This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
According to the scholars namely, Wendt, Euwema and Zhytnyk (2004) in their article titled 'Leadership Styles and Team Cohesiveness across Cultures" there is a clear outlining as to what defines team cohesiveness in organizational context and its behavioral study. The research of the paper thus is central to the arguments team cohesiveness and leadership factor that influence individual and group members.
When analyzing the given article, there is a clear indication that team cohesiveness depends on a large number of factors to be on track. Let say, for example that there are many ingredients which often shapes the very essence and subject of team cohesiveness, and individual or group members behavior for that matter in organizational context. One example is leadership. It is argued by the scholar in the article that leadership across culture also plays a significant part for team cohesiveness, or for that matter shapes the mindset of individual in team and groups settings in an organization. The author is of the opinion that team cohesiveness and cultural effects are linked one to one. There is no doubt in that regard, and the assumption appears to be true as far as the research results goes. But fact of the matter is that the research result itself came as surprising for the author. Many researches into the behavioral element of an organization have shown that conflicts of ideas are prominent, especially in a team setup within an organizational context. It is complex indeed to understand the many variable of organizational behavior. However, the scholars in the given article are of the opinion that solution to team cohesiveness are there, but most of the time cultural factor plays a significant role in shaping individual or group reaction or for that behavior in a team setup. One such cultural dimension is the object of how leadership, as well as team cohesiveness is linked head-to-head with culture, and its influence to be precise.
In the first hypothesis of the article, the author stated that 'collectivism is positively related to team cohesiveness.' How true this statement is calls for a research, which the research of the paper attempts to trace in the cross cultural context when it matter to the relationship between team cohesiveness and how leadership influence any for that matter. When it matter to this assumption, there is a precise indication when emphasize from a cross cultural outlook to the subject matter arguments. Besides, collectivism often breeds team work as well, which are influenced from leadership and how effectively leadership roadmap are channelized for team to be inspired to be subjectively and objectively integrated. Team setup does not happen without a reason. There is a reason for everything, and effective leadership is seen to be one instance of team cohesiveness in the organizational context.
Further analysis in the case study article shows that every object as to what defines team cohesiveness across cultures are defined and explored upon by the author in their article. According to our understanding of the research, it appears that there are various components as to what defines a cohesive team in organizational domains and group setup. One example of it can be derived when assimilating the component as to what defines collectivism, leadership, cultural boundaries and most importantly the relationship between these factor and team cohesiveness. The author asserts that collectivism as a matter of fact is that object which binds people together in context of their nationalism or cultural dimensional outlook and beliefs. Add to it, the author in the article also assumed that leadership components and cohesiveness might have been influenced by national cultural and sentimentalism. This appears to be rightly argued, since people sentimentalism are the ingredients of what shapes that sense of belonging, especially when it comes to groups in organizational context. Yet it should not be sidelined that leadership in whatever forms and substance also shapes the negative and positive vibes of team cohesiveness. To top it all, individualistic components and collectivism too are parts of that cultural discourse which forms the central feature of team cohesiveness.
As we go further into the analysis of the paper, it shows that the research question that the author above wanted to convey to readers is to reach a conclusion whether there is any link between team cohesiveness and culture. Moreover, from assimilating the paper it is understood that there are great many elements that separate also directive leadership and supportive leadership, which are central factor that shapes the cultural belief and behavioral components of individual or group members of a team in organizational setup. It is also acknowledged that team cohesiveness is the most important ingredients of organizational life. However, development of team cohesiveness is not that easy as it appears, argued scholars. Organizational behavioral and its subject study is complex. Above all, when working on a team, teamwork often is found to be the missing link that is happening everywhere within the organizational realms.
Critical Analysis: Points and Counter Points
"National Culture does not have impact on the level cohesiveness"
The result as to be correct is surprising The result according to the research shows that national culture does not have any cohesiveness when it matters to how individual or groups members behaves. This posed many question and counter question as to how such a result is reached upon. Since in all circumstances it is to the observation that in almost all features of organizational behavior and its study the very essence that culture plays a significant part is always there. The research result itself is debatable to be correct. How true the statement that national culture doesn't have any impact on cohesiveness is still a matter of intensified research that calls for it.
