Leadership in Germany

To sustain a strong culture and management system, global HRM leaders need to identify the best leadership style for their operating countries. Ideally, a global leader would have at least one of the following leadership styles according to Brodbeck et al (2008), charismatic/value-based leadership, team-orientated leadership, participative leadership, humane-orientated leadership, autonomous leadership, and self-protective leadership. Global HRM leaders need to have a vision, be proactive, motivate and inspire others, initiate change, and build people (Maleka, 2022).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmyZMtPVodo

Issues with German leadership

German leadership varies; however, it is moving towards a participative leadership style in West Germany as opposed to their previous authoritative style, however there is still some reluctance (Grunwald and Lilge, 2019). Participative leadership is where leaders involve others when making and implementing decisions (Brodbeck et al, 2008). This presents the idea that Germany is becoming an inclusive culture and values the input of their employees. On a global scale, this leadership style would work well with other countries such as the US, where they believe in working together. Studies show that in Western Germany, participative leadership was the preferred leadership style by employees, followed by charismatic leadership according to the GLOBE study (Berger, 2019). As of recent, organisations in Germany tend to have a flatter structure to encourage better communication between management and their employees (Schneider et al, 2014; Berger, 2019). This flatter structure is also evident in Hoftstede’s insights, where Germany have a low power distance score of 35. Furthermore, the GLOBE study raised the question of humane orientation which is ‘the degree to which a collective encourages and rewards individuals for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring and kind to others’ (Browaeys & Price, 2019, pp. 41). In the study, Germany was rated as the lowest for humane orientation with a score of 3.18 in comparison to Zambia who has a score of 5.23 (Browaeys & Price, 2019).

With a low power distance, comes high uncertainty avoidance (Schneider et al, 2014). According to Hoftstede’s insights, Germany has a uncertainty avoidance score of 65, which implies that they feel threatened by unknown situations and try to avoid these. This means that German leaders tend to have a narrow span of control, organised by function, have structural solutions, decentralised decision making, and top management team focused (Schneider et al, 2014). This would be an issue for global HRM as a key competency is to be able to respond and adapt to change (Browaeys & Price, 2019). Unable to do so may restrict global interactions and operations, specifically when working with countries such as the UK, who have a low uncertainty avoidance score of 35, meaning that they express change and adopt a laissez-faire approach when it comes to rules and regulations. To improve this, German HR leaders can employ leaders from cultures that have a low uncertainty avoidance to work with other German leaders and employees so they can gain insight on how they can adapt their ways of working.

However, whilst German leadership styles are progressing, improvement is still required to improve people management and obtain sustainable performance in the context of HRM activities. Particularly in Eastern Germany, leadership is seen as more assertive and does not have an open-door policy (Berger, 2019). According to the GLOBE study, charismatic leadership was seen as the most valued leadership style which is when leaders inspire and motivate their employees (Brodbeck et al, 2008; Berger, 2019). This creates the assumption, that the culture in East Germany is not a supportive one, and employees seek a softer approach from their leaders. Typically, German companies tend to have a steep hierarchy and a top-down organisation where decisions are made only by those in senior positions (Berger, 2019). This feeds into the idea that they value honesty and a direct approach to ensure clear objectives and schedules (Berger 2019; Schneider et al, 2014). This may pose as in issue for German leaders operating on a global scale. This is evident if Germany was to have operating leaders in China. In the Chinese culture they prefer to build a relationship, before discussing business (Browaeys & Price, 2019). Therefore, the German leadership culture may be offensive towards those in China and may impact potential business deals.

References

Berger, M (2019). Cross-Cultural Leadership: A comparison between the Finnish and German working culture and its leadership practices. Available at: https://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/171626/Berger_Mike.pdf?sequence=2 (Accessed: 1st April 2023).

Brodbeck, F.C, Frese, M and Javidan, M (2002). Leadership made in Germany: Low on compassion, high on performance. Available at: https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/ame.2002.6640111 (Accessed: 1st April 2023).

Browayes, M and Price, R (2019). Understanding cross cultural management. 4th edition. Harlow: Pearson.

Grunwald, W and Georg-Lilge, H (2019). Change of Leadership Style in German Enterprises: From Authoritative to Participative Leadership? Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863659-033 (Accessed: 1st April 2023).

Hoftstede Insights (2023). Country Comparison Tool. Available at: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/germany/ (Accessed: 30th March 2023).

Maleka, R (2022) Five Reasons Why Leadership And Management Skills Are Different—And Why It Matters. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesbusinessdevelopmentcouncil/2022/06/17/five-reasons-why-leadership-and-management-skills-are-different-and-why-it-matters/?sh=11f3cc41598f (Accessed: 5th April 2023).

Schneider, S.C., Barsoux, J.L and Stahl, G.K (2014). Managing across cultures. Harlow: Person.