Author Note:
Anthony E. Bass, The School of Global Leadership and Entrepreneurship, Regent University Correspondence concerning this sample paper should be addressed to Anthony E. Bass
Abstract
This paper was an essay of the current trends in Leadership theory regarding the importance of the role wisdom and morality play in making the Leader effective in a global context. This paper compares and contrasts contemporary scholar’s research on the topic. And, it extracts how their data could lead to a basis for an accepted Christian leadership model. The research shows that there is an existing framework for a verifiable Christian Leadership model. As a result of this research paper, scholars can begin to consider the ultimate role of leadership, which points to a divine context.
Introduction
This paper argues that although wisdom is not the only virtue, it is an essential one needed for a global leader in order to have the ability to utilize a personal decision grid based upon morality which is developed by either a consistent skillful examination of life’s experiences or the redemptive work of Christ that can give one the ability through formation to choose right and wrong courses of actions and adjust preferred core values for followers within a complex global context. This paper will explore contemporary definitions, philosophies, theories and approaches in Global Leadership whilst comparing and contrasting all of them with the Biblical call to authentic and moral Christian Leadership with the purpose to impact and change the world. It will address wisdom as a philosophical foundation for leadership effectiveness and formation and how wisdom is an existential conduit for understanding—starting outside of the individual by means of life and then ‘working itself through’ them by mode of deliberation eventually working its way back outside of the individual into action.
Moreover, it will identify some of the challenges of globally competent leadership such as the leader’s need to hold in tension adopting certain global values while at the same time retaining some core values that groups have identified with in the past. This paper will also argue for a biblical philosophy and ethic of wisdom that proposes how the unique gift of wisdom the believer in Christ has received can revolutionize an entity and establish it as the model for organizational structure within the global context.
It will also discuss the ethical and moral dimensions of global leadership and how the goal of the global leader is to develop his followers so their interests are advanced and that their well-being is secured regardless of the changing global landscape. And, finally it will conclude by addressing the formation of authentic Christian leadership and how formation is possible despite of the fact that a leader is predisposed to error and moral failure his or herself.
Wisdom as a philosophical foundation for leadership effectiveness and formation:
Early in Solomon’s reign, after he married an Egyptian princess, he was in Gibeon making sacrifices to God; in Gibeon God appeared to him in a dream and without provocation offered the King a single request (1 Kings 3). The Scripture does not state the reason for the request, yet we see because of it Solomon was given a gift that memorialized his mythology in lore; additionally, scholars now argue this very same gift is an indispensable archetype for leaders to strive for if he or she desires to be effective in a global context: in (1 Kings 3: 10 – 12, NASV) God said to him, “Because you…have asked for yourself discernment to understand justice, behold, I have done according to your words. Behold, I have given you a chakam and discerning heart, so that there has been no one like you before you, nor shall one like you arise after you.”
The Scriptures make it clear that Solomon would be the greatest leader in history because of the gift of chakam or wisdom and a discerning heart he received from God. The Hebrew word chakam means to be wise, it conveys an intelligent, skillful, artful, and cunning man who is both subtle and wise hearted (WWW.strongsnumbers.com). According to (Korac-Kakabadse, 1996) stated wisdom is conceptualized as a personal philosophy, a sense of balance and understanding of the complexities of inter-actions within a landscape. For the leader, developing a proficiency at navigating contexts successfully is fundamentally intrinsic to wisdom.
Thus, wisdom is an existential conduit for understanding—starting outside of the individual by means of life and then ‘working itself through’ him or her by mode of deliberation eventually working its way back outside of the individual into action. (Werpehowski, 2007, p. 58) argues for the elements of a model that highlights the ‘working itself through’ portion of the process aimed at the realization of wisdom itself. He states, inquiry, deliberation, and judgment reach forward to affect what Aquinas calls “command,” which has to do with decisively generated action. It is also true to say that command reaches back to affect these other activities considered as an ongoing affair. Wisdom exists outside of humanity, yet everyone is not able to benefit from the process somehow aborting its progression before its utility has become beneficial.
Solomon wrote, “Wisdom shouts in the street, She lifts her voice in the square, She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying, How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? And the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?” (Proverbs 1: 20 – 22, NASB) Similarly, the leader in today’s gobal context must have the skill and capacity to listen and allow wisdom to form within and allow it to work itself out into fruitful leadership decisions.
