Managing a Multinational Team: Lessons from Project GLOBE

1. Managing a Multinational Team: Lessons from Project GLOBE Paul J. Hanges University of Maryland

2. GLOBE Project • Robert J. House • 1991 • Objectives of project • Are there any universal aspects of leadership? • Explore relationships between societal culture, organizational culture and organizational leadership. • Develop quantitative and qualitative description of the cultures studied

3. SOCIETAL CULTURE CULTURALLY ENDORSED IMPLICIT LEADERSHIP THEORY (CLT) LEADER ACCEPTANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS LEADER ATTRIBUTES AND BEHAVIOR ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND PRACTICES

4. 1992 • House worked with Paul Koopman, HenkThiery, Celeste Wilderome, & Phillip Podsakoff • 1993 • Mike Agar, Paul Hanges, Tony Ruiz-Quintanilla • Initial Funding from Dwight D. Eisenhower Leadership Education Program of the Department of Education.

5. October of 1993 • Researchers from 28 countries were participating in the project. • Collected Quantitative Data • Collected Qualitative Data • Wrote country specific interpretations of cultures • Interpreted results of quantitative data relevant to their culture • Ensured the accuracy of the questionnaire translations • Contributed their insights to project

6. PHASE 1: SCALE DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION Item Evaluation Reports Item Generation Q-Sort Calgary Meeting & New items PILOT STUDY 1 (20) Translation Back-translation PILOT STUDY 2 (23) Translation Back-translation PHASE 2

7. GLOBE Research Project • Bob House (Principal Investigator) • GLOBE Coordinating Team • Paul J. Hanges, Marcus W. Dickson, S. Antonio Ruiz-Quintanilla, Michael Agar • Over 170 CCIs • Ikhlas A. Abdalla, Sami Al Ali Adday, Adebowale Akande, Bolanle, Elizabeth Akande, Staffan Akerblom, Moudi Al-Houmoud, Eden Alvarez-Backus, Victor Alvarez-Ramos, Carlos Altschul, Carlos Andujar-Rojas, Maria Eugenia Arias, Ahmed Sakr Ashour, Giuseppe Audia, Gyula Bakacsi, Helena Bendova, Domenico Bodega, Muzaffer Bodur, Lize Booysen, Hamid Bouchikhi, Dimitris Bourantas, Nakiye Boyacigiller, Klas Brenk, Felix C. Brodbeck, Sandy Chau, Chieh-Chen Chang, Young-Chul Chang, Frenda Cheung, Jagdeep S. Chhokar, Peter Cosgriff, Ali Dastmalchian, Columbia de Bustamente, David L. Dean, Jose Augusto Dela Coleta, Marilia Ferreira Dela Coleta, Deanne N. Den Hartog, Peter Dorfman, Christopher Earley, Mahmoud Abed Elaziz El-Gamal, Miriam Erez, Mark Fearing, Richard H. G. Field, Michael Frese, Reginald Garters, Mikhail V. Gratchev, Frans Mardi Hartanto, Peggy Sue Heath, Ingalill Holmberg, Marina Holzer, Jon P. Howell, John C. Ickis, Zakaria Ismail, Maddy Janssens, Slawomir Jarmuz, Mansour Javidan, Bao Je-Ming, Gregory Jeregian, Jorge Correia Jesuino, Ji Li, Bao Jiming, Hayat E. Kabasakal, Jeffrey C. Kennedy, Paul L. Koopman, Edvard Konrad, Leena Lahti-Kotilainen, Huseyin Leblebici, Francisco Leguizamon, Martin Lindell, Jean Lobell, Jerzy Maczynski, Norma Mansour, Miguel E. Martinez-Lugo, Cecilia McMillen, Nabil M. Morsi, Jeremiah O'Connell, Enrique Ogliastri, Athan Papalexandris, Nancy Papalexandris, Maria Marta Preziosa, Boris Rakitski, Gerhard Reber, Nicoli Rogouski, Amir Rozen, Argio Sabadin, Carmen Santana Melgoza, Daniel Alan Sauers, Camilla Sigfrids, Mirrian Sjofjan, Erna Szabo, Gregory Teal, Henk Thierry, Jeff Thomas, Anne Tsui, Marius van Wyk, Marie Vondrysova, Jürgen Weibler, Celeste P. M. Wilderom, Hong Wu, Rolf Wunderer, Jean-Marc Xuereb, Nik Rahimah Nik Yacob, Rachid Zeffane.

