11

Leadership and Culture in the
Republic of Ireland

Mary A. Keating
Gillian S. Martin
School of Business Studies and Department of Germanic Studies,
University of Dublin, Trinity College, Ireland

The contemporary Irish writer, Seamus Deane, has interpreted W. B. Yeats's observation that “Ireland belonged to Asia before the Battle of the Boyne” (cited in Deane, 1984, p. 90) as underlining Ireland's membership of an old and worldwide culture.¹ The island of Ireland is situated to the extreme northwest of Europe and is separated from Britain, its closest neighbor, by the Irish Sea. Celts, Vikings, Normans, and the English have inhabited Ireland since the Stone Age. At the 2002 census, the population of the Republic of Ireland stood at 3.92 million and is predicted to increase to 5.1 million by 2021 (Central Statistics Office, 2004). In 1841, shortly before the Great Famine, the area now comprising the present Irish State had a population of over 6.5 million. The 1851 census revealed a massive decline to 5.1 million due to death from starvation, disease, and emigration. This outflow established a pattern, which has only recently begun to change. Former President Mary Robinson, in a speech to a joint sitting of the two houses of parliament on February 2, 1995, noted that there are some 70 million people of Irish descent living outside Ireland, who assert a strong cultural allegiance to their land of origin, yet have adapted and contributed richly to the countries in which they now reside. Indeed, while geography has destined Ireland to remain peripheral, this diaspora has also enriched the country's heritage in ensuring that “Irishness is not simply territorial” (Robinson, 1995).

Culture is defined by the GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) study as “the common experiences of individuals which result in shared motives, values, beliefs, identities, and interpretations (meanings) of significant events” (House et al., 1999, p. 5). The following chapter sets out to explore leadership in the Republic of Ireland within its cultural and organizational context and to consider the interrelationship between societal and organizational culture as they have impacted on the implicit leadership perceptions held by Irish middle managers. It also investigates the extent to which these perceptions have been shaped by recent and past history. The study is informed by the insights that have emerged from analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data generated within the framework of the GLOBE project. The corpus includes questionnaires, focus groups, and qualitative interviews alongside a review of unobtrusive indicators of culture. The organizational focus of the Irish study is located in the financial services and the food-processing sectors.

The chapter is divided into six principal sections. The first seeks to introduce Irish cultural identity from a social, historical, political, and economic perspective and thereby to provide a context in which to locate the field study. The second section introduces the GLOBE research in the Republic of Ireland. The third presents the findings of the empirical study of Irish societal culture. In the fourth, the focus is on leadership. The section begins with a review of leadership research in Ireland, before reporting on the leadership perceptions of Irish middle managers and investigating one of the core research questions set by the GLOBE project, specifically, how societal culture influences such perceptions. The fifth section addresses this question at an industry level with a view to exploring the interrelationship between societal and organizational culture and leadership perceptions in the food processing and financial services sectors. Conclusions are presented in the final section.

1.  IRELAND: SOCIETY, HISTORY, POLITICS, AND ECONOMY

Perspectives on Ireland

Ireland has undergone vast changes since independence in 1921 and, perhaps most particularly, since the 1960s (Breen, Hannan, Rottman, & Whelan, 1990). The past 40 years have seen much turbulence as Irish society has moved away from being a traditional, socially conservative society and sought to redefine what it means to be Irish in a new millennium. Membership in the European Union (EU), global influences, the impact of new communication and information technologies, shifting demographic patterns, and higher levels of education have all contributed to this change.

Historians and psychologists use terms such as national psyche and collective psyche. Concepts such as the “Irish personality” or “Irish psyche” can generate stereotypes and appear static, suggesting that variations across social groups, historical time, and life span do not exist (Moane, 1994). At the same time, such concepts bear the “imprint of bygone circumstances” (Lee, 1994, p. 248). Lee exhorts that all generalizations about national psyche should be based on comparison; for Ireland, the English connection has been central to our historical experience. The fundamental difference between the historical experience of the Irish and English is that the English have been a conquering people and the Irish a conquered (cf. Lee, 1994).

Ireland has been studied from a variety of viewpoints including the postcolonial, the nationalist, and the religious, that is, Roman Catholic perspective. Lee (1989) mentions the following postcolonial characteristics of late twentieth century Irish society: “extreme centralization; resistance to change and to new ideas, a lack of self-reflection, internal fragmentation; lack of self confidence” (cited in Moane 1994, p. 254), all of which add up to a national inferiority complex. Kane (1986) observes that a group's ethnic identity is more likely to hold positive and negative assumptions about itself when it is part of a “conquest culture” and when these assumptions are instilled in part by the conquering culture (pp. 540–541). In this vein, Ruth (1988) has suggested that many of the changes that have taken place in Ireland are typical of a postcolonial society. He identifies in this respect psychological patterns such as the acceptance of anti-Irish stereotypes (dim-witted, drunken, aggressive) and, ensuing lack of pride, mistrust with this, and divisiveness between Irish people, a narrow identity definition of being Irish, a lack of assertiveness, and a tendency to oppress. Liberation from such patterns may, according to Ruth, involve anger and grief followed by pride, assertiveness, and acceptance of all members of society.

Within the stages of evolution prescribed by postcolonialism, it would appear that the process of liberation is under way. There has been a remarkable growth in self-confidence since the early 1990s, prompted to some degree by success in the artistic, literary, and sporting spheres, but most notably by economic growth. Furthermore, a sense of anger among the Irish people toward many of the institutions that have influenced their lives, most notably the Roman Catholic Church, has given way to a questioning of their moral authority.

The Roman Catholic Church continues to exert influence on the Irish psyche. To some, being Roman Catholic is synonymous with being Irish. The rate of religious practice among Irish Catholics is one of the highest in the world, although it is much lower than the statistics suggest. According to one commentator, the social project of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland has been the maintenance of social stability (Nic Ghiolla Phádraig, 1995). To this end it provided the state with independent legitimization; the state, in turn, instituted laws and policies in keeping with Catholic teaching. Moreover, it has been closely involved in the provision of education, health, and welfare services. Much of this involvement is being renegotiated as the Church redefines its mission in the light of dwindling vocations, its implosion in the wake of internal scandals, and the emerging voice of a more pluralist society.

History: Ireland in the 20th Century

Following 800 years of domination, the Easter Rising of 1916 saw the final rebellion against British rule in Ireland. It unleashed a bitter War of Independence (1919–1921) after which the Anglo-Irish Treaty was signed and 26 counties gained independence from the British Crown as the Irish Free State. Six counties were granted their own parliament in Belfast and remained within the United Kingdom. The “troubles” in Northern Ireland have been the legacy of this division.

On independence, the Irish Free State inherited a number of important assets including “an extensive system of communications, a developed banking system, a vigorous wholesale and retail network, an efficient and honest administration, universal literacy, a large stock of schools, houses and hospitals and enormous external assets” (Haughton, 1995, p. 26). Yet, the new state faced a number of serious problems, most notably, the need to establish a new government in the wake of a destructive and divisive Civil War (1921–1922).

Eamon de Valera, who played a major role in the development of modern Ireland, entered office in 1932 as head of government. He embraced the role of protector of Irish nationalism and creator of the Irish nation and, to this end, instituted a policy requiring the use of the Irish language wherever possible. In 1937, he introduced a new constitution, declaring Ireland to be a sovereign, independent, and democratic state. In keeping with its independence from Britain, Ireland remained neutral during the Second World War and thus escaped the worst effects of the conflict. In 1948, the Republic of Ireland Act was passed, severing Ireland's last constitutional links with Britain.

From the late 1950s onward, the country underwent rapid economic expansion under de Valera's successor, Séan Lemass. Post-1965, following a free-trade agreement between Ireland and Britain, there were significant developments in Irish trading patterns, which were positively influenced by accession to the European Community in 1973. Such developments marked the beginning of an opening up of the Irish economy, which helped to pave the way for the emergence of the “Celtic Tiger” in the 1990s and a period of sustained economic growth.

Legal and Political Framework

The basic law of the Irish State is the Constitution of Ireland, adopted by referendum in 1937, which asserts that all legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government derive under God from the people. Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order, constitutionally guaranteed and the state guarantees not to endow any religion. In a referendum held in 1972, the Irish people voted overwhelmingly to delete those clauses in the Constitution that recognized the “special position” of the Roman Catholic Church as guardian of the faith of the majority of citizens.

Duncan (1994) observes that “it is a feature of certain areas of Irish law that there exists, or has existed, a considerable divide between legal aspiration or principle and social fact, but that this divide has been mitigated by a remarkable flexibility in the operation of those principles” (p. 450). His commentary poses interesting questions about Irish attitudes to law and how Irish society resolves certain deep conflicts, most notably, divorce, abortion, and homosexuality. He suggests that our Catholic heritage of condemning the sin but not the sinner may go some way toward explaining this flexibility, but concludes that a more acceptable explanation, also influenced by our Catholic heritage, may lie in the Church's view of the civil law as an important mainstay of moral living. That laws should be used to shape moral behavior has subsequently given way to the more subtle idea that change in the law may create an environment that makes the individual's path to virtue a more difficult one (Daly, 1993; cited in Duncan, 1994).

Many areas of Irish law have been honored in the breach rather than in observance. Evidence presented at ongoing tribunals investigating political and financial scandals in Ireland supports the view that a culture of noncompliance existed in respect of commercial and company law. In spite of rules and regulations to manage all aspects of public life, a culture of bending these rules prevailed: Who you were and who you knew mattered in terms of how you were treated if you were caught. Some have attempted to explain this practice with reference to the aforementioned Catholic heritage of forgiving the sinner or by evoking our colonial past where, much in line with the literary parallel of servant–master relations it was deemed a feather in your cap if you could dupe the master! However, the past 10 years have seen an attempt to modify Irish attitudes and behavior in terms of compliance with rules and regulations.

Irish political decision making is shaped by a highly centralized bureaucracy, an executive monopoly of legislation, and a tightly controlled political party system within the context of a personalist political structure (Coakley & Gallagher, 1993). Though local government plays a minor role in Irish political life, some would argue that the Irish electoral system, which is based on proportional representation coupled with multiseat constituencies, “gives too much weight to the constituencies rather than the country” (Guiomard, 1995, p. 163). The personalist political environment has nurtured a culture of direct-contact clientelism between government ministers, senior administrators, and organized representative groups.

British rule in Ireland left a significant legacy in terms of public policies. Similarly, the agricultural heritage of the country, together with its strong Catholic tradition, has ensured the maintenance of an essentially conservative base within politics. The current government consists of a coalition between two center right parties. Many scholars contend that Ireland displays a distinctly corporatist pattern of group–state relationships, particularly in the economic sphere; indeed, some go so far as to suggest that it displays a closed corporatist pattern of interest representation (Galligan, 1998). However, it is becoming apparent that Europe will increasingly determine Ireland's public policies.

The Irish Economy

Ireland is now classed as a high-income economy by the World Bank on the basis of gross national income (GNI)/capita of $27,010 (World Bank, 2005). As an island, the Irish economy is very open and heavily dependent on trade: exports of goods and services amount to 94% of gross domestic product (GDP; World Bank, 2005). It is widely accepted that the slow growth of the Irish economy in the 1950s was largely because of the inefficiency of the industrial sector developed in the 1930s. The main elements of Ireland's current industrial policy were introduced in 1958 in the country's first comprehensive plan for economic development. These were: the introduction of substantial capital grants and tax concessions to encourage export-oriented manufacturing, the inducement of direct investment by foreign export-oriented manufacturing enterprises in Ireland, and a transition to free trade. On joining the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973 (now the EU), Ireland was classified as a peripheral nation and benefited greatly from European structural and cohesion funds as well as becoming part of a large economic area with free movement of goods, services, people, and capital.