Yet, there are psychological factors that can hinder this process as well. (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996), focusing on the functionality of wisdom for leadership, referenced Aristotelian wisdom; he offered that leaders need to have a healthy vision of self, which can only be forged in a combination of knowledge and experience. (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996) Thus, a healthy self-concept is paramount for a leader’s ability to perceive his or her context correctly and utilize that information in a way that leads to effective decision making. Wisdom is something that normally is gained through time.
This line of thinking may slow the process of elevating young leaders prematurely. However, we see that God bequeathed this quality to King Solomon in a theophanic prayer. Yet, within a pragmatic framework it can be argued that this quality comes by means of careful rumination on life experiences. Nevertheless, the goal of wisdom is to lead well by means of making right decisions. (Werpehowski, 2007, p. 56) suggests we can say that prudence or practical wisdom has to do with the right use of reason regarding things to be done.
Thus, wisdom or chakam for a leader is the ability to utilize a personal filter developed by a consistent skillful examination of life’s experiences to decide right and wrong courses of action. (Werpehowski, 2007, p. 55) also states, the virtue of prudence or practical wisdom disposes a moral agent to “reason rightly about things to be done” in so far as the acts of counsel, judgment, and command enable both the discernment and the embodiment of moral reality in the world created and redeemed by God in Jesus Christ. According to (Werpehowski, 2007) wisdom only functions properly for a moral agent. Without morality wisdom has no construct from which to function. Wisdom is the work of art that is displayed on the canvas of morality.
Without morality the work of art cannot be seen nor will the artist’s intent be communicated clearly. Since Jesus Christ is the creator and is truth or objective reality, all of one’s life experiences must be perceived through that realty alone. Without looking at life through the “what is” of reality ones perspective will be skewed, and proper decisions will not be made. Jesus, who is the moral compass of reality helps to guide individuals through the ruminations of wisdom, which ultimately leads to the proper conclusions.
Ultimately, the working of wisdom must lead to proper moral actions in light of God’s plan for redemption of mankind. Without this outcome, according to Werpehowski, we can question whether an act is really wise. (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996, p. 207) goes on to argue if one analyses Plato’s central problems of the character of a well-governed city; the formation of its leaders; the pedagogy of their sensibility and vision; it becomes evident that moral values are the central theme.
(Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996) continues to argue that the essential quality of the leader is his or her moral rectitude. Without this, one should not expect for municipalities to be governed effectively. Good leadership is based on morality. Yet, (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996, p. 208) does not romanticize the fact that being a moral leader alone will fix all problems. He states, “Although the presence of the philosopher-king does not in itself guarantee the realization of the state as the embodiment of absolute justice, it is nonetheless true that without the guidance of one who knows the essence of justice, the state is condemned to be ruled in an arbitrary and capricious fashion.”
Good leadership is based on morals, but morality alone does not guarantee success. A moral leader does not answer the organizational questions of vision mission values, conflict management, employee pensions, etc. (Crainer, 2011) states, “Leadership is not a single light waiting to be switched on, but a complex and sometimes inspiring network of illumination and inspiration.” It can be argued that wisdom is the philosophical foundation for leadership effectiveness and formation. And, without wisdom and morality it is impossible to be a good leader. For, wisdom embraces judgment, discernment, intuition and comprehension in an integrated wholeness, where every step of the decision calculus needs to be complemented by emotions in order to assign values to differing possibilities within competing and, more often than not, paradoxical demands (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 1996, p. 213)
The challenges of globally competent leadership:
(Robinson & Harvey, 2008) pointed out that Globalization demands new approaches, and the challenge is to find the appropriate leadership imperatives in response to the changing problems of existence. Moreover, they add cultural diversity affects the way leaders go about defining their roles as leaders and applying themselves to the responsibilities of leadership. One of the many challenges of globally competent leadership is harmonizing a leader’s focus to a common vision of leadership in the global context. If this does not happen there will remain perpetual confusion regarding what leadership is within the global community.
It is irresponsible to suggest that all leaders must have an identical vision of leadership, but regardless of what worldview a leader has there are general universal values that must guide leadership standards globally. This issue is magnified because of globalization. Globalization forces all leaders to clearly define the values they have and to focus on the nonnegotiable ones so that their organizations can navigate the global context. (Kretzschmar, 2007) clarifies exposure to cultures different to one’s own can significantly amend one’s cultural value orientations. Furthermore, factors such as character, personality, education, class and, especially, human sinfulness also plays a significant role in value perceptions and choices
The sifting of values to interact on a global stage will allow leaders and followers to refine their efforts as contexts vary; cultural orthodoxies will be challenged and leaders will have to boldly push forward identifying what is essential for a group’s progress. (Robinson & Harvey, 2008) assert Culture can be broadly understood as an integral system which expresses the values, beliefs, customs and institutions of a particular community, or group of communities. Culture is the way a people have organized themselves to express and preserve their identity and way of life.