8. Phase 2 Countries • Greece • GuatemalaHong Kong • Hungary • India • Indonesia • Iran • Ireland • Israel • Italy • Japan • Kazakhstan • Kuwait • Malaysia • Mexico • Morocco • Netherlands • New Zealand • NamibiaNigeria • Philippines • Poland • Portugal • Qatar • Russia • Singapore • Slovenia • Spain • South Africa • South Korea • Sweden • Switzerland • Taiwan • Thailand • Turkey • Venezuela • USA • Zambia • Zimbabwe • AlbaniaArgentina AustriaAustralia • Bolivia • Brazil • CanadaChina • Colombia • Costa Rica • Denmark • Ecuador • El Salvador • England • Egypt • Finland • France • Germany (East & West) • Georgia

9. Universal Leadership Attributes Description: Value Based - Charismatic Dynamic Motive Arouser Excellence Oriented Confidence Builder Team Builder Motivational Decisive Encouraging Positive Foresight

10. Description: Reliable/Trustworthy Coordinator Dependable Trustworthy Intelligent Just Honest Description: Management Competence Win-win Problem Solver Administratively Skilled Plans Ahead Informed Effective Bargainer Communicative

11. LOWEST RATED LEADER ATTRIBUTES Description Loner Irritable Asocial Non-explicit Egocentric Ruthless Dictatorial Non-cooperative

12. Findings

14. Products • House, Hanges, Dorfman, Javidan & Gupta (2004) • Chokkar, Brodbeck & House (2006) • Over 200 papers, books chapters and academic presentations • SIOP’s 2004 M. Scott Myers Award • Phase 3 consisting of CEO & TMT in 26 different countries

15. Challenges • Long-term nature of the project • Dynamic size of the team • Large membership size of the team • Virtual nature of communications • Cultural differences of participants • Intermittent funding

16. Challenges Long-Term Nature of the GLOBE Project • Long-term commitment & patience from CCIs • For many, GLOBE became the major academic research project for a decade • How to sustain motivation for the long haul? • Keeping everyone motivated & on track was a daunting task • Misunderstandings • of authorship (frequently) & rewards for prior work • Which team members would participate in future phases

17. Recommendations Long-Term Nature of the GLOBE Project • Choose team members wisely • Similar to the humorous saying, “one should choose their parents wisely” • Quiz, if you choose academics, what level academic is optimum? • Develop a social contract at the beginning of the project • Make it as specific as possible while maintaining some workable flexibility • Unfortunately, although the social contract was explicitly discussed, written down & agreed upon, throughout GLOBE’s life cycle, the social contract’s concepts had different meanings to GLOBE participants

18. Recommendations Long-Term Nature of the GLOBE Project • Document tangible evidence of progress & share it with the entire membership of the organization • Schedule a major intervention, e.g., the release of some data results (correlation tables of major variables) to the CCIs or hold an event ( intra-GLOBE conference in Philadelphia in 1997) • Build in success milestones such as conference presentations and fun group activities • e.g., pub gatherings and elaborate dinners • Find a volunteer (with proven organization skills) who will assiduously handle numerous time consuming, inherently dull tasks related to potential publication efforts

19. Challenges Dynamic Size of GLOBE Team • 1993: CCIs from 28 countries • Pilot Study 1: 20 countries • August 1994: CCIs from 43 countries • 1997: Over 170 CCIs from 62 countries • Organizational structure of the project changed to handle the growing number of CCIs • Problems • Timelines for new countries & collaborators were out of sync with more tenured members • When to stop admitting new countries & collaborators with new data vs. staying on publication schedule

20. Recommendations Dynamic Size of GLOBE Team • Determine what additional skills or capabilities are needed on the team prior to inviting new members to join • e.g., statistical experts • Determine in advance the windows of time when new members can join the team • New team members should join during transition phases of the project • Develop a discussion strategy and organizational structure for decisions regarding team membership • e.g., a single decision maker versus a committee • Develop some simple documentation of the project’s history, major decisions, and future deadlines • Though we did not do this for the GLOBE project, it would have helped