Since the 1980s, policies have been implemented to curb imbalances in the public finances. O'Higgins (2002) summarizes the situation in the mid-1980s as a time when Ireland “was beset by prolonged recession, low living standards, a negative trade balance, high inflation, unemployment of over 17 percent, a hostile industrial relations climate, and weak revenues” (pp. 104–105). Since then, living standards have been converging with European levels and by 2000 GDP per capita had risen to 115%.

The “vicious circle of Irish industrialisation” (Mjoset, 1992, p. 13), based on a weak national system of innovation and continual population decline, appears to have been finally overtaken by a “virtuous circle,” at the center of which lies a corporatist, consensual approach. This strategy has resulted in rapid development and economic stability. The growth of the Irish economy since 1994, dubbed “the Celtic Tiger,” has been three to four times the average of the EU countries and higher than the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) average. Indeed, economic growth continues at a rate of over 5%, whereas other Western European countries struggle to attain less than half this figure (Federation of European Employers, 2005). Such high levels of growth over the past 10 years have, in turn, led to skilled inward migration. This inward migration will become even more critical in the future if current levels of growth are to be supported (Federation of European Employers, 2005).

Gray (1997) has proposed a number of reasons for Ireland's economic turnaround. These are labor force skill and education, an English-speaking workforce, the importance of foreign investment coupled with a shift in the balance of international trade, the provision of European subsidies, the role of convergence, and the prospect of peace in Northern Ireland. A favorable corporate tax regime and the emergence of the Single European Market have also contributed to this turnaround, as has the social partnership. The Programme for National Recovery (1988–1990) secured trade union support for cuts in public spending and was followed by a series of partnership programs involving all stakeholders in Irish economic well-being.

Two major tasks face Ireland in the new millennium: The first is to address the problems of social inequality; the second is to stimulate an Irish system of innovation that encourages the development of indigenous firms while reducing the country's dependency on mobile foreign direct investment.

Education

One of the main catalysts of social change in Ireland has been education. Education and learning have always been valued and, for many, a good education represented the passport to a better life. This view has become more pronounced with the “shift from family property to education as the principal means of reproducing social status” (Fahey, 1995, p. 218). According to Nic Ghiolla Phádraig (1995), schools are “important tools of religious socialisation” (p. 603) and, traditionally, the Catholic Church has been the dominant player in educational provision at primary and second level. This influence has diminished with increasing secularization of schools. Free secondary education was introduced in 1966, with Irish children remaining in obligatory full-time education until the age of 15. O'Higgins (2002) notes that, “[b]y the late 1990s, over 80 per cent of workforce entrants had completed secondary education and 40-plus per cent experienced some third-level education”; this latter figure compares favorably with the EU average of 20% (p. 106).

The aim of the Operational Programme for Human Resources Development 1994–1999 (Government of Ireland, 1995) has been to maximize the potential of Ireland's people and to facilitate the shift to a knowledge-based service society. Much of the funding to achieve these objectives has come from the European Social Fund. The recognition that Ireland's human resources will constitute the key to the country's economic competitiveness in the next millennium has prompted a shift within educational thinking toward the notion of continuous learning and, with this, awareness of the imperative of ongoing training within industry. In 2000, Professor Michael Porter stressed the need for more executive training and better managerial skills if Ireland is to remain competitive (The Irish Times, October 27, 2000, p. 4).

Summary

The preceding section has provided an overview of Ireland's social, economic, and political development over the last century. In particular, it is important to emphasize the ongoing significant changes within Irish society, most notably the move toward a more secular, pluralist, and transparent society, the unprecedented levels of economic growth, and the sense of confidence that this has instilled in the Irish people. The path of change and growing self-confidence, attested by many Irish “success stories” on the world stage in the economic, diplomatic, literary, and artistic spheres, is expressed forcefully by one commentator:

It is against this backdrop of change that we now turn to the GLOBE study in Ireland. This is preceded by a brief summary of Ireland's profile within existing cross-cultural comparative management literature, including Hofstede's (1980) research. The latter has retained its benchmark status as the most extensive quantitative empirical study of the dimensions of Irish societal culture until the GLOBE project.

2.  GLOBE IN THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND

Ireland in Cross-Cultural Management Research

Recent cross-cultural empirical research has paid scant attention to Ireland, lumped it together with Britain, or hinted at a more schizophrenic profile (Martin, 2001). Ronen and Shenkar's (1985) review of eight cross-cultural studies, including that conducted by Hofstede (1980), generated five main clusters within Europe. Ireland is assigned to the Anglo cluster, alongside the United Kingdom. The authors propose that geographical proximity, shared language or language groups, and religion are determinants of cultural clustering; they also explore the influence of modernity in the areas of economic, social, political, and educational development as it has an impact on individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and gender equality (cf. Brodbeck et al., 2000). More recently, in a survey of top managers’ views on the diversity of management systems in Europe, Calori (1994) notes that Ireland “probably belongs to a broader Anglo-Saxon block, but … may also share some Latin characteristics” (p. 21), a view also suggested in the Cranfield study of management styles in eight European countries (Myers, Kakabadse, McMahon, & Spony, 1995, pp. 22–23; cf. also Hickson & Pugh, 1995). Other commentators to have hinted at “Latin rim” characteristics include Mahon (1994), who refers to indicators such as late industrialization and postcolonialism.

Hofstede's (1980) research classifies Ireland as low on Power Distance, high on Individualism, weak on Uncertainty Avoidance, and high on the Masculine Index, a profile similar to that of Great Britain. Whereas Hofstede's findings suggest similarity, the inhabitants of these countries would recognize that there are fundamental differences in their outlook on life and in the conduct of business. Such differences may emerge more clearly through the inclusion of qualitative research tools, which were absent from Hofstede's study.

When contemplating the findings of the GLOBE study of societal culture, it is useful to consider these varied observations on Ireland's cultural profile, together with the social, economic, and political changes, which we have documented in the first section of the chapter. GLOBE provides a lens through which to view the Ireland of the mid-1990s. Critically, unlike previous cross-cultural comparative research, GLOBE can establish the direction of desired change in a culture by focusing on “As Is” scales (i.e., societal practice or perceptions of one's society) and “Should Be” scales (i.e., espoused values concerning one's ideal society).

The GLOBE Dimensions and the Irish Sample

At the center of the GLOBE study has been the development of scales for the evaluation of societal cultural norms. The scales build on Hofstede's (1980) four cultural dimensions and include Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Gender Egalitarianism, which replaces Masculinity/Femininity, and Institutional Collectivism in place of Individualism/Collectivism. It introduces Assertiveness, which was previously part of Hofstede's Masculinity/Femininity dimension, but treats it as a separate index. Four further dimensions are included: Future Orientation (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961), Performance Orientation (McClelland, 1961), Humane Orientation (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961; Putnam, 1993), and In-Group Collectivism, that is, Collectivism as an orientation discrete from Individualism. Definitions of the dimensions are summarized in Table 11.1. The methodological parameters of the GLOBE study are set out in House et al. (2004).

The GLOBE study in the Republic of Ireland is based on analysis of 156 questionnaires collected during 1995 and 1996 in two wholly indigenous sectors, namely the food-processing and financial services sectors. The Irish sample is drawn from 8 indigenous financial services companies and 10 food-processing companies. The sample reflects an urban and provincial spread. Respondents were middle managers aged between 23 and 56; the age range was virtually identical in both sectors. The average age of the respondents was 37 years; 84% were male. In addition, two focus groups and two semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with middle managers in these sectors. A review of unobtrusive indicators of culture and leadership, including stamps, banknotes, and statues, was also undertaken in an attempt to explicate features of Irish identity that impact on attitudes toward leadership within social and organizational settings.

There are two GLOBE questionnaires. Questionnaire Alpha concentrates on the measurement of leadership and organizational culture. Questionnaire Beta measures leadership and societal culture. An equal number of respondents to Alpha and Beta questionnaires was sought in each organization taking part in the study. Using a 7-point scale, informants were asked to state their perceptions of items relating to the nine cultural dimensions, concerning how things “are” (observed practices) in their society or organization and how things “should be” (values). In this way, the questionnaire distinguishes between practices (“As Is”)and espoused values (“Should Be”), allowing us to comment on trends in societal and organizational practices and values.

On the leadership scales, the middle managers were asked to rate 112 leadership items on a scale between 1 (greatly inhibits a person from being an outstanding leader) and 7 (greatly contributes to a person being an outstanding leader). Based on exploratory factor analysis and prior theorizing, the items were distilled into 21 leadership scales, which constitute culturally endorsed perceptions of leadership.

The following section reports on the findings of the questionnaire-based study of societal culture. On the basis of the profile of Irish society emerging from the questionnaires, we briefly consider some of the possible implications for preferred leadership styles.

3.  IRISH SOCIETAL CULTURE

Findings of the GLOBE Study

Table 11.2 presents the findings in respect of Irish societal culture in terms of absolute mean scores for practices (“As Is”) and espoused values (“Should Be”) scores on a 7-point scale. The results represent aggregated scale scores on each of the dimensions. Ireland's ranking on each dimension relative to the other participating cultures is also indicated, together with the band to which Ireland belongs. Countries in Bands A or B are very high or high on the particular dimension, whereas those in Bands C and D are low or very low respectively, compared to all other countries. An absolute score indicating the difference between the two culture measures, “As Is” and “Should Be,” is also provided.

If we examine each of these dimensions within the context of the issues discussed in the first part of the chapter, we can posit a number of explanations as to the emergent trends within the data set and assess their possible implications for preferred leadership styles.

Power Distance. Power Distance specifies the extent to which the members of a society expect power to be shared equally in that society. Hofstede's (1980) study classified Ireland as a low Power Distance society, whereas the GLOBE data reveal that perceived levels of Power Distance within our society are high (Mean [M] = 5.15, Rank 36, Band B) and that middle managers would like to see much lower levels (M = 2.71, Rank 30, Band C). In fact, the highest absolute difference between “As Is” and “Should Be” is recorded for this dimension (–2.44). The espousal of lower levels of Power Distance mirrors the worldwide trend. Interestingly, however, when juxtaposed with the other sampled countries, Ireland's relative score on “As Is” suggests that levels of Power Distance in Irish society are moderate.

One factor, which might explain the respondents’ perceptions of Power Distance within Irish society, is centralization. Faced in the 1980s with a galloping national debt and rising unemployment, central government and its various departments assumed greater powers as a means of tackling these problems (cf. the subsection Legal and Political Framework). Other organs of centralized power include the EU and the Roman Catholic Church. Where the locus of power is perceived to be defined centrally, those who are affected by its mandate may discern its influence to be greater.

On the surface, Ireland does not appear to be a very formal society. People do not use titles, prefer first-name terms, and tend to relate to each other as equals in a familiar way, regardless of position or status. Yet, underlying this behavior is an awareness of the power relationship and a sense that everybody knows their place. Irish society cannot be described as elitist and, generally, status is achieved nowadays rather than ascribed (cf. the subsection Legal and Political Framework) and class determined to a large extent by occupation. However, in the past it has been argued that people were rewarded for their possessions, notably land, jobs, education, and wealth, rather than for their performance or enterprise (Lee, 1989). Warnes (1979) observed the prevalence in the late 1970s of “class distinctions, class-prejudices, nepotism, obsequiousness, back-biting, rigid stratifications, procrastination, social rituals, authoritarianism, inquisitiveness into who your father was, [and] what kind of school you attended” (p. 330). Indeed, the much more recent scandals within Irish public life have revealed the abuse of power by named politicians, members of the judiciary, the banking and accounting professions, and well-known chief executives in the agricultural and financial services sectors and government departments, and have demonstrated that status can confer certain privileges. Furthermore, they underpin the fact that clientelism and networking have always been an accepted part of life in Ireland (cf. the subsection Legal and Political Framework). This may help to explain perceptions of higher Power Distance.