"Leaders worldwide apparently use the supportive styles considerably than the directive style"
According to this statement, there also seems to be a subject of further debate. It isn't clear as to what research material gathered by the research was justified for such a conclusion. Leadership and leadership tactics are many in practical use within the realms of organizational context. To say that leaders apparently use supportive leadership posed many question and counter question. That is to say, why it is not an observable fact for that matter, rather than just an assumption, when it is viewed that supportive style is considerable used, other than directive style. Point is that if there is no clarity to the subject, there should be no mentioned of it. But the researcher here seems to be on two contexts. Above all, if leadership does not have any direction as well, then the balance of leadership influence is lost in between we feel. This does not mean that leadership should be authoritative to be correct. But it should be organized enough that followers in cross cultural context understand the value of leadership directions and where it is going. No followers follow blindly, hence, leadership with a directive purpose and a combination of supportive is always a mixed ingredients.
Paper Concepts in Context of UAE
In the UAE today, there are many development changes taking place. UAE in context of organizational makeup is a centre of cross-cultural demography. There are many instances which showed that work groups in UAE composed of individual members from different cultural background. To be precise in UAE today the presence of large number of foreign worker are a sight everywhere. Moreover, UAE also is hugely dependent on foreign worker, whether be it in the white collar job, or construction workers, who use to come to UAE as far as from the Asian nations. Hence, team cohesiveness in such situation is important for any form of organizational productivity.
In that reasoning of the term, when we relate the article concept to the real case is UAE we see reason enough to believe that there is link in one form or the other. As reported in the media news highlights available with AmeInfo.com, it shows that "Leading Multicultural workplace Key to economic success." (AmeInfo.com, 2011) What is specific to this new report is that even the leadership that breeds across multicultural forms are the ingredients of today globalised world. Moreover, maintaining a close knit group and learning leadership features across cultures is one feature of today globalized world. As the case is, for futuristic leadership, culture form a main substantial element. This not only helps organizational makeup between team works, but also helps organization to understand the values of what defines cultures in cross-cultural settings for its successive bonding and success for that matter. (AmeInfo.com, 2011) As we are conversant with organizational behavioral study, it is believed that human resource is looked upon by organization to be the most important assets. Moreover, effective team cohesiveness thus is a factor to drive the organization group in the positive way, either when it comes to motivation, sharing of ideas, or individual bonding.
Thus, leaders should understand that culture makes an important part of team cohesiveness. For that matter, the event as highlighted in the news report also states that students exchange programs helps leaders in the making to understand the value of culture and how it influence team bonding and cohesiveness. (AmeInfo.com, 2011) Fact of the matter is that UAE corporate sector is mostly absorbed by 70% of foreign worker. Culturally as we can understand, UAE culture is a mixture of traditionalism and modernity. In the work group too, culture considerable influence group behavior. According to the article analyzed herein, the subject of it is universal to be precise. Thus, when relating the article subject matter concepts in context of UAE as well, we see every reason to juxtapose the same head-to-head. That is to say, making a comparison as to how the article concept is applicable in UAE as justified above.
Conclusion: Subject Matter Comparison and Contrast
The first article titled "Leadership Styles and Team Cohesivess across Cultures" and its research undertake a close knit view as to how leadership factor helps bonds team cohesiveness. In organization context and its behavioral study, it is believed that culture play a significant part in shaping individual behavior towards a member of a group. A leader of substance thus should understand these components, and should try to invigorate a sense of belonging among team members.
On the other hand, the second paper titled "Matching Leadership Styles and Employment Modes: Strategic Human Resource Management Perspective" also echo similar views, since part of the study is based on individual, leadership and their behavior in the organizational context. Both the study is an in-depth study that focuses their research in the arena of human behavior for that matter, and to understand how individual behaviors are a component of culture that shapes it. According to Wei Lu, et al, (2003) they argued that many research have focuses on how to make the best use of human factor for productivity. Understanding individual behavior is complex. And when it comes to team cohesiveness, the feature of it also posed many unanswered question when it matter to individual behavior in groups, and how leadership and leadership styles influence the same. This is the main similarity in between the two articles.
In the article titled "Leadership Styles and Team Cohesivess Across Cultures" its research take an in-depth study to understand individual behavior and how culture and leadership within the organizational makeup shapes the foundation of team bonding. The same case also can be seen in the second article. Effective bonding of team is a factor of (Hein Wendt, 2004) (Wei Liu, 2003) great importance for organizational success, and also contributes towards productivity, since effective team bonding and their understanding of the particular purpose generally drive the results in an effective ways. But it should also be noted that leadership in cross cultural environment is also crucial which defines organizational involvement.