Analysis of Inclusive Leadership

Leadership distinctly depends on responsive adherents in a process incorporating the guidance and sustentation of collective activity. Characteristics of leadership are regularly pondered in terms of traits. Central to this process are one or more leaders who are the primary actors serving vital functions, especially determining the situation and communicating it to adherents. Leadership is a system of relationships with constraints as well as opportunities. The current paper will discuss the role of inclusive leadership in strengthening the organizational culture among diverse global groups of employees.

An Overview of the Traits of Inclusive Leadership

There are a number of traits, which are systematically linked with successful leadership. These traits distinctly connect the traits of leaders with leader conduct by debating that leaders with these preconditioned traits must also take particular operations so as to be prosperous and effective. The major traits or individual attributes are “drive, leadership motivation, honesty and integrity, self-confidence, cognitive ability and knowledge of the business” (Hartog, Caley & Dewe, 2007, p. 61). Drive, as the first trait incorporates accomplishment, aspiration, activity, persistence and ingenuity. Leadership motivation as a trait belongs to the solid and substantial aspiration to guide and affect others with individuals who are prosperous in leadership appointments having a tendency to “expose this motivation” (Sugerman, Scullard, & Wilhelm, 2011, p. 55). Despite the fact that such traits as honesty and integrity are the traits of all individuals, they have exceptional importance for inclusive leaders, as without them, leadership is subverted. Such trait as integrity stands for the correlation between word and deed, while honesty is about being faithful and non-deceptive (Hartog, Caley & Dewe, 2007). If the two traits are combined, they create the basis for a credulous relationship between the leader and adherents. Self-confidence as a trait is also incorporated in the trait frame as it performs a crucial function in decision-making and in obtaining others’ credit in resolutions. Cognitive ability is an important trait, as the leader has to be smart enough to elucidate and operate upon a multitude of intricate and indistinct data. Finally, comprehensive ‘knowledge of the business’ is more significant as a trait than a formal education (Hartog, Caley & Dewe, 2007). Thus, inclusive leader has to intercept and abide valuable contributors, which put human relationships at a central stage. An inclusive leader determines the objective of the organization to incorporate not only the organizational fiscal, or nundinal purposes, but also the human relationships quality. The standards of an inclusive leader will implicate respectfulness for multifarious cultural predilections and considerations, promotion of attendance above the cupidity, reticence in the usage of consumptive authority, and a concern for stable organization and relationships (Sugerman, Scullard, & Wilhelm, 2011).

An Analysis of the Key Leadership Skills Required to Create an Inclusive Organizational Culture

Focusing on inclusion and the creation of the inclusive organizational culture begin with the process of evolving cultural agility, which stands for the capacity to efficiently negotiate, interact, interconnect and operate well in diverse cultural surroundings. Culturally agile leaders are adaptable, versatile, and compliant (Ryan, 2006). These are the skills essential to lower the risk and maximize possibilities to gain efficiency and outcomes. A public treatment and behavior are the preconditions for dealing in the uninterrupted tuition act of evolving cross-cultural efficiency. Successively, cultural cognizance must be interpreted into cross-cultural skills in order to achieve cross-cultural efficiency. Individual self-awareness of the inclusive leader alleviates other-awareness, which promotes the creation of an inclusive organizational culture (Ryan, 2006). Four key skills are fundamental for the attainment of inclusive organizational culture. Firstly, it is cultural diligence, as it allows assessing the potential influences of culture in relationships adequately. Secondly, it is style-switching, which stands for the capacity to utilize a wide and amenable conduct repertoire. Thirdly, it is persistence, which stands for the ability to accomplish one’s objectives (Hartog, Caley & Dewe, 2007). Finally, it is sociability, which especially concerns cultural dialogues, meaning the capability to clarify cultural foundations of conduct and fulfillments, obturate cultural lacunas and generate cultural synergy via conversations (Ryan, 2006). It also stands for the ability to consult, tutor and educate individuals in their sphere of influence.

A Review of the Leadership Characteristics that Will Be Most Influential in Creating the Organizational Culture of the Given Group

According to the fact that the given organization is planting business operations in Singapore, Greece, Iran, and Germany, and will be recruiting individuals from these diverse nations to work together with the staff from the U.S., it is important to address inclusive leadership in order to strengthen the organizational culture among the diverse group of employees.According to theinformation provided in “LDR 804 Globe Assignment Data”, three major characteristics will be the most influential for the organizational culture creation. The first and the most important characteristic stands for the ‘power distance’. It received the highest rating from the representatives of all countries, including Germany, Greece Singapore, and Iran. Power distance is the measure to which the less authoritative members of organization group acknowledge and anticipate that power is divided unevenly (Hollander, 2009). On the one hand, the U.S. has an inferior power distance, where all people believe that they are permitted to have a particular amount of power. On the other hand, Singapore and Iran are believed to have an elevated power distance, where people admit that some are given minor or no power, while others can be in eminently high powered positions (Sugerman, Scullard, & Wilhelm, 2011). The second characteristic stands for ‘uncertainty avoidance’. This characteristic indicates the measure to which people in the society feel intimidated by unstable, unforeseeable or obscure situations and therefore attempt to elude them by securing greater career firmness, formulating more formal regulations and believing in the obtainment of expertise (Hollander, 2009). Despite the fact that Greece and Iran do not have elevated ratios for this characteristic, it is important to take into account the average value. The ratios are elevated in the case of Germany and Singapore, which means that ‘uncertainty avoidance’, might be a problematic issue for the organization.