Attitudes to Power Distance may also be linked to the latent disrespect for authority held by Irish people. Attempts to impose new regulations on different aspects of daily life have traditionally been ignored on a widespread basis and form part of the culture of noncompliance. This situation has changed as structures are being imposed to modify behavior across a variety of fronts. The growing confidence of a younger, more highly educated generation, coupled with the many scandals within the Church, has fundamentally altered this sense of acquiescence.

Gender Egalitarianism. Gender Egalitarianism is defined as the extent to which gender differences in a particular society are minimized. Ireland's score for practices on this dimension (M = 3.21, Rank 39, Band B) would imply that, in absolute terms, Irish middle managers perceive Irish society to have a low level of gender equality. For values, Irish middle managers espouse high levels of Gender Egalitarianism (M = 5.14, Rank 3, Band A), in both absolute and relative terms. Indeed, the second highest absolute difference between practices and espoused values is on the dimension Gender Egalitarianism (1.93).

Hofstede's (1980) study classified Ireland as high on masculinity. Until recently, Ireland could be regarded as a predominantly patriarchal society. It had earned this reputation because of its traditional stance on reproductive rights and the low participation of women in the labor force. Scannell's (1988) study of the position of women subsequent to the enactment of the 1937 Constitution found that “for almost thirty years after the Constitution was adopted, the position of women in Irish society hardly changed at all” (p. 127). Education has facilitated greater gender equality, although some academics would argue that sex role models are reinforced by schools and may have implications for the career choices made by women.

In the 1970s, a liberal agenda of policy reform dominated public discourse and was strongly influenced by European Community directives. Since then, the dismantling of discriminatory legislation and expanding participation of women within the workforce have altered the profile and role of Irish women in society. Between 1991 and 2002, female participation in the Irish labor force increased from 35.9% to 47% (Browne, 2005), while the rate of employment among women (54%) represents a 15% increase since 1994 and is now higher than most OECD countries (European Employment Observatory, 2003). Nonetheless, they remain underrepresented at the senior management level across a number of sectors. By contrast, women are extremely active in a voluntary capacity at local level in their communities (Coulter, 1993) and, at the time of the GLOBE survey, some 53% of adult women in Ireland were home workers (K. Lynch & McLaughlin, 1995, p. 266).

The findings attest that the country has made some progress in achieving greater gender egalitarianism, although the “Should Be” scores echo the widespread and explicit view that we still have considerable distance to travel. Such a view may also be reinforced by the constitution of the GLOBE sample: The workforce within the food industry remains predominantly male and respondents to the questionnaires in this particular sector were 100% male.

Performance Orientation. Performance Orientation describes the degree to which people are encouraged and rewarded for performance improvement and achievement of excellence. On the “As Is” scale, the respondents record moderate scores in absolute terms, but, viewed relatively, the country belongs in the highest band (M = 4.36, Rank 17, Band A). In absolute terms, the “Should Be” score for Performance Orientation is substantially higher (M = 5.98, Rank 30, Band B)—it is, in fact, the highest absolute score on any of the value dimensions— but in relative terms the data suggest that many other countries are more performance oriented.

Lee's (1989) reference to an inadequate “performance ethic” in Irish life (cf. the subsection Power Distance) may have characterized past attitudes, when “it was accepted that profits could be made, not by means of enterprise, but rather by financial engineering and tax avoidance” (O'Higgins, 2002, p. 105). The GLOBE findings suggest that Ireland has become very performance oriented. Factors contributing to this include the country's continued economic development, the shift from an inward- to an outward-focused economic policy, membership in the EU, the number of foreign direct investment firms located in Ireland and the global economic environment (cf. the subsection The Irish Economy), all of which stress the importance of remaining competitive on a global level. There has been a growth in performance-management-oriented systems in work organizations and this trend is expected to continue in order to facilitate labor market flexibility. In the Financial Times (May 26, 1995) Ireland was recorded as having a productivity record that “would be the envy of the Germans, and a balance of payments surplus in line with Switzerland and Japan,” a trend reiterated by an ILO (International Labour Organization) study of global labor trends (Doohan, 1999). Notwithstanding the recognition that transfer pricing can distort national figures in a small economy (Stewart, 1997), Ireland has grown fast and the Irish respondents appear to recognize that maintaining such levels of performance and growth will be the challenge of the future.

Future Orientation. Future Orientation measures the extent to which future-oriented behaviors (e.g. planning, investing, delay of gratification) are encouraged and rewarded. On practice scores (M = 3.98, Rank 21, Band B), the absolute and relative positioning implies that Irish society is moderately future oriented. For values (M = 5.22, Rank 43, Band B), they espouse significantly higher levels of Future Orientation, although in relative terms, other countries are more focused on the future at this point in time.

With increased economic prosperity, the stability offered by continuity of employment provides a more solid foundation on which to plan for the future. The efforts and success of the Irish Investment and Development Agency in pursuing a policy of attracting targeted multinational corporations (MNCs), specifically in the technology sectors, cannot be underestimated. Central planning to sustain economic performance and growth is also evident, together with higher levels of investment in training and executive education and in research and development (R&D) within industry, a figure that has more than quadrupled since 1982. However, the percentage remains modest when juxtaposed with other European countries and is lower in indigenous Irish firms than in foreign companies (J. J. Lynch & Roche, 1995, pp. 48–52). As O'Higgins (2002) has pointed out: “Mindful that Ireland lags behind the EU average on R&D government spending as a percentage of GDP, the state invested ∈1 billion-plus in Ireland's R&D future in 2001, to fund basic research in information and communications technology, biotechnology, and center of excellence standard R&D in universities and colleges” (p. 107). Within organizations, strategic planning has assumed new dimensions, even if the Anglo-Saxon model of shareholder as opposed to stakeholder value remains predominant amongst the larger publicly quoted companies. Individuals within Irish society have also become more proactive in making independent provision for their future and taking control of their own destiny (Jupp & O'Neill, 1994) as evidenced by the increase in numbers purchasing health insurance and making pension arrangements.

Such shifts are reflected in the Irish GLOBE data, together with possible recognition of the lag between policymaking for the future and present reality, which is most clearly evinced in the area of infrastructural development. There is a realization that infrastructural weaknesses could ultimately compromise Ireland's attractiveness as a location for inward investment.

In-Group Collectivism. In-Group Collectivism describes relationships among members of families or organizations. On practices (M = 5.14, Rank 39, Band B), Irish middle managers report in absolute terms high levels of In-Group Collectivism. Viewed relatively, Ireland has moderate levels of In-Group Collectivism. The “Should Be” (M = 5.74, Rank 28, Band B) indicates a moderate desire for greater In-Group Collectivism.

This profile may be traceable to the increasing fragmentation of Irish society in the wake of shifting values, coupled with economic development, attendant urbanization, and the sense of displacement and anonymity that this can produce. Family patterns in Ireland have undergone considerable change since the 1960s, marking a growing distance between public religious observance and personal decisions. In line with European trends, the number of children born outside marriage had risen to 31% by 2002 (National Center for Policy Analysis, 2002).

The changing role of women and their increased presence in the workforce, together with the growing phenomenon of spousal separation prior to the introduction of divorce in 1996 have had repercussions for the stability of family life and the traditional patterns of family organization. Yet, although the traditional family group may be under stress, the role of family remains very important in Ireland as a form of social support. Society continues to place a high value on mothers, who exercise great influence both within and beyond the family circle (cf. the subsection Gender Egalitarianism). Equally, kinship ties remain strong in both rural and urban families and many people obtain important levels of support from their family and neighbors; for example, care of the elderly continues to be assumed largely by the family. K. Lynch and McLaughlin (1995) note that although the Republic of Ireland is unusual insofar as it does make some provision for carers in its social security system, the actual sharing of costs between carer and the state remains minimal (p. 283).

Humane Orientation. Humane Orientation describes how much a society rewards or encourages its members for being fair, altruistic, and caring toward others. Looking at the score for practices (M = 4.96, Rank 3, Band A), Ireland is considered by the respondents to place a very high value on these qualities, in both absolute and relative terms. For values (M = 5.47, Rank 29, Band B), we see a desire for higher levels on this dimension, although in relative terms the ranking drops.

The high “As Is” score (M = 4.96) is probably attributable to our strong Christian and Catholic heritage and the size of the country. For decades, Irish missionaries have ministered to the needs of those in developing countries and nowadays are assisted by many young volunteer workers. There is a long tradition of charitable institutions being funded by the government and run by religious orders, also representing a pragmatic solution to the problems of cash shortages.

The higher values score (M = 5.47) may be explained by the perception that the “softer,” gentler characteristics of life in this country are being sacrificed to the “Celtic Tiger” through economic success and emphasis on performance and individual achievement. According to Collins and Kavanagh (1998), “There has been a marked increase in the level of inequality (in Ireland) over the past twenty years” (p. 172). Whereas the wealthiest 20% of the population has increased its share of national income from 46.7% in 1972 to 52.5% in 1994, income distribution for the lowest 50% fell from 18% to 11.5% (Collins & Kavanagh, 1998, p. 172). A comprehensive welfare system does exist, but, as in many other developed nations, it fails to catch all in its net. Many of those who remain outside the system are reliant on services provided by voluntary organizations.

Through economic prosperity, there are signs that Irish people are beginning to forget their own diaspora. Already, the impact of an increasing number of refugees seeking either political or economic asylum in the wake of the country's prosperity is being felt. Until recently, Ireland was shielded by its relative economic weakness and its island geography from immigration and, thus, Irish society has remained remarkably homogeneous. Whereas there is a tolerance of difference within the “in-group,” this not necessarily replicated with respect to “outsiders” from other cultures who seek refuge in Ireland (cf. Jupp & O'Neill, 1994). Jupp and O'Neill suggest that in the future, Irish people expect fear and greed to be more apparent and politeness, generosity, and tolerance to wane. They record: “Our socio-cultural values will be severely tested as twice as many people expect us to be less caring by the next millennium” (p. 12).

Uncertainty Avoidance. Uncertainty Avoidance captures the degree to which reliance is placed on social norms and procedures to reduce the unpredictability of future events. For practices (M = 4.30, Rank 22, Band B), the respondents record moderate scores both in absolute and relative terms. For values (M = 4.02, Rank 49, Band C), lower levels of Uncertainty Avoidance are espoused. Whereas Hofstede (1980) categorized Ireland as low on Uncertainty Avoidance, the GLOBE findings indicate that we have become less tolerant of uncertainty, but wish to become more tolerant.

As societies mature, they become better at managing uncertainty (Hofstede, 1980). Examples of Ireland's attempts to manage uncertainty can be seen in the area of macroeconomic planning, the emergence of the social partnership in the 1980s and early 1990s (cf. the subsection The Irish Economy), improved educational policies linked to future prosperity, and efforts to build a culture of compliance with rules and regulations for the good of the country and its citizens. Additionally, people now insure their lives and possessions more comprehensively against risk, which also ties in with the desire for greater Future Orientation. Though Ireland has been described as having a “lightly regulated environment” with respect to employment regulation and benefits (Sedgwick Noble Lownes, 1998), the desire for a lower level of Uncertainty Avoidance may reflect a sense of constraint, which is imposed by increased regulation and structure in the era of freedom of information and accountability.

Communication has a strong basis in the oral tradition with evidence of recourse to metaphor, euphemism, and legend and is “particularly suited to the expression of ambivalence and ambiguity” (Bourke, 1999, p. 206). Much value is still attached to the notion of a wordof-mouth culture, although the indispensability of written documentation both in the workplace and in dealing with public institutions has gained in importance as the country has evolved socially and economically. Nonetheless, off-the-record conversations remain intrinsic to how we communicate with each other, together with subtle signaling known as “nodding and winking,” which has close ties to the clientelist approach. Keeping situations open-ended, providing loopholes, bending rules, and avoiding closure are mechanisms that are often used to manage uncertainty at the individual level.