21. Challenges Large Size of the GLOBE Team • Good News • Once recruitment began, GLOBE had dozens of CCIs • Colleagues were invited to join • Number of researchers in each nation often grew as CCIs were added depending on the needs of each country’s research project

22. Challenges Large Size of the GLOBE Team • Bad News • Enormous difficulty keeping track of who was • On the team • Actively participating • Recently put on the team • By nature of politics in a country or favors granted • Prevented team members from having face-to-face meetings or conference calls • Eventually had 2 conferences; allowed more direct communication & interaction among CCIs

23. Challenges Virtual Nature of Team Communications • Communication problems were some of the most common complaints from virtual teams • Language • Official language: English • Most GLOBE CCIs were not native English speakers • Detailed discussions about proper translation of even the most central concepts in the project • Partially due to different languages having no direct, one-to-one English translation of critical words such as “leader” or “leadership”

24. Recommendations Virtual Nature of Team Communications • Before the project begins, train team members about virtual communication • Train new team members as they join • Encourage effective communication • Develop a common understanding by using a common language • Commonly used terms should be defined, discussed, clarified & completely understood by all participants

25. Recommendations Virtual Nature of Team Communications • Institute a mechanism by which any team member can receive immediate attention • Similar to the “stop the train” emergency lever • Ensure that all team members have access to a common • Word processing program • Email

26. Cultural Differences of GLOBE Participants Challenges • GLOBE was a microcosm of the phenomena we were studying • Issues surrounding • Time • Deadlines • Missed deadlines. Cultural differences created confusion; e.g., how much time had to pass before a deadline was missed?

27. Challenges Cultural Differences of GLOBE Participants • Scientific Methods • Quantitative versus Qualitative Methodology • How should we analyze data across cultures? • Factor analysis? Confirmatory Factor Analysis? • To what extent is data exploration an acceptable thing to do?

28. Challenges Cultural Differences of GLOBE Participants • Philosophy of Science • Should we share data with others? When? For free? How? • Authorship and Co-authorship • Relativism versus Logical Positivism

29. Cultural Differences of GLOBE Participants Recommendations • Be aware of practical implications related to cultural differences. • Power Distance & Uncertainty Avoidance can be cultural traps. • High PD cultures will expect deference due to status differences. • Cultures varying in UA will find team differences on deadlines, organizational structure, & stress levels

30. Recommendations Cultural Differences of GLOBE Participants • Continually remind team members (at least once a year) about their particular or peculiar cultural differences • Give other team members a word in one culture that is difficult to translate in your culture (e.g., “leadership”) • Keep a good sense of humor

31. Limited Funds for GLOBE Challenges • $500,000 in national grants • Numerous problems with on-again, off-again funding • Equity & fairness issues • Decisions made regarding financial help for less socio-economic developed countries in contrast to first-world countries • Financial constraints limited face-to-face meetings with CCIs • Main burden of writing grant proposal was left to the Principal Investigator (Bob House) • Shouldered the main burden of obtaining funds to keep the project progressing

32. Limited Funds for GLOBE Recommendations • Decide up front who will be responsible for obtaining funds initially & who will carry on the obligation • Relentlessly seek additional funding • Universities, government, private foundations • Select a committee within the project whose function is to obtain funds

33. Recommendations from GLOBE Teams’ Journey • Four general issues for research before typical recommendations are accepted as gospel

34. Continued Recommendations from GLOBE Teams’ Journey • Is it necessary for the multinational team to initially meet face-to-face? • Relationship building is thought to be a key • Or is it more important to meet deadlines? • Does each team member need the same depth of information? • Sending all information to all participants with expectations that they approve all decision would be confusing & time-wasting

35. Continued Recommendations from GLOBE Teams’ Journey • Do the goals & incentives of the team members need perfect alignment? • At the completion of a long-term project, is it reasonable to expect that a “hybrid culture” emerges from the multiple individual cultures brought into the project? • By the end of GLOBE’s Phase 2, the Western-oriented culture still dominated the project. No evidence that a hybrid GLOBE culture emerged

36. Conclusions • Despite all the challenges, GLOBE was successful • Participants were please or satisfied with • their involvement (73%) • the excellence of the project (87%) • the scope of the project (98%) • But not with • Meeting research deadlines • Timeliness of publications • And there was some dissension with the decision-making process

37. Phase 3 data collection has been completed • We are currently analyzing the data