Toward a Framework of Contextualized Assets and Liabilities in Global Leadership: Identity and Power Implications in an African Context

Abstract

Answering to calls for further contextualizing global leadership, this study investigates power dynamics and cultural identities in global leadership in an African context. We took a grounded theory approach to investigate how a specific cultural context shapes assets and liabilities of global leaders. Drawing on our data comprising semi-structured interviews of managers of multinational enterprises operating in Ghana, we identified key assets and liabilities for being local or foreign in one's global leadership role. Furthermore, we theorize four specific styles of leadership leveraging: identity leveraging, power leveraging, juxtapositional leveraging, and temporal leveraging. Finally, we integrated the above-mentioned elements and proposed a framework of contextualized assets and liabilities which illustrates how specific cultural context affects the assets and liabilities of localness and foreignness for global leaders, and how these assets and liabilities constitute the four styles of leveraging in such context. Implications of our findings for research and practice are discussed.

Prelims

“…In a recent tribute, they noted that "her expertise, intellectual curiosity, wit and ability to unite interdisciplinary perspectives produced unforgettable insights, rollicking debates and constructive dialogue." And a recent special issue of the Journal of World Business, the "Interplay Between Intercultural Communications and IB Research" (2020) was dedicated to Janet: Dr Bennett's vision, deep knowledge, dedication, and personal warmth has touched the lives of innumerable scholars and practitioners.…”

A Systematic Review of Power in Global Leadership

“…In the global leadership literature, studies invoking this definitional category vary greatly in terms of the types of global leaders studied, their power bases, and how they exercise power. One recurring theme, however, involves investigating whether global leaders' control over the allocation of valued resources depends on their language proficiency (e.g., Gyamfi & Lee, 2020;Tenzer & Pudelko, 2017). In these studies, language proficiency is not seen as a resource or a source of power.…”

“…In navigating these various conceptualizations, some global leadership researchers have adopted definitions of power that combine elements from several of the categories described above. For instance, Gyamfi and Lee (2020) write, "Power is defined as the ability and willingness to asymmetrically enforce one's will over entities; by utilizing one's relative capacity to provide or withhold resources or administer punishments (Keltner et al, 2003;Sturm & Antonakis, 2015)" (p. 82). Inherent in their definition is a conceptualization of power simultaneously as ability to influence, as relational dependence, and as control over resources.…”

“…The factors moderating global leaders' abilities to exercise power fall broadly into four categories: (i) personal attributes of the leader/agent of power, (ii) features of the leader-follower relationship, (iii) organizational attributes, and (iv) cross-national differences. In terms of the personal attributes that promote global leaders' abilities to exercise power, scholars point to professional expertise, sociocultural understanding, linguistic proficiency, and social capital (e.g., Gundling et al, 2014;Gyamfi & Lee, 2020;Kane & Levina, 2017). Given previous scholarly emphasis on the roles of individual personality, cultural intelligence, and global mindset for global leadership competencies (Bird & Stevens, 2013), it is surprising that these traits and capabilities do not feature more prominently in research on power in global leadership.…”

Book review: Global fitness for global people: How to manage and leverage cultural diversity at work

“…Being a perfectionist, I found myself noticing the absence of a discussion on status and power dynamics in this book. Recent research has increasingly recognized that intercultural interactions are not confined to scenarios of equal status or power (Gyamfi and Lee, 2019; Thomson and Gibson, in press). Often, interactions involve individuals from specific cultures who wield a disproportionately higher degree of power compared to their counterparts.…”