Assertiveness. Assertiveness refers to the degree to which individuals in a society are allowed to be aggressive or dominant. Nonassertiveness refers to nonconfrontational, non-dominant social relationships. For both practices (M = 3.92, Rank 41, Band B) and values (M = 3.99, Rank 19, Band B), the scores suggest in absolute and relative terms moderate to low Assertiveness and the desire not to alter this.

V. Kenny (1985) elaborates on social relations in Ireland. He talks of social withdrawal, in other words, superficial compliance, indirect communication, the lack of self-revelation, and the elaboration of secret worlds. These can result in such behaviors as understatement, evasiveness, the avoidance of conflict and self-exhibition, passive aggression (cited in Moane, 1994, p. 259), and nonassertiveness, which are symptomatic of a postcolonial mind-set (cf. Ruth, 1988, in the subsection Perspectives on Ireland). This can be disconcerting for people who speak the same language, but do not use language in the same way, including our closest neighbors within the British Isles. In face-to-face negotiation, issues are generally not dealt with head-on and confrontation is avoided (Martin, 2001). Indeed, the nature of communication points to the fact that Ireland may have more in common with high-context cultures (Hall, 1976). Often what is not said is more important than what is said and an ability to read between the lines is essential. This would also appear to tie in with our collectivist orientation.

Institutional Collectivism. Institutional Collectivism refers to the degree to which societies reward collective endeavor. Hofstede's (1980) classification of Ireland as individualistic does not match the view held by respondents in the Irish GLOBE study. In both absolute and relative terms, the score for practices indicates high levels of institutional collectivism (M = 4.63, Rank 9, Band A) and the minor shift on values (M = 4.59, Rank 35, Band B) suggests that the respondents are happy with these existing levels. The drop in ranking from 10 on “As Is” to 35 on “Should Be” reflects the international shift toward espousal of higher levels of Institutional Collectivism. Similar trends are evident for Humane Orientation and Future Orientation.

The high level of Institutional Collectivism is compatible with our size and colonial history. There is a strong sense of belonging to a parish, of community-level interdependence especially in a rural context. Most indigenous Irish sports are team based and membership in collectives, such as trade unions, is high. Roche and Ashmore (1997) estimated trade union density at 53%. Additionally, positioning on this dimension may be influenced by the collective sense of national pride and self-esteem evident in the Ireland of the mid-1990s as a consequence of the success of the “corporatist partnership” (Sweeney, 1998). O'Higgins (2002) observes: “Smallness is an advantage in maintaining partnership because of familiarity, informality, and close personal relationships among the stakeholders, all helpful preconditions for successful bargaining and compromise” (p. 105). However, she draws attention to the growing inequalities within Irish society between rich and poor as a result of espousal of the capitalist model (cf. the subsection Humane Orientation), which might “weaken the social solidarity that has been such a cornerstone of Irish development” (p. 117).

There has also been a move toward encouraging greater collective responsibility in dealing with a variety of societal administrative and behavioral matters such as drinking and driving and tax evasion. It is suggested that this trend is symptomatic of a desire to foster an independence rather than a dependence culture and also mirrors the trend toward Irish individuals accepting collective responsibility for what is acceptable in our society.

One economist presents an alternative view on collectivism in Irish society: “Our rhetoric stresses the community over the individual, upbraiding the upstart and the self-starter, implicitly requiring that everybody stay in his or her appointed place” (Guiomard, 1995, p. 186). Such a commentary also raises a number of interesting issues in respect of Irish attitudes to failure and to Power Distance (cf. the subsection Power Distance). Peter Sutherland, ex-head of GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) and Ireland's previous EU commissioner, observed in 1990: “We have a capacity for excessively admiring noble failure. We seem sometimes to be inured to coming off worst and almost to wallow wilfully in this” (cited in Guiomard, 1995, p. 188). The notion that we like to see others fail is a theme to which we return in our discussion of the literature on leadership in Ireland and in the qualitative study of leadership.

Summary. The Irish GLOBE data confirm the fact that Ireland is a country that has undergone radical and rapid change since the 1960s and is reflecting on how to proceed beyond the crossroads at which it currently finds itself. This involves some degree of reconciliation and recalibration of old and new practices and values. There is evidence of divergence from Hofstede's (1980) conclusions, in particular, regarding assumptions about individualism and collectivism.

The information presented in the preceding sections provides the context for one of the central objectives of the GLOBE study, namely the investigation of the impact of societal culture on implicitly held perceptions of leadership. In summary, Irish society is characterized inter alia by moderate Power Distance, high Collectivism, high Humane Orientation, high Performance Orientation, moderate levels of Assertiveness, Future Orientation, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Gender Egalitarianism. In absolute terms, Irish middle managers want more Gender Egalitarianism, a more humane society, more In-Group Collectivism, stronger Future Orientation, and higher Performance Orientation. They espouse similar levels of Assertiveness and Institutional Collectivism and lower levels of Power Distance and Uncertainty Avoidance.

What are the implications of this profile for leadership in Ireland? Certain initial assumptions as to the style of leadership, which is compatible with Ireland's positioning on the GLOBE societal dimensions, can be distilled from the findings. They suggest the importance of a participative, nonassertive, consensus-based style, which manifests a strong humane underpinning, together with a focus on performance. In the following sections, we explore such assumptions empirically, with reference to unobtrusive indicators of culture, as defined by Webb et al. (1973), the focus groups, the qualitative interviews, and the quantitative study of leadership. The presentation of the empirical study is preceded by a review of leadership research conducted in an Irish context.

4.  LEADERSHIP IN IRELAND

Research on Leadership in Ireland

Whereas many of the other country chapters within this collection can draw on studies of leaders and leadership in their particular societies, there is a lack of any large empirical study or incisive theoretical analysis of leadership in Ireland. This is, in part, due to the preponderance of the self-analytic, autobiographical, and biographical approach to the study of leaders.

An early study in the 1960s, conducted by researchers at the Irish Management Institute and the Institute of Personality Assessment and Research (Berkeley, California), involved self-and other assessment of the personal attributes of 37 Irish business leaders using a battery of psychological tests (Barron & Egan, 1966, p. 13). All the leaders were male. The emergent attributes are “the achievement motive, personal dominance and leadership, and freedom from self-doubt” (Barron & Egan, 1996, p. 20); moreover, “independence is balanced by conformity” and there is an element of “feminine nurturance” (Barron & Egan, 1966, p. 22), which Barron and Egan see as challenging their assumptions about Irish leadership. In their conclusion, they observe: “There is an odd combination of masculinity and sense of the poetic in them. Their vision is of conquest, mastery, personal dominance, [and] command” (p. 29).

As already mentioned, much of the literature on leaders within Irish society and business is biographical in focus. Examples include Farrell's Chairman or Chief (1971), and I. Kenny's In Good Company: Conversations With Irish Leaders (1987), Out on Their Own: Conversations With Irish Entrepreneurs (1991), and Leaders: Conversations With Irish Chief Executives (2001). Farrell focuses on the constitutional, legal, and administrative position of Taoiseach (i.e., head of government). He categorizes five Irish heads of government as either “Chief” or “Chairman.” Chiefs are exceedingly dominant, even authoritarian, figures. They believe in the concentration of power and centrally controlled decision making. The Chief is “dynamic, an activist and a promoter of action” (p. xi). Conversely, the Chairman adopts a consensual, procedural style of leadership. He believes in the sharing of responsibility and collective decision making: “He is a routine leader, more conscious of methods than goals” (p. xi). Eamon de Valera, perhaps the most famous of Ireland's political leaders, is classified as a Chairman. His governments “moved slowly, at the pace of the last man to be convinced” (p. 30). By contrast, Séan Lemass was the perfect Chief. His leadership was undisputed and his dominance uncontested. He favored the quick decision and believed “that the task was to hold the team together and to press forward with an active, even controversial, programme” (p. 58). Farrell's study emphasizes the importance of context and time in understanding leadership and submits that the position of Taoiseach was designed for a Chairman and not a Chief.

I. Kenny (1987) records a number of leadership attributes and behaviors characterizing the 15 male leaders from business, religious, and media spheres appearing in his book In Good Company: Conversations With Irish Leaders. It is worth noting that the individual whose name is mentioned most as having been a successful leader in Irish society is Séan Lemass, classified by Farrell (1971) as a Chief:

Other attributes and behaviors include the importance of being able to delegate and to use the talents and skills of others, to build a strong team, to set goals and see clearly where they are going, to seek consensus, to possess determination and patience, and to take risks. In a recent survey of nine Irish business leaders (Excellence Ireland, 2001) and in I. Kenny's Leaders: Conversations With Irish Chief Executives these attributes and behaviors are reemphasized. Kenny defines a leader as “someone who has willing followers” (p. 2); leadership is “a combination of character (who you are) and competence (what you can do)” (p. 2). Interestingly, Kenny's interviewees also refer to the begrudgery of success in Irish society, a point noted in our discussion of the societal cultural dimensions (cf. the subsection Institutional Collectivism).

In the past few years, a number of autobiographies and biographies of Irish business leaders have been published, including those of Tony O'Reilly,¹ and Bill Cullen.² Yet, alongside this, a recent publication, which presented perspectives on Irish identity from 100 very diverse people (Logue, 2000), did not feature a business leader. The omission is striking, considering the economic changes that the country has undergone and the contribution of the business community to this development. It is worth reflecting in this context on I. Kenny's (1991) observation that “it is the peasant culture which attributes lesser value to business, than, for example, the professions” (p. 4).

A further omission is striking, namely the absence of female leaders from available literature on leadership and Irish leaders. I. Kenny (2001) notes: “While there may be anecdotal evidence that women are beginning to break through, few indeed have reached the top floor—women constitute two percent of the chief executives in the leading 100 Irish companies” (p. 5).

The contextual nature of leadership underscored by Farrell (1971) and I. Kenny (1987) is further elaborated by Leavy and Wilson (1994), who use a multilevel approach to explore how “leadership, context and history interact in the formation of an organization's strategy and how this changes over time” (p. 2). Their analysis of leaders is focused less on attributes and more on the challenges, which they face within their organizational and historical context. Leaders, they posit, are “tenants of context and time” (p. 3). They classify the leaders who form part of the study into four generic groupings, viz. builders, revitalizers, turnarounders, and inheritors (p. 113) and identify the contextual factors that seem to have exerted the greatest influence on strategy within the organizations under scrutiny. The authors draw attention to the shift in the 1960s away from the leader as “nation-builder” who was “driven by values forged during the revolutionary times” and in times of peace had harnessed this “nationalistic passion and leadership talents to the practical patriotism of laying down the economic infrastructure of the new state” (p. 165). The new direction of leadership was towards “careerism, managerialism and professionalism” (p. 163), epitomized by Tony O'Reilly: “Under his [Lemass's] leadership a new kind of hero or economic patriot, the professional manager, began to rise in stature. The men who rose to govern the country in the post-Lemass era had come to power because they were men of ambition rather than of destiny who had chosen politics as a career” (p. 164). Such a shift is arguably a worldwide rather than a specifically Irish phenomenon.

The findings of a survey on best practice in Irish top management, jointly conducted by the Cranfield School of Management and the Irish Management Institute in 1991, concluded that the key competencies of top managers/CEOs were generating a vision for the future, molding a top team, communicating effectively, generating a positive success-oriented culture within the organization, and practicing the personal qualities and skills required for effective performance (Kakabadse, Alderson, & Gorman, 1995). The authors of the survey submit that, in comparison with other European samples, Ireland has produced talented business leaders, Irish management is one of the better educated professional cohorts in Europe, and Ireland does not have a leadership capability problem; the challenge is the development of top teams (p. 23). This view is supported by another recent study based on interviews with CEOs and a survey of the top-management team, of core knowledge employees, and of human resource managers in multinationals and indigenous software and telecommunications companies. The authors of this study conclude that the interviewed leaders recognize the need to move from the solitary leader model to a more collective and mutually accountable leadership style (Flood, MacCurtain, & West, 2001).

