At the same time, the personality of the leader should personify the corporate
culture and live it out every day. All of their actions should follow the basic rules
of the organization and provide benchmarks for everyone else – but without
becoming rigid laws.
A good culture of leadership can be established through good networks of
relationship, the development of existing potentials of leadership, by offering values,
goals and challenges, but also through decentralization. Successful corporations
such as 3M, Hewlett Packard and General Electric have succeeded in establishing
unmistakable, respected, productive and innovative cultures of leadership as part of
their organizational cultures. “The solid foundation of corporate culture in align-
ment with true leadership is the highest the art of leadership can achieve” (Kotter
1999b, p. 66). If the power is in one set of hands, there is a strong connection
between the leader’s personality, the style of leadership and the corporate culture –
all three of them shaped by the social environment.
Let us now move from the micro-level to the macro-level. Not only the corporate
culture plays a part, but also the culture of the society and the nation. It shapes the
personalities of (future) leaders and the expectations of the subordinates. For
example, a leader in the US is a successful man or woman of action who is admired
by others. Yet such a cult of personality is frowned upon in the Netherlands. There
the manager is seen as more of a martyr sacrificing himself or herself for the
company. French leaders lead differently than for example German leaders;
the former are more network-oriented and person-oriented. “Factors such as
power, status and hierarchy play different roles, also control and authority are
considered differently by leaders of different cultures” (de Vries 2004, p. 65).
Especially upon the backdrop of globalization, the organizational culture
receives a connecting, border-crossing function. Or, as Rosabeth Moss Kanter has
put it: “Common procedures and a common language help people of a different
background or from different countries to work together efficiently” (Kanter 1998,
p. 25). At the same time the management has to integrate its concepts and methods
into the context of the given national culture (see Drucker 2000).
I would like to only briefly mention the theories of substitution. They shift the
focus away from the direct, interactive influence of the leader towards the indirect
and structural effects of guidelines, structures, systems and strategies on the lead-
ership process. The practical benefit of these theories is rather limited (Heinen
1998, p. 171 ff.).
A good overview of the most important organizational influences (including
corporate culture) can be obtained by using the 7-S model developed in the early
1980s. (see Peters/Waterman 1982). This model identifies seven factors of success
for an enterprise: firstly the strategy, secondly the structure of the organization,
thirdly the systems of management, fourthly the style of leadership, fifthly the staff,
sixthly the technical and social skills and finally the shared values.
This model makes it clear that all factors of success need to be considered
simultaneously. No single factor must be stressed, because they all interact. The
7-S model can be an effective tool for understanding a given organization. It is
important to consider that each organization has to find its own way, both with
2.4 The Leadership Situation 113