality circle.

Hendon (2001) A strong hierarchy is essential in Thai organizational culture, which is the

opposite to the Japanese concept of equality.

McCambell and Associates (1999) Thai subordinates prefer performance-based pay and promotional also

preferred in the Japanese system.

Sedwick (1995) Thai subordinates prefer that work and private time is clearly separate,

which would contradict the main ideas around the quality control circle.

Thai subordinates are not interested in quality control circles without

overtime payment.

20

Holmes and Tangtongtavy (1995) Thai subordinates expect more opportunities and direction from Japanese

managers. Decision-making by Thai managers is Authoritarian and Thai

employees accept their leaders‟ decisions without participation. Thai

employees prefer quick decisions and immediate results, which is not

characteristic of the Japanese decision-making process.

Source: adapted for this research from Raoprasert and Zeidan (2006)

The literature above provided the impetus for the researcher to investigate the characteristic of Thai leaders including

gender, age and level of education. The literature also provided the idea of comparing males and female leaders in Thai

organization.