There are a number of themes emerging from the literature on leadership in Ireland, which resonate with points raised in our exposition of society, the economy, and politics, and with the findings of the quantitative study of Irish societal culture. These include the growing importance of performance; the espousal of lower Power Distance; the existence of consensus-based models of decision making, which correlate with a strongly collectivistic society; the importance of lower Uncertainty Avoidance; and recognition of the traditionally patriarchal nature of society and its implicit assumptions about gender roles.

The existence of begrudgery is a further theme, which surfaces in the literature and may be embedded in higher levels of collectivism and attitudes to Power Distance. We can also observe that the study of leadership in Ireland mirrors trends in research worldwide with its shift from a focus on the characteristics of leaders to a concentration on leading the top team.

In the following sections, we turn attention to the qualitative components of the GLOBE study in Ireland, which include a review of unobtrusive indicators of leadership, focus groups, and qualitative interviews. The findings are contemplated alongside the trends emerging from the literature on leadership and the quantitative study of societal culture.

The Qualitative Study of Leadership in Ireland

Unobtrusive Indicators of Culture and Leadership. Stamps, statues, and banknotes possess symbolic significance. They “recall, evoke the sentiments of, or otherwise render recognizable the cultural mappings of basic social and ecological relationships in human society” (Garrison & Arensberg, 1976; cited in Kane, 1986, p. 549); they bear witness to the historical and social evolution of Ireland and to its continuing transition and shaping of a new identity.

The emergence of the Irish State and its path from a small, inward-looking economy to a fully integrated member of the EU is charted by its stamp design (cf. Miller, 1986). In particular, stamp design has chronicled in recent decades the changing face of nationalism and the burgeoning self-confidence of the Irish nation. The semiotic value of stamps as an assertion of nationhood cannot be disputed. The first stamps to emerge post-1922 thus reinforced, through their use of motifs and symbols traditionally associated with Irish heritage, the religious and scholarly self-image possessed by Ireland (Scott, 1995, pp. 87–88). Up until the Republic of Ireland Act in 1948, which Scott sees as a watershed in Irish stamp design, stamps continued to mirror those themes that were ideologically close to the young state, most notably religion and nationalism. The Irish language also featured prominently, although after 1949 there is a move toward bilingual stamps, connoting the growing self-confidence and international outlook of the Irish nation. This also found expression in a broadening of the motifs depicted by Irish stamps: Literary and artistic motifs together with a greater emphasis on themes that attest to Ireland's technological and scientific accomplishments are in evidence.

Banknotes, like stamps, have tended overwhelmingly to depict male figures. Although Ireland has produced a significant number of prominent women in both the literary and political spheres, the representation of women as contributors to the country's development is limited to their participation within the caring professions, in religious life, and as homemakers, reasserting the centrality of the family together with its Catholic ethos within Irish society (cf. the subsections Gender Egalitarianism, In-Group Collectivism). In spite of the erosion of the position of the Roman Catholic Church, the achievements of founders of religious orders continued to be commemorated on banknotes right up to the introduction of the euro in 2002.

Ireland's history is also reflected by its public art. Many of the classical monuments, erected by dukes and viceroys to the honor of kings or military prominents of the British Empire, were removed after independence or blown up. At the time of their erection, the arbiters of “the politics of public space” were the landowning and politically influential Protestant class, although it is important not to confound “Protestant” with “British.” By the mid-19th century, there was general support among Catholics and Protestants for the need to forge an Irish identity through monuments, even if the conception of this identity was not always shared. The monuments erected during this period thus paid tribute to those who had furthered either constitutionally or at arms the cause of Irish sovereignty. In the 20th century, the heroes of 1916 provided the symbolism with which to shape the identity of the newly independent state. Independence monuments frequently adopted religious imagery, which also underpinned the ideal of the nationalist Catholic state. Nowadays, artists and literary figures are immortalized in stone, but they exist alongside sculptures, which address issues that have had an impact on everyday people in both the present and past, such as the Great Famine.

Smyth (1985) charts an important evolution within Irish commemorative art in the 20th century away from a narrow ethnic view of public memory to searches for Irish identity across different traditions in politics, institutions, art, and thought (cited in Hill, 1998, p. 201). Other forces have been at work in determining the changing orientation of public sculpture. The process of its selection has become more democratic. There are new patrons amongst the business community who wish to emphasize their links with art and thereby to provide the “philistine” pursuits of commerce with a more acceptable face and to reinforce their own status within the community. Yet, there is a continued lack of public recognition of achievements and achievers in the business world, recalling our comments with respect to Logue's (2000) omission of a business leader in his recent publication on Irish identity (cf. the subsection Research on Leadership in Ireland). We have indicated that this might be attributable to the country's relatively recent commercial success or to our “peasant culture” (I. Kenny, 1991, p. 4).

In summary, stamps, banknotes, and public monuments point to an ideal of leadership that is clearly centered on the notion of the romantic or patriot hero and liberator, possessing vision and willingness to risk his or her life for the freedom of the country. The evolution of public commemoration again encapsulates the crossroads at which the country now finds itself: Growing self-confidence coexists with a sense of nostalgia and looking to the past rather than the present for inspirational leader figures. The absence of prominent business leaders from public memory is noteworthy. In the next subsection, we consider the view of leadership emerging from the focus groups and qualitative interviews.

The Focus Groups and Qualitative Interviews. Two focus groups were conducted during 1995. The participants were drawn from a cross-section of industrial sectors and did not know each other. In total, 13 middle managers, both male and female, participated. They were asked to define management and leadership, to identify the behavioral characteristics of an average manager, an above-average manager, and an outstanding leader, and to indicate whether successful Irish managers would have to alter their behavior to be successful abroad. Participants were also asked to reflect on incidents involving a strong leader and a strong manager who was not a strong leader. The focus groups were both audio- and videotaped for the purposes of transcription. The researchers also conducted two semistructured qualitative interviews with middle managers, which sought to elicit views of outstanding leaders. These interviews were also audiotaped and transcribed and are used to supplement observations recorded from the focus groups.

Leadership was perceived to be a top-level or very senior management characteristic. A characteristic of the outstanding leader is an ability to see the big picture—the so-called “helicopter view”—and to take a global approach, recalling the profile described by I. Kenny (1987; cf. the subsection Research on Leadership in Ireland). Thus, when the participants were asked whether they could identify leaders at different societal or organizational levels, identification was almost solely confined to the highest echelons of society and organizations. The outstanding leader fulfills a strategic function as opposed to the competent manager, who is effective on the operational level and doesn't take too many risks. Outstanding leaders are seen to be visionary, charismatic, inspirational, and tenacious, and to exhibit a willingness to take risks. They possess intelligence and drive, and are outstanding motivators. Leaders adapt to situations and choose to get around the red tape that may stand in the way of achieving a goal. Such characteristics are compatible with lower levels of Uncertainty Avoidance (cf. the subsection Uncertainty Avoidance). By contrast, an inability to delegate, being overly task centered, getting bogged down by issues of procedure and administration, aggressive, dominant, and face-saving behavior together with steam-rolling ideas and opinions are the hallmarks of ineffective leadership, but are attributes sometimes used to describe a normally effective manager. Verbs used to describe leaders include to inspire, to guide, to stimulate, to direct, and to communicate. There was general agreement that leadership involved influencing people to do something.

Leaders have an ability to command respect and to take tough decisions. Though it was recognized that the leader must on occasions be assertive, consensus was seen as the preferred decision-making style for Irish leaders. The opinions expressed in the qualitative interviews correlate with those documented in the focus groups and reflect the preference for a consensus-based leadership style. Moreover, they provide support for trends emerging from the quantitative study of societal culture, for example, low Assertiveness and high levels of Institutional Collectivism. In the rejection of authoritarian leadership, we see the preference for lower Power Distance relationships in Ireland.

Some of the participants noted that good leaders do not have to be liked, but, critically, they must enthuse people to follow. Charisma was seen as a critical trait. Recognition of the importance of followers in the achievement of goals or strategy was a recurrent theme, which resonates with the old adage that Irish people cannot be led, but must be inspired. Indeed, as noted in our discussion of Power Distance, Irish people tend to be low on obedience to authority and, consequently, they do not always make good followers. A view reiterated in the focus groups was that outstanding leaders are often those who remain in the background, rather than flaunting their authority.

In Ireland, powerful people are frequently seen as leaders, yet the feeling in the focus groups was that it is important to distinguish between having power and being a leader; the difference resides in the use to which power is put. Such a view is also expressed by Gardner (1996, p. 16). There is a strong awareness of the negative side of leadership. Indeed, the participants reject the abuse of authority, conferred by what might be designated as position power, although it was also suggested that leaders need to manipulate people and that leadership sometimes consists of negative control with leaders concealing their real objectives. In the words of one participant: “I think being an outstanding leader is not seeming to manipulate, but [he] is manipulating all over the place. And he's not seen to control, [yet] he is controlling. He's using all sorts of techniques [and] methods to get his own way.”

The role of the leader in creating versus implementing an existing vision was discussed in the focus groups. A leader can take an idea and create a vision around it, much like Gardner's “innovative leader” (Gardner, 1996, p. 10): Examples given by the participants include the former prime ministers, de Valera and Haughey. Yet, this, in turn, raises the question as to whether implementing the vision is a function of management or leadership. In general, it was felt by participants that leadership is more about getting people to follow or to buy into the vision than actually creating it.

A further theme concerns the notion that leadership is context framed, a view that we have already documented with reference to Farrell (1971), I. Kenny (1987), and Leavy and Wilson (1994) (cf. the subsection Research on Leadership in Ireland). The participants in both the focus groups and the qualitative interviews were unable to divorce leadership from its context, irrespective of whether the context is generated by a political party or an organization. Leaders stand out from the crowd in their own microculture and their status is achieved both by an ability to inspire and by knowledge of the industry. The desirability of competence in a particular leadership context ties in with the desire for the leader to deliver and perform.

It was considered difficult to achieve consensus on who is or is not an outstanding leader in Ireland. Similarly, the participants had reservations about conferring prominent Irish business figures with leadership status, with the exception of Tony O'Reilly. There was great dissent as to whether the outstanding business people in both the Irish and international business sphere could be considered as outstanding leaders. The conclusion was that they were outstanding business people but not outstanding leaders. We have noted the absence of business people in public memory in our discussion of unobtrusive indicators and suggested that our relatively late emergence as an industrialized nation implies less experience of prominent business figures. Unwillingness to laud success in business may be embedded in Irish culture in the guise of begrudgery (Guiomard, 1995; I. Kenny, 2001; cf. also the subsections Institutional Collectivism, Research on Leadership in Ireland). It resurfaces in both the focus groups and qualitative interviews and is perhaps not unrelated to the lack of confidence in Irish business leaders at home and the general belief that they perform well abroad. Abroad they are perceived to be adaptable, versatile, and unbureaucratic.

Many of the outstanding leaders identified by the focus group participants and the interviewees are not Irish: They include Richard Branson, Margaret Thatcher, Lee Iacocca, and John F. Kennedy, the latter albeit with Irish roots. Irish nationals mentioned include a number of political figures, such as Lemass, de Valera, Haughey, and Mary Robinson—the sole female figure of Irish nationality considered to personify outstanding leadership. Noteworthy is the naming of ex-Prime Minister Haughey in the light of the scandals that have shadowed his career. During his period of office, shadiness in political and personal dealings were never far away, although he continued to enjoy a great deal of support among the grass-roots members of his party and the broader electorate. Haughey is recognized as having possessed vision and charisma. Although recently, the many tribunals of inquiry (cf. the subsection Legal and Political Framework) have assumed an almost cathartic, countercultural function; some sneaking regard for the duplicity and rule bending successfully practiced by Haughey would appear to linger.

