How the Communal Philosophies of Ubuntu in Africa and Confucius Thought in China Might Enrich Western Notions of Leadership

Discursive Leadership: Exploring the "Black Box" Challenge in Transcultural Leadership Studies

“…This finding both reflects, and adds nuance to, the literature I reviewed in chapter two, particularly Caldwell and Prizant (2018), whose study found that Chinese junior executives tended to struggle with acclimating their conduct to fit the Western verbal influence paradigm. It also is in keeping with the work of Elkington and Tuleja (2018), where they position Confucianism as a counterpoint to Western individualism in leadership and group interactions.…”

“…While the Dari/Afghan participants, when freed from the cultural constraint they apparently felt in the same culture session, increased their participation levels by over 600% in the mixed culture groups, the Chinese participants only upped their participation by 61%. This is not only reflective of this study's qualitative findings from Chinese participants' statements regarding their cultural preference for projecting modesty and reserve, but also from several other anecdotal and survey-based research studies that have sought to depict communicative tendencies in Chinese culture (Hofstede, 2002;House & Javidan et al, 2004;Meyer, 2014;Elkington & Tuleja, 2018;Caldwell & Prizant, 2018).…”

“…Western model of trait theory (Zaccaro et al, 2004;Zaccaro 2007) In their chapter on the communal philosophies of Ubuntu and Confucianism as African and Chinese counterpoints to the prevalence of Western individualism in leadership studies, Elkington and Tuleja (2018) seek to explain and elevate the two non-Western philosophies of human interaction. They state the importance of this endeavor in terms similar to Guramatun-huCooper's, citing the unduly limited leadership and organizational relations perspectives available within a Western-dominated research landscape.…”

“…While both the Ubuntu and Confucianism sections do a noteworthy job of highlighting the durability and relevance of ancient philosophies in the contemporary African and Chinese societies, the section on Confucianism is particularly significant. In it, Elkington and Tuleja (2018) discuss the importance of Confucianism's more dialectic approach compared with the recent prevalence of dichotomous culture and leadership models, citing Hofstede (2002) and Javidan and House et al (2004) as particular examples. Ultimately, Elkington and Tuleja (2018) suggest that more individualist Western leadership paradigms, predominantly those in commonly accepted practice in western Europe and the U.S., would be enriched by blending with the more collectivist and communal practices of Ubuntu and Confucianism.…”

“…In it, Elkington and Tuleja (2018) discuss the importance of Confucianism's more dialectic approach compared with the recent prevalence of dichotomous culture and leadership models, citing Hofstede (2002) and Javidan and House et al (2004) as particular examples. Ultimately, Elkington and Tuleja (2018) suggest that more individualist Western leadership paradigms, predominantly those in commonly accepted practice in western Europe and the U.S., would be enriched by blending with the more collectivist and communal practices of Ubuntu and Confucianism. This idea of a less dichotomous approach to cultural and leadership studies, encouraged in particular by Confucianism's more dialectic nature, is perhaps the most important takeaway.…”