Considering whether an organization is adhering to a core value and bearing in mind whether a core value is hindering the advancement of an organization must be a consistent step taken by an entity if it hopes to remain in alignment with the vision of the organization itself. (Kretzschmar, 2007) also argues that cultural preferences cannot be blindly perpetuated without considering changing social circumstances. When cultures are in collision, flexibility and mutual respect can enable such cultures to benefit from each other’s insights. Without a leader’s willingness to adjust broadly to different intercultural dynamics, globally they will not advance past a geo-political mindset nor will they benefit from lessons learned from the past.
However, on the opposite side of the spectrum, it must be understood that from a conservative perspective global value integration will mean organizations must forsake some of the long standing ideologies they have identified with. There can be benefits from the synchronization of certain values within the global context. This pragmatic approach does not mean one has to forsake core values. Yet, it does mean to be effective in the global context one must agree that there are values outside of the conservative mainstream that can enhance the effectiveness and quality of life of a more traditional group if applied skillfully.
The fear in most cases would be to lose the identity of the group attempting to integrate itself in the mainstream of the global conscience, as previously stated, the balancing act of being flexible and conservative rest on the organization alone. Pragmatism is amoral yet these scholars are not extreme in their position. The arguments presents are fundamentally aimed at the utility of pragmatism designed for effectiveness in a global context. How far a leader adopts pragmatism is up to the leader.
(Kretzschmar, 2007) argues the point utilizing universalism and pragmatism instead of suggesting a balancing between conservatism and pragmatism. (Kretzschmar, 2007, p. 6) bases his argument off of the African Holistic idea displayed in model highlighting the six dimensions of cultural diversity. He states universalism can be a moral pathway in that it focuses on norms and values that can be widely, if not globally, endorsed. Universalism insists on equality before the law, so that all the members of a society can be treated in the same way. If universal moral norms are applied, the rich, powerful and corrupt will not escape justice.
Once again (Kretzschmar, 2007) is not romantic he also addresses the negative consequences of universalism he proposes that universalism is a tool that can be used to mold the earth into a global conscience. Yet, in doing so he also carefully addresses the need for individuality in the global context via Particularism. (Kretzschmar, 2007) states particularism can be a moral pathway in that it appreciates local customs and takes particular situations and needs into account. Motive, mitigating circumstances, a possible conflict of duties, a full consideration of the situation, the possible consequences of a particular action, and a search for wisdom can mean that a holistic assessment is made and the best possible action taken.
The balanced approach of the leader of embracing globalism yet holding on to identity will be another responsibility place on his or her shoulders going forward. There are no easy answers here, yet the reality that in order to be successful embracing this challenge is a necessary.
A Biblical philosophy and ethic of wisdom:
Proverbs 3:13-18 sets up the philosophical framework for a biblical philosophy and ethic of wisdom. Within this context wisdom is seen as understanding, which is beneficial to the adherent of it. By understanding it in this context is critical to comprehending what its origin and functionality are. In this context, it points back to the nature of God himself, which is revealed to man through His laws.
Thus, wisdom is not an ends in itself, but it is the proper foundation for achieving a desired end. Wisdom is prescribed the highest significance, and to gain it is to be blessed in God’s sight. Through wisdom one will respond in a way that harmonizes with God and the ultimate good for all mankind, and because of it one achieves self-actualization, which has alluded so many:
How blessed is the man who finds wisdom and the man who gains understanding. For her profit is better than the profit of silver and her gain better than fine gold. She is more precious than jewels; and nothing you desire compares with her. Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor. Her ways are pleasant ways and all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to those who take hold of her, and happy are all who hold her fast. (Proverbs 3:1, NASB).
Wisdom is not perfection for its adherents. (Werpehowski, 2007, p. 64) states and for the love of God, moral wisdom in Christian existence is gained by persons who are at once both sinners and justified. For the leader acting in wisdom once again means to grapple with reality as it is. The fact that all of humanity are sinners, and sin can even effect the perspective of the leader must be conventional wisdom when articulating wisdom as the foundation for leadership.