Summary. On the basis of the qualitative study of leadership, several preliminary observations can be presented with respect to leadership characteristics together with a number of apparent paradoxes. Interestingly, the participants in the focus groups and qualitative interviews were able to identify the characteristics of leaders, but had difficulty in naming leader figures other than those from the political sphere. The memory of past political figures is very much alive and they are generally credited with the shaping of modern Ireland. Vision and charisma are amongst the central tenets of outstanding leadership and the image of the romantic or patriot hero continues to hold a dominant place in collective memory and in perceptions of leadership qualities.

Consensus-based leadership is seen as the preferred decision-making style, although the frequent naming of Lemass, classified as a Chief by Farrell (1971) by virtue of his more authoritarian leadership style, underpins the importance of context. This style of leadership may be more appropriate in times of economic crisis such as existed during Lemass's period of office.

The view that leaders within the business community are not outstanding leaders within society is widespread and they also remain absent among the unobtrusive indicators of culture and leadership. Such a perception again underpins the contextual focus of leadership, which might also explain why leaders often remain in the background, that is, within their own context, and why business leaders are not widely recognized beyond their context. Ireland's economic turnaround has evidently been steered by leaders in the business community and their absence from the list of named figures would support the notion that they are acting in the background. Alongside this, we have noted higher levels of identification with Irish business leaders who have gone abroad. We might speculate that this is, in part, a consequence of many decades of emigration, which have seen individuals with low Uncertainty Avoidance go abroad, thereby leaving behind those with higher Uncertainty Avoidance. Those who have gone abroad thus fulfill one of the expectations attributed to outstanding leaders, namely risk taking.

There is broad consistency between the findings emerging from the narrow literature base on leadership in Ireland and the issues raised by the participants in the focus groups, qualitative interviews, and the review of unobtrusive indicators. Moreover, the profile of Irish society generated from the quantitative study supports the view of leadership that is articulated in the qualitative research, specifically a preference for consensus-based and participative leadership, a willingness to take risks, together with a nonauthoritarian and nonassertive style. These preferences correspond with strong endorsement of Institutional Collectivism, low Uncertainty Avoidance and Power Distance, and moderate Assertiveness. Such a profile is now juxtaposed with results of the quantitative study of leadership in Ireland.

The Quantitative Study of Leadership in Ireland

Findings. Irish middle managers rated the 112 leadership items on a sclae between 1 (greatly inhibits a person from being an outstanding leader) and 7 (greatly contributes to a person being an outstanding leader). Using exploratory factor analysis (see House et al., 2004) these items were grouped intially into 21 first-order leadership dimensions which, in turn, were consolidated into 6 second-order global leadership dimensions, namely autonomous, charismatic, humane, self-protective, participative and team-oriented leadership. Table 11.3 shows the 6 global second-order culturally endorsed leadership theory dimensions together with the 21 first-order leadership dimensions. Together they constitute the attributes and behaviors culturally perceived to contribute to or inhibit outstanding leadership.

When we consider the scores for each of the 21 first-order leadership dimensions, the dimensions rated as most important for Irish middle managers and, therefore, deemed by the respondents to contribute significantly to outstanding leadership include performance orientation (M=6.38), visionary (M=6.33), inspirational (M=6.33), integrity (M=6.19), collaborative team oriented (M=6.19), and decisive (M=6.14). Also of importance are: administratively competent (M=5.60), team integrator (M=5.46), diplomacy (M=5.44), modesty (M=5.11), self-sacrificial (i.e., foregoing self-interest in the interest of the goal or vision) (M=5.11) and humane (M=5.01). Based on the global culturally endorsed leadership theory dimensions these findings suggest that Irish middle managers espouse a charismatic/value based leadership style. They also endorse a team-oriented style coupled with a participative and humane approach. By contrast, dimensions which are perceived to act as significant inhibitors of successful leadership include malevolent (egoistic, cynical, dishonest, vindictive), conflict inducer, self-centered, non-participative face-saving and autocratic behavior. A self-protective or narcissistic leadership style is not acceptable to Irish middle managers.

Discussion. The profile to emerge from the Irish qualitative and quantitative data indicates that charismatic value-based leadership is endorsed. Such characteristics—visionary, inspirational, performance orientation—have already been highlighted in the qualitative research and the review of unobtrusive indicators. They also resonate strongly with the profile emerging from the quantitative study of societal culture and with the findings of previous research, including “the achievement motive” (Barron & Egan, 1966, p. 20) and qualities such as integrity, decisiveness, performance, vision, and team integrator (Excellence Ireland, 2001; I. Kenny, 1987).

Such preferences must be considered against the backdrop of societal change in Ireland. It is not difficult to understand why performance-oriented leadership is valued if one considers the dynamic imposed by social and economic progress. Emphasis on decisiveness and integrity may reflect expectations of greater clarity of vision coupled with the shift away from the clientelist approach toward transparency within Irish society. Indeed, trust is perceived to be a critical attribute of all leadership relationships: it is asserted by the focus group participants and in the leadership literature (cf. the subsection Research on Leadership in Ireland). Furthermore, the belief that decisiveness substantially enhances leadership effectiveness marries well with the view expressed in the qualitative research that a leader is someone who “sees things through.” The recognition that administrative competence enhances leadership can be linked with the broader thrust toward performance orientation. The desirability of inspirational leadership underpins the notion that Irish people need to be inspired rather than led by a directive or authoritarian leader, a point raised in the focus groups and in our discussion of power relationships in Irish society. So too, willingness on the part of leaders to sacrifice themselves for the common good may connote some form of residual adherence to the image of the romantic hero, which features so prominently in collective memory.

The importance attributed to the characteristic “collaborative team oriented” attests to the centrality of getting people to buy into the vision and the ability to ensure commitment to the vision. This characteristic was identified by Farrell (1971) and echoed in the research findings of Kakabadse et al. (1995) and Flood et al. (2001), and in the qualitative research regarding the leader–follower relationship.

Unlike Barron and Egan (1966), who found that “feminine nurturance” challenged their expectation of leadership, various explanations can be offered that potentially account for the value attributed to a more humane style of leadership. Within the societal culture data, Ireland enjoys one of the highest rankings on the “As Is” scale for humane orientation and there is belief that Irish society should be even more humane. Contributing to this profile is the fact that modesty and diplomacy are seen as positive dimensions of leadership. It has already been documented in the findings of the quantitative study of societal culture that Ireland is a relatively nonassertive society with a preference for indirectness in interpersonal communication. In the focus groups, the participants observed that leaders do not flaunt their authority. The impression that they should adopt a consultative style, not induce conflict, and involve team members in decision making, is evidenced in both the quantitative and qualitative findings.

Face-saving behavior, with its implications of evasiveness and ambiguity, is negatively evaluated. This possibly signals a desire to move away from a feature of Irish society characterized by Lee (1982) as the “peasant residue in the Irish psyche” which “confuses the distinction between necessary confidentiality and furtive concealment,” thereby underpinning “suspicions grounded in the face to face nature” of society in Ireland (cited in Leavy, 1993, p. 145). The tendency to conceal may also be a legacy of Ireland's colonial past. The dissimulation of truth, revealed in the previously mentioned investigative tribunals, has undermined the credibility of some recent Irish political and business leaders.

Narcissistic, self-centered leaders have never been endorsed within Irish society, which may also be a consequence of several centuries of occupation by a colonial power. Despite the fact that autocratic leadership is not deemed desirable, Ireland has had autocratic leaders who were “tenants of history and time” (Leavy & Wilson, 1994). The focus groups concurred that such a style exists, especially in times of crisis, even if it is not desirable. Not surprisingly malevolence is seen as a significant inhibitor of leadership.

Another characteristic that has a slight inhibiting function is the focus on procedure. Again, this perception corresponds with a view expressed in the focus groups and qualitative interviews that outstanding leaders can cut through red tape in order to achieve their goals: Emphasis on procedure was identified as characterizing managers, not leaders. The fact that the questionnaire respondents eschew bureaucratic procedures is not surprising if one considers the tendency, which has been inherent within Irish society, to circumvent rules and regulations (cf. the subsection Legal and Political Framework).

In conclusion, the profile of leadership issuing from the quantitative study broadly echoes many of the trends that we have identified within the qualitative components of the research, the quantitative study of Irish societal culture, and the leadership literature.

The preceding sections complete the review of societal culture and of middle managers’ implicit perceptions of leadership. The following section presents an industry-level analysis of the data, reporting the findings of the quantitative study of organizational culture and leadership in the food-processing and financial services sectors. To recap, data were collected from middle managers in 10 indigenous food-processing and 8 indigenous financial services companies. Central to our reflections is a consideration of the interrelationship between societal culture and organizational culture and their impact on perceptions of leadership in the two sectors.

5.  ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE IN THE TWO SECTORS

Findings

Organizational culture was measured on the same nine dimensions as those employed in the societal culture survey, with the “As Is” scores reflecting organizational practices and the “Should Be” scores espoused values. The GLOBE study posits that organizational culture and practices will affect how leaders in these organizations are expected to behave. Specifically, it is hypothesized that organizational culture will have a stronger impact on leadership perceptions than societal culture as the organizational culture is more proximate. Table 11.4 presents the findings for the two industries with respect to the nine GLOBE dimensions.

With the exception of Uncertainty Avoidance, the direction of desired change from “As Is” to “Should Be” across the remaining eight dimensions is similar in the two sectors. For Performance Orientation, Future Orientation, Humane Orientation, Gender Egalitarianism, Institutional Collectivism, and In-Group Collectivism, the trend is toward the espousal of higher values. With respect to Assertiveness, respondents in the food sector espouse slightly lower levels (“As Is” M = 3.47; “Should Be” M = 3.27) and those in the financial services sector seem content with existing levels (“As Is” M = 3.83; “Should Be” M = 3.77).

Both the food-processing and financial services sectors face challenging futures, requiring greater Performance Orientation (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.53, “Should Be” M = 6.36; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.32, “Should Be” M = 6.14) and Future Orientation (Food Processing “As Is” M = 5.07, “Should Be” M = 5.75; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.67, “Should Be” M = 5.62). Margins are low in the food commodity sector, giving rise to continuing pressures to be more efficient and cost-effective; hence the trend toward implementing change management strategies such as world-class manufacturing. In the financial services sector, middle managers recognize the need to become more performance oriented in order to deliver anticipated shareholder value, to meet financial targets, and to prevent takeovers by larger predator institutions. The thrust toward greater Future Orientation signals recognition of the necessity to plan ahead. For the food-processing industry, the scores may reflect awareness of the challenge of managing the shift away from primary processing toward producing value-added consumer foods and the need for investment in product development and innovation.

Middle managers in the two sectors also espouse higher organizational loyalty, that is, In-Group Collectivism (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.67, “Should Be” M = 6.13; Financial

Services “As Is” M = 4.44, “Should Be” M = 5.82). This is particularly so in the food-processing sector, mirroring the fact that the food sector organizations are already very collectively focused due to their location in tightly knit rural communities. In both sectors, there is a clear desire for greater cohesiveness and a more collective, shared vision. The espousal of higher levels of Institutional Collectivism (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.50, “Should Be” M = 4.73; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.20, “Should Be” M = 4.89) support this trend.

Both industries embrace higher Humane Orientation (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.26, “Should Be” M = 4.59; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.26, “Should Be” M = 4.71). One explanation for such a view within the financial services sector is that many of these organizations are large mature bureaucracies, where regardless of excellent procedures and practices, there can be a lack of human kindness. According to the results of the quantitative studies of societal culture and of leadership in Ireland, humane qualities are valued highly within Irish society.

Respondents in both sectors recognize the importance of improving Gender Egalitarianism (Food Processing “As Is” M = 2.72, “Should Be” M = 5.11; Financial Services “As Is” M = 3.11, “Should Be” M = 4.93). However, this is felt more strongly in the food sector companies in which fewer women are employed, and those who are have traditionally operated in sex-segregated roles. Gender imbalance is apparent at senior levels in financial institutions and most of the organizations surveyed are implementing “valuing diversity” and “employment equality” strategies in order to make the espoused value a reality.

Middle managers in both sectors want Power Distance to be reduced (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.00, “Should Be” M = 3.42; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.53, “Should Be” M = 3.40), with the financial services sector endorsing this reduction more significantly. As machine bureaucracies, financial institutions have a stronger sense of hierarchy and formality than food sector processing plants. Dismantling hierarchies and focusing staff around the concept of customer service will necessitate a more collaborative approach to work in financial services.

On Uncertainty Avoidance, the organizational cultures of the two industries diverge (Food Processing “As Is” M = 4.09, “Should Be” M = 4.33; Financial Services “As Is” M = 4.44, “Should Be” M = 4.17). Respondents in the food sector organizations wish to become slightly better at managing uncertainty, which reflects the increasingly regulated environment in which these companies operate. Certification, validation, and evaluation are required to meet the demands of accountability and transparency to multiple stakeholders. Financial services companies, on the other hand, wish to become less uncertainty avoiding. As an industry dominated by rules and procedures, these organizations wish to become more innovative and to encourage staff to become more responsible and self-reliant in order to deliver a speedy and efficient customer service.

In summary, the organizational culture data from both sectors broadly mirror each other. The mean scores on each of the dimensions reflect recognition of the reality of the macroenvironment in which the industries are operating and of future challenges. Significantly, when juxtaposed with the findings for the societal cultural data, we can see clear parallels in the direction of espoused change. In the organizational culture data we find, not surprisingly, a stronger focus on “Should Be” for Future and Performance Orientation, whereas for Power Distance and Humane Orientation, the societal cultural scores are significantly higher on “As Is” and “Should Be,” respectively. In conclusion, the findings demonstrate the strong interrelationship between societal and organizational culture. In the next section, we examine perceptions of effective leadership within the two industries.

Leadership in the Two Sectors

The results of the industry-level analysis of perceptions of leadership are presented in Table 11.5.

The charismatic/value-based cluster of attributes, including inspirational, visionary, performance orientation, decisive, self-sacrificial, and integrity, are positively endorsed in both sectors. The leadership dimension receiving the highest mean score in the food sector is performance orientation (M = 6.63), reflecting the pressure to perform and deliver shareholder value. Complementing performance, which is a feature of all cost-competitive strategies, are the leadership attributes “inspirational” and “visionary.” These attributes are self-explanatory if one takes account of the task facing the leaders of Irish food sector companies to effect radical change in an industry that is critical to the Irish economy and psyche. The profile of charismatic leadership also distinguishes the financial services industry, where “inspirational” ranks highest (M = 6. 32). Personal integrity (M = 6.14) is judged to be very important and represents a value that has always been esteemed in financial service leaders. Indeed, poor performance and lack of personal integrity have resulted in the recent removal of leaders from leadership positions in this sector.

Team orientation is highly valued in both industries and provides evidence of the necessity for leaders in Irish business organizations to have the ability not just to create the vision but to inspire their followers to accept their vision. Given the pluralist allegiances within these industries in terms of stakeholders and the strong support for a collective orientation, the task facing leaders is to ensure that the organization is fully committed to and inspired by their vision. Skills in team leadership will be imperative for food sector leaders, who will have to secure acceptance of their future vision of a drastically changing industry in the face of European expansion and globalization, as well as motivating and empowering highly unionized, middle-aged, and inward-looking staff. Equally important in both industries are skills of diplomacy (Food M = 5.49; Financial Services M = 5.33) in orchestrating the shift from managing internal stakeholders to delivering external shareholder value. Communication can be very political and clientelist in business circles and this might help to explain the high value placed on diplomacy as a desirable attribute for leaders in the two sectors. Given the increasing requirements for transparency, accountability, and compliance with national and international regulations in the food and financial services sectors, senior managers will need to adopt a team-oriented, participative approach. Administrative competence is rated particularly highly, especially in the food sector (M= 5.93), where there is perhaps a perceived need for such expertise to guide the industry successfully through a period of turbulent change.

Finally, in both sectors leaders are expected to demonstrate a humane orientation. Given the small size of Irish food sector companies and their location in small rural communities, this emphasis is understandable. Modesty was ranked as an important characteristic of Irish business leaders and may coincide with the fact that food and financial services’ chief executives have not been public figures in the past. They have been acknowledged within their context but not in the wider society, although this situation is changing. It is worth recalling the reservations expressed in the focus groups about accepting prominent business figures as leaders: “They're outstanding in the area which is important for them to operate in—not in the huge arena but in the micro-culture environment of their organization or industry.” This statement rings true in the food industry, where leaders are household names, especially in their regions and local community, and it brings us closer to an understanding of the contextual basis of leadership.

A self-protective, narcissistic, nonparticipative style of leadership is not acceptable in either industry. Factors perceived to impede effective leadership in the two sectors include malevolent, self-centered, nonparticipative, autocratic, and face-saving behavior. We might recall the suspicion voiced by the focus group participants regarding the misuse of power to influence followers: This view is wholly endorsed in both industries, with malevolence ranked as the factor most likely to impede leadership.

In summary, middle managers in both food-processing and financial services organizations in Ireland expect their corporate leaders to practice charismatic, value-based leadership. This expectation is underpinned by an assumption that leadership will be focused on team integration using a participative style and humane orientation. Both sectors agree that being malevolent, self-centered, nonparticipative, face saving, and autocratic are not the characteristics of the leaders they wish to follow in their respective industries. The emergent profile of leadership in the two sectors has strong parallels with that documented in previous research and also elaborated in the focus groups and qualitative interviews. The findings point to a high degree of congruence regarding the espoused profile of leadership between the two industries. Taking into consideration the finding that there is a strong interrelationship between societal and organizational culture, we might conclude that societal culture is potentially more influential in shaping perceptions of effective leadership than organizational culture.

6.  CONCLUSION

The Irish GLOBE study set out to explore, describe, and explain leadership in the Republic of Ireland within its cultural and organizational context and to consider the interrelationship between societal and organizational culture as they have an impact on leadership. The research embraced both quantitative and qualitative approaches in addressing these questions.

In Ireland, the quantitative and qualitative studies of leadership point unambiguously to the espousal of a charismatic value-based leadership style. This style of leadership is underpinned by a constellation of leadership attributes, which are strongly influenced by the dimensions of Irish societal culture. However, the imprint of history still casts a shadow over perceptions of leadership.

There is a clear view among Irish middle managers about the substance of leadership. This clarity is evidenced in the findings of the quantitative study, the focus groups, and qualitative interviews and, additionally, in the findings of previous research. Irish leaders are performance orientated, have vision, possess a so-called “helicopter view,” and are focused on the future. They are expected not just to inspire their followers, but to get them “to buy into their vision.” They achieve this by participative, consensual decision making, integrity, trust, and loyalty: in short, by playing the role of chairman as described by Farrell (1971). There is a strong expectation that leaders will behave in a humane, modest way, will not flaunt their authority, and will be self-sacrificing in the interest of their organization. By contrast, an authoritarian leadership style, based on narcissism and self-centered, face-saving behavior, is perceived to be an inappropriate style.

This profile resonates strongly with findings of the quantitative study of societal culture. Ireland emerges as a performance- and future-oriented society, which is not surprising for a country that has recently been ranked for 3 years in succession as the world's most globalized economy (A. T. Kearney, 2004). It manifests strong Collectivism, which, together with moderate Power Distance, explains the preference for participative, consensual decision making. The “Should Be” scores on the dimensions Institutional Collectivism, In-Group Collectivism, and Power Distance indicate that this style of leadership will continue to be endorsed. Furthermore, Irish society is deemed to be very humanitarian and wishes to remain so, suggesting that the expectation for Irish leaders to behave in a kind, humane way will also persist. Some tension between this value and the demands for performance, driven by the global imperative, may ensue.

In contrast, there is little or no consensus on who might be designated as having leader status in contemporary Irish society. The people most named were political or historical, demonstrating that the image of the romantic patriot hero continues to infuse perceptions of leadership qualities. Collective memory is also more firmly focused on an ideal of leadership centered on the patriot-hero and liberator, as commemorated inter alia by stamps and monuments, who is symbolic of Ireland's struggle for and transition to independence. Such an ideal would appear to remain valid within Irish society in the 1990s. Moreover, it attributes little value to female figures, who notwithstanding their prominent role in the family, in caring, and in the community, seem not to be lauded as leaders, the exception being ex-president Mary Robinson. This scenario may change if we consider the “Should Be” scores for Gender Egalitarianism coupled with the increased participation of women in the labor force.

Business leaders are not accepted as leaders except in their business context and they have not yet earned a place in public memory. Their absence is noteworthy in a society in which business leadership has clearly been evidenced. The most obvious examples include the emergence of the “Celtic Tiger” and the major social and economic changes that Ireland has undergone in the past quarter of a century. Why are business leaders not recognized or, indeed, visible other than in the context of their organizations? One possible explanation is the country's late industrialization, which might explain the preoccupation with historical and political figures and the reluctance to elevate prominent business figures to the status of societal leaders. Alternatively, based on the GLOBE “As Is” findings, Irish society's strong collectivist orientation, moderate Power Distance relationships, and nonassertiveness might militate against leaders standing out from their context. This particular nexus of societal factors might lead us to conclude that in a small collectivist society the leader remains in the background; they are known in context to the selected team/in-group and influence performance and outcomes through networking and clientelist relations, often eschewing bureaucracy and regulation behind closed doors. This latter insight has been glimpsed through the workings of the many tribunals currently investigating business and political life in Ireland.

There is also a strong sense emerging from the quantitative and qualitative data that although leadership is about performance and vision, it will occur in Ireland only if the followers choose to follow the leader, who will be one of the team, who will not be entitled as the leader to flaunt authority, who will encourage and influence the team members, who will not induce conflict, and who will know her or his place. Knowing one's place again raises the issue of context, but also recalls the theme of begrudgery, which features strongly both in the literature on leadership and in the qualitative research. Ruth's (1988) discussion of the postcolonial psyche notes that the process of internalized oppression means that we have “unrealistically high expectations of leaders” (p. 436).

What then might the practical implications of our findings be for foreign nationals who lead organizations in Ireland? There are dangers associated with the interpretation of the findings of large-scale cross-cultural studies. The practitioner may assume that where an attribute is universally endorsed, it is enacted in an identical manner the world over. It is critical for managers who operate across borders to be aware that even where cultures are clustered, for example, in the case of Ireland, the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and White South Africa (Anglo cluster), the enactment and acceptability of certain behaviors differs among the countries within that cluster. There are, however, a number of features that non-Irish managers operating in Ireland will need to consider if they are to lead organizations and motivate their staff to buy into their vision. In Ireland, the findings of the GLOBE research suggest that success and performance rely on people and that interpersonal relationship building and maintenance are critical components in ensuring that the task is fulfilled. This approach can result in some blurring of the task and relational levels, which means that criticism can be taken personally, that conflict and confrontation are avoided, and therefore that interpersonal exchanges need to be appropriately modified. Moderate levels of assertiveness help to explain this behavior. The importance of relationships and social competence is underpinned by strong collectivism, which creates higher expectations of team integration and participation in decision making among followers. Moderate levels of uncertainty avoidance mean operating with fewer rules and regulations or accepting the tendency to find a way around these rules and regulations and to keep all options open. The expectation that rules will be followed unquestioningly may be a misplaced assumption on the part of the non-national manager.