Furthermore, (1 Corinthians 1: 24) states Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God. Jesus Christ has become the wisdom of God for all who believe. The implications are now the same benefits that Solomon, the greatest leader who ever lived, received from God those who believe in Jesus possess. Believers who adhere to the redemptive work of Jesus now receive wisdom if they accept his atoning sacrifice and resurrection as their own. No longer does the individual have to wait for understanding that comes experientially.
But, the Spirit of Christ indwells within the believer and becomes the experience needed when confronted with various situations. The process of wisdom working itself through the individual are not abandoned; it is simply the process is now not dependent upon external experiences to bring one to the habit of making wise and moral choices. The inception now is an internal one starting from within the individual and like an enteral spring perpetually flowing outside of them.
Working out the whys of each suggested action now becomes a matter of faith; unlike before where they were a matter of experience for the unbeliever. Ultimately this quality is available for all adherents to Christianity, which should lead to a higher level of organizational trust and more empowerment for the followers in each organization. (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001) argues a similar point when arguing for the Socratic leadership model stating this image of Socratic leadership may well serve as a guide to contemporary leaders. Leadership in this sense is not to be equated with a hindering or postponement of action. The leader–follower relationship is one which empowers the followers and where both members of the relationship are led to creative activity in which the horizons of meaning surrounding the issues at hand are perpetually stretched.
The Socratic leadership model which was designed to refute a dictatorial model even though admirable does not address the root of the character issue - the fallen state of the human heart, but the Biblical model of leadership does, and if the phenomena of a transformed heart is replicated throughout an organization, the leader–follower relationship can be one that empowers the followers and where both members of the relationship are led to creative activity in which the horizons of meaning surrounding the issues at hand are perpetually stretched. The exercise of prudence requires a deliberative inquiry into the moral realities present in a particular situation, an asking of questions about the sorts of goods and evils to be discovered in it, and with which one as an agent is involved. (Werpehowski, 2007)
Ethical and moral dimensions of global leadership:
“Writing in the 4th century bc, Plato’s philosopher-king rules the state with an authority derived from his knowledge of the one Truth. For Plato, the possession of the ‘wisdom’ of an ‘intellectual vision’ informing the principles of government, as it informs the principles of human conduct in general, distinguishes a leader from follower” (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001, p. 208) From an axiological perspective there is no leader unless the leader’s goal is minimally to treat his or her followers humanely. Without a leader who is genuinely concerned for the needs of the people he or she leads, it is nonsensical to even call him or her a leader.
A despot or tyrant would be the appropriate terminology for that context. (Kretzschmar, 2007, p.1) argues “where avarice, lust, lies, injustice and violence flourish, the lives of people will be destroyed and the communities in which we live will be places of tears and conflict.” Without a moral compass the global leader simply has a greater opportunity to do more harm than good. The responsibility of the global leader is superior to that of local leadership: larger numbers of people are affected as a result of the global leader’s decisions, and each decision whether positive or negative will have larger ramifications on the global community.
Therefore, morality is fundamental for the global leader. The ability to lead as a moral agent is the responsibility of the global leader. “Moral agency is the ability and desire to be a good person and to do what is right, both in one’s personal life and in one’s social interactions and responsibilities. Not only individuals, but also moral communities need to be nurtured, if people are to have a positive effect on their societies.” (Kretzschar, 2007, p. 10) For a leader the development of his or her followers is a must.
For a leader follower development is tantamount to leadership; however, the goal of the global leader is to develop his followers so their interests are advanced and that their well-being is secured regardless of the changing global landscape. Intrinsically, a moral agent positively influences society. The leader should either be a facilitator or the inception of positive influence where his or her scope of influence encompasses, yet by default the leader’s impact will be greater on a culture than other moral agents.
(Robinson & Harvey, 2008) comment the responsibility of leadership is essentially to keep the company moving ever-forward by adjusting pre-emptively in accordance with what is required to satisfy both expediency and sustainability problems of existence. The vision, mission, values, goals, and strategic planning for followers must all be intertwined with morality, which reflects the character of the leader. And, this idea should harmonize to some degree with a global responsibility of what leadership requires. Similar to the social responsibilities of American companies, global leaders must keep in mind the social responsibilities of the public globally.
The moral regeneration of society is dependent on the moral renewal of persons and groups and their ability to engage with the broader society in terms of its visions, values and social structures. (Kretzschar, 2007) Harmonizing the leader’s goals with the overarching goals of the global community will be one of the challenges for leadership going forward. Another challenge (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001) addresses is the fact that even in a global context the leader cannot neglect the psychological needs of followers on an individual level. He stated, leadership, in essence, is nurturing and development, both of which require deep psychological insights. By its nature, nurturing calls for leaders’ evaluations and selections, as they act upon ideas about what motivates people and how people plan to achieve ambitions, what is effective and what is not and how feelings should be expressed.
Therefore, regardless of the style of leadership one has he or she must maintain the dyadic process flowing in order to produce a vibrant relationship. Yet, trust between leadership and followership is perpetually eroding as leaders throughout the world consistently fall into immoral habits. Thus, repairing the image of the global leader is a must. Currently, the shortcomings of the global economy, the moral corruption of the both the IMF and IOC leaders, and the recent failures of several televangelist have left many in the global community mistrusting leadership in general.
This adds to the challenges of the global leader who is required to garner trust for a vision aimed at a group of people to follow. Is it even wise to get people to follow a vision within the global milieu? Yet scholarship demands that leaders have vision (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001) observes contemporary writings on leadership, especially on transformational leadership, hold that leaders must have a vision. It has been forcefully argued (Sowel, 1987) that visions play an important role both in developing initial insights on which theory develops and in influencing the ultimate choices that are made by individuals among the alternative theories and options that evolve.
Moreover, within the global context the information explosion has affected the knowledge based leader basically ending bureaucracy with in organizational hierarchy. “In the ‘information society’, where the new organizational forms of networks, ‘enterprise webs’, are becoming the norm (Reich, 1991), with 30 percent of the workforce employed in symbolic-analyst services, empowerment becomes problematic but imperative” (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001. 223)
Once again wisdom and morality are invaluable for the global leader to be successful in a global context. Robinson & Harvey (2008) summarize the ethical and moral dimensions of global leadership stating, “Accordingly, it is concluded that to lead effectively global leaders need to acquire the ability to adopt leadership practices corresponding to the appropriate value station that is most suited to the values of their followers and then ensure congruency across the chosen band. In a culturally diverse world, leaders need to be sensitive to the differing needs among followers and become skillful at assessing which of the values station bands would be most appropriate and then able to adapt their leadership practices accordingly.” Pg. 14
The formation of authentic Christian leadership:
(Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001) suggested that leadership is not authority, but the talent to influence people to work towards a mutual objective. And, now the leader must persuade people while interacting within a global context, which as a consequence will challenge many of his or her followers’ ideologies. The role oscillates amid centering on gaining wisdom that is founded in morality, the dyadic process between the leader-follower, and on navigating the organization through the perils of the global environment. These equivocal priorities do not exclude the customary responsibilities of a leader.
One of the many new pressures the leader faces is that he or she must gain wisdom while leading. (Korac-Kakabadse et al., 2001, pp. 209, 212) notes that “leadership belongs more to moral philosophy than to scientific theory. Practical wisdom is not the same as expertise in a technical specialization, but a kind of expertise that requires practice and experience…becoming a leader is an on-going journey of self and team development.” The emerging global leader must engage in internal formation consistently. It’s not that this formation is the change itself, however, it will lead the way to expand ones capacity for real change to eventually.
Formation is a process that takes place during the implementation of what is learned. The global leader is being challenged to develop a host of new skills that will enable him or her to effectually navigate the changing role of global leadership. The weight of responsibility is now higher and because of the ever expanding responsibilities the global leader now faces, every decision is more crucial do to the reality of the enormity of his or her scope of responsibilities; additionally, because of the information technology boom the people he leads are now more reactive to his or her leadership decisions. How this is at all possible in light of the fact that the leader is predisposed to error and moral failure him or herself is as subject for further research.
Nevertheless, the leader must develop a culture of transparency and authenticity, which leads to trust. (Werpehowski, 2007, p. 68) argues growth and wholeness may be accomplished in a repetition and renewal of asking and seeking that do not erase but rather test our previous answers to the ethical question in terms of what is now present and incumbent.
Conclusion
This paper argued that wisdom is not the only virtue but is an essential one needed for a global leader in order to have the ability to utilize a personal filter based upon morality which is developed by either a consistent skillful examination of life’s experiences or the redemptive work of Christ that can give one the ability through formation to decide right and wrong courses of actions and adjust preferred core values for followers within a complex global context.
This paper has explored contemporary definitions, philosophies, theories and approaches in Global Leadership whilst comparing and contrasting all of this with the Biblical call to authentic and moral Christian Leadership with the purpose to impact and change the world. It addressed wisdom as a philosophical foundation for leadership effectiveness and formation and how wisdom is an existential conduit for understanding—starting outside of the individual by means of life and then ‘working itself through’ them by mode of deliberation eventually working its way back outside of the individual into action.
Moreover, it identified some of the challenges of globally competent leadership such as the leader’s need to hold in tension adopting certain global values while at the same time holding on to some of core values that groups have identified with in the past. This paper also argued for a biblical philosophy and ethic of wisdom that proposes how the unique gift of wisdom the believer in Christ has received can revolutionize an entity and establish it as the model for organizational structure within the global context.
It also discussed the ethical and moral dimensions of global leadership and how the goal of the global leader is to develop his followers so their interests are advanced and that their well-being is secured regardless of the changing global landscape. And finally it concluded by addressing the formation of authentic Christian leadership and how formation is possible in light of the fact that the leader is predisposed to error and moral failure him or herself.
Bibliography
• David A. Robinson, D. A. & Harvey, M. (2008). Global leadership in a culturally diverse world. Management Decision, 46(3), 466-480.
• Korac-Kakabadse, N., Korac-Kakabadse, A., & Kouzmin, A. (2001). Leadership renewal: Towards the philosophy of wisdom. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67:207-227.
• Kretzschmar, L. (2007). The formation of moral leaders in South Africa: A Christian-ethical analysis of some essential elements. Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, 128, 18-36.
• Werpehowski, W. (2007). Practical wisdom and the integrity of Christian life. Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics, 27(2), 55-72.
• Stuart, C. (2011). Read my tips. Business Strategy Review, 22 (2), 55 -72) Retrieved June 19, 2011, from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8616.2011.00756.x/
• Biblios, NAS Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries, The Lockman Foundation Retrieved June 19, from http://strongsnumbers.com/hebrew/2450.htm
The six dimensions of Cultural Diversity Figure 1.1
1. Universalism
Rules, codes, laws, and generalizations.
General principles, rules, and codes that apply to persons in all circumstances.
Particularism
Exceptions, special circumstances, unique relations. Particular circumstances are taken into account when making decisions, thus exceptions can more easily be made.
2. Individualism
Personal freedom, human rights, competitiveness. The focus is placed on the individual person. The interests, thoughts and decisions of the individual are of primary importance. Individuals are expected to take responsibility for themselves and be self-reliant. Competition is regarded as healthy, persons need to take actions that will lead to their own development and fulfillment. Communitarianism
Social responsibility, harmonious relations, co-operation. The interests, thoughts and decisions of the group prevail over those of the individual. Individuals are expected to co-operate and defer to more senior members of the group, and promote the values and well-being of the group. The legacy or tradition of the society is important.
3. Specificity
Atomistic, reductive analytical, objective. Public spaces are considered to be large other people can be directly engaged. Individuals communicate specific information; their reactions are shown openly and precisely, even bluntly. Transparency is important. Diffusion
Holistic, elaborative, synthetic, relational. Specific information is less easily shared. People tend to be indirect, tactful, and even ambiguous. Yet, multiple areas of life and personal context need to be related to in a diffuse manner. Information is not shared until trust is developed.
4. Achieved status
What you‟ve done, your track record. A person is appointed to a certain position on the basis of their accomplishments. Skills and achievement are important. Ascribed status
Who you are, your potential and connections. A person is given a certain position based on age, or social position. Reputation and status are important.
5. Inner direction
Conscience and convictions are located inside. Societies tend to control their environment and nature itself can be controlled. The convictions will and deliberate actions of people can change their circumstances. Outer direction
Examples and influences are located outside. These societies adjust to their circumstances. The rhythms and force of nature cannot be changed and human relationships must be valued and conflict avoided.
6. Sequential time
Time is a race along a set course. Time is perceived as succession or a line and should not be wasted. These societies are future and goal orientated, change is more easily accepted. Synchronous time
Time is a dance of fine co-ordinations. These societies are event orientated. The past is an important part of the present. Change is accepted only if this legacy is not destroyed. Time is circular, because situations and opportunities can be repeated, actions are less urgent.