Though understanding cultural dimensions and their impact on organizational leadership can guide expatriate or international managers toward identifying areas where they must adjust their behavior, ultimately the degree of adjustment will depend on their interpretation of the range of prevailing organizational, situational, and personal contingencies. In other words, any kind of cultural or leadership dimensions that are used in cross-cultural training or orientation should not create the assumption of within-culture homogeneity. Integrating the theory with practitioner experience is a critical consideration (cf. Keating & Martin, 2004). The Irish GLOBE findings also have implications for national managers working in organizations that have become increasingly multicultural over the past 10 years.

The advantages of combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies are clearly demonstrated by the GLOBE study (cf. Martin et al., 1999). Qualitative methods can help to elicit the many permutations of the cultural context in which quantitative findings are embedded; they can enrich, challenge, or confirm quantitative data and in this way they can reveal new relationships. Though they may appear “messy, incomplete, unvalidated, and not readily amenable to the neat control that is taken for granted with abstract concepts and laboratory data” (Gulliver 1979, pp. 63–64), the focus groups, qualitative interviews, and review of unobtrusive indicators of culture in the current research provide a valuable explanatory framework and help us to explicate some of the complexities of the context in which the findings of the quantitative surveys of societal culture and leadership are presented.

One methodological question raised by the GLOBE study concerns the issue of sampling. Is it possible to select a sample from a particular group, such as middle managers, that might be considered to represent the values held more broadly by the members of that society? This question has long preoccupied researchers and there is no clear answer (Schwartz, 1992, 1994). Large-scale cross-cultural studies tend to rely on “convenience sampling” (Kim, Triandis, Kagitcibasi, Choi, & Yoon, 1994, p. 9) for comparative purposes; clearly, in the case of GLOBE it would be both desirable and interesting to replicate parts of the study using other samples. The authors of this chapter and the Austrian chapter have already taken steps in this regard (Keating, Martin, & Szabo, 2001). Nevertheless, at the societal level, unobtrusive indicators confirm the GLOBE middle manager reports with respect to all core GLOBE dimensions.

In the course of this chapter, we have made ongoing reference to the significant reshaping of Irish society over the last quarter century, not least the leap from a pre- to a postindustrial society. Yet, it would appear that we have not made the transition from lauding “men of destiny” toward recognizing “men of achievement.” Might it be the case that members of Irish society look to the past for their role models as their expectations are too aspirational to fit the “postrevolutionary” reality? Answers to this and other similar questions may lie in the search for self-identity in the new century; there is a need to reconcile the legacy of a colonial mind-set with the far-reaching social and economic changes within Irish society. Looking toward external role models or the “ideal” figures of the past (Kane, 1986) are manifestations of this search. The GLOBE study in Ireland has captured some of the dilemmas within Irish society and attitudes toward leadership in the closing decade of the millennium. The new millennium will confront business leaders with new strategic challenges. The process of shaping self-identity is continuous and responds to the changing sociocultural context; it remains to be seen for how long our perceptions of leadership bear the “imprint of bygone circumstances” (Lee, 1994, p. 248).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge support received from the Trinity College Dublin Arts and Social Sciences Benefactions Fund.

REFERENCES

Barron, F., & Egan, D. (1966). Leaders and innovators in Irish management: A psychological study. Dublin: Irish Management Institute.

Excellence Ireland. (2001). Best practice. Dublin, Ireland.

Bourke, A. (1999). The burning of Bridget Cleary. Dublin, Ireland: Pimlico.

Breen, R., Hannan, D. F., Rottman, D. B., & Whelan, C. (1990). Understanding contemporary Ireland: State, class and development in the Republic of Ireland. Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Brodbeck, F. C., Frese, M., Akerblom, S., Bakacsi, G., Bendova, H., et al. (2000). Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73,1–29.

Browne, M. (2005). Family matters ten years on. Dublin, Ireland: Comhairle.

Calori, R. (1994). The diversity of management systems. In R. Calori & P. de Woot (Eds.), A European management model: Beyond diversity (pp. 11–30). Hemel Hempstead, England: Prentice Hall.

Central Statistics Office. (2004). Population and labour force projections 2006–2036. Dublin, Ireland: Stationery Office.

Coakley, J., & Gallagher, M. (1993). Politics in the Republic of Ireland. Dublin, Ireland: Folens.

Collins, M., & Kavanagh, K. (1998). For richer, for poorer: The changing distribution of household income in Ireland, 1973–1994. In S. Healy & B. Reynolds (Eds.), Social policy in Ireland: Principles, practices and problems (pp. 163–192). Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Coulter, C. (1993). The hidden tradition: Feminism, women and nationalism in Ireland. Cork, Ireland: Cork University Press.

Deane, S. (1984). Remembering the Irish future. The Crane Bag, 8(1), 81–92.

Den Hartog, D., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., et al. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219–256.

Doohan, J. (1999 September/October). Working longer, working better? World of Work, 31. Retrieved July 6, 2006, from http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/inf/magazine/31/work.htm

Duncan, W. (1994). Law and the Irish psyche: the conflict between aspiration and experience. Irish Journal of Psychology, 15(2–3), 448–455.

European Employment Observatory. (2003). Increasing the participation of women in the labour market: The situation in the EU15, acceding, candidate countries and Norway. Retrieved August 30, 2005, from http://www.eu-employment-observatory.net/resources/meetings/MISEP_2003_11.doc

Fahey, T. (1995). Family and household in Ireland. In P. Clancy (Ed.), Irish society: sociological perspectives (pp. 205–234). Dublin, Ireland: Institute of Public Administration.

Farrell, B. (1971). Chairman or chief? The role of Taoiseach in Irish government. Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Federation of European Employers. (2005). Feeding the tiger. How will Ireland's tiger economy keep up its momentum? Retrieved August 30, 2005, from http://www.feedee.com/celtictiger.shtml

Flood, P., MacCurtain, S., & West M. (2001). Effective top management teams. Dublin, Ireland: Blackhall Press.

Galligan, Y. (1998). Women and politics in contemporary Ireland: From the margins to the mainstream. London: Pinter.

Gardner, H. (1996). Leading minds. An anatomy of leadership. London: HarperCollins.

Government of Ireland. (1995). Operational programme for human resources. 1994/1999. Dublin, Ireland: Stationery Office.

Gray, A. W. (Ed.). (1997). International perspectives on the Irish economy. Dublin, Ireland: Indecon Economic Consultants.

Guiomard, C. (1995). The Irish disease and how to cure it: Common-sense economics for a competitive world. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Gulliver, P. H. (1979). Disputes and negotiations: A cross-cultural perspective. New York: Academic Press.

Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. New York: Doubleday.

Hanges, P. J., Dickson, M. W., & Sipe, M. T. (2004). Rationale for GLOBE statistical analyses: Societal rankings and test of hypotheses. In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Leadership, culture, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 219–234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Haughton, J. (1995). The historical background. In J. W. O'Hagan (Ed.), The economy of Ireland: policy and performance of a small European country (pp. 1–44). Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Hickson, D. J., & Pugh, D. S. (1995). Management worldwide: The impact of societal culture on organizations around the globe. London: Penguin.

Hill, J. (1998). Irish public sculpture: A history. Dublin, Ireland: Four Courts Press.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., Javidan, M., Dickson, M., et al. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE. In W. H. Mobley, M J. Gessner, & V. Arnold (Eds.), Advances in global leadership(Vol. 1, pp. 171–233). Stamford, CT: JAI.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Gupta, V. & GLOBE Associates. (2004). Cultures, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jupp, R., & O'Neill, G. (1994). Reflections on Ireland in the year 2000. Dublin, Ireland: Landsdowne Market Research and Henly Center Ireland.

Kakabadse, A., Alderson, S., & Gorman, L. (1995). Irish top management—competencies and team dynamics. In B. Leavy & J. Walsh (Eds.), Strategy and general management: A general reader (pp. 3–24). Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Kane, E. (1986/Winter). Stereotypes and Irish identity: Mental illness as a cultural frame. Studies, 539–551.

Keating, M., & Martin, G. (2004). Managing cross-cultural business relations: The Irish-German experience. Dublin, Ireland: Blackhall.

>Keating, M., Martin, G., & Szabo, E. (2002). Do managers and students share the same perceptions of societal culture? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26(6), 633–652.

Kenny, I. (1987). In good company: Conversations with Irish leaders. Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Kenny, I. (1991). Out on their own: Conversations with Irish entrepreneurs. Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Kenny, I. (2001). Leaders: Conversations with Irish chief executives. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Kenny, V. (1985). The post-colonial personality. The Crane Bag, 9, 70–78.

Kim, U., Triandis, H. C., Kagitcibasi, C., Choi, S.-C., & Yoon, G. (1994). Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kluckhohn, C., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientation. New York: Harper & Row.

Leavy, B. (1993). Ireland: Managing the economy of a newly independent state. In D. J. Hickson (Ed.), Management in Western Europe: Society, culture and organization in 12 nations (pp. 125–148). Berlin: De Gruyter.

Leavy, B., & Wilson, D. (1994). Strategy and leadership. London: Routledge.

Lee, J. J. (1982). Society and culture. In F. Litton (Ed.), Unequal achievement: The Irish experience 1957–1982 (pp. 1–18). Dublin, Ireland: Institute of Public Administration.

Lee, J. J. (1989). Ireland 1912–1985, politics and society. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, J. J. (1994). The Irish psyche: A historical perspective. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 15(2–3), 245–249.

Logue, P. (2000). Being Irish. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Lynch, J. J., & Roche, F. W. (1995). Business management in Ireland: Competitive strategy for the 21st century. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Lynch, K., & McLaughlin, E. (1995). Caring labour and love labour. In P. Clancy (Ed.), Irish society: Sociological perspectives (pp. 250–292). Dublin, Ireland: Institute of Public Administration.

Mahon, E. (1994). Ireland: A private patriarchy. Environment and Planning, 26, 1277–1296.

Martin, G. S. (2001). German–Irish sales negotiation: Theory, practice and pedagogical implications. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Martin, G., Donnelly-Cox, G., & Keating, M. (1999). Culture, communication and organisation: what can linguists, psychologists and organisation theorists learn from each other? In D. O'Baoill & A. Chambers (Eds), Intercultural communication and Language Learning (pp. 265–278). Dublin: IRAAL/RIA.

McClelland, D. (1961). The achieving society. New York: Irvington.

Miller, L. (1996). The Dolmen book of Irish stamps. Mountrath, Ireland: Dolmen.

Mjoset, L. (1992). The Irish economy in a comparative perspective (National Economic and Social Council, 93). Dublin, Ireland: National Economic and Social Council.

Moane, G. (1994). A psychological analysis of colonialism in an Irish context. Irish Journal of Psychology, 15(2–3), 250–265.

Myers, A., Kakabadse, A., McMahon, J. T., & Spony, G. (1995). Top management styles in Europe: Implications for business and cross-national teams. European Business Journal, 7(1), 17–27.

National Center for Policy Analysis. (2002). In Europe, little stigma attached to children born out of wedlock. Retrieved March 27, 2002, from http://www.ncpa.org/iss/soc/2002pd032702e.html

Nic Ghiolla Phádraig, M. (1995). The power of the Catholic Church in the Republic of Ireland. In P. Clancy (Ed.), Irish Society: Sociological perspectives (pp. 593–619). Dublin, Ireland: Institute of Public Administration.

O'Higgins, E. (2002). Government and the creation of the Celtic Tiger: can management maintain the momentum? Academy of Management Executive, 16(3), 104–120.

Putnam, D. (1993). Making democracy work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Robinson, M. (1995, February 2). Cherishing the Irish diaspora. Address to the Houses of the Oireachtas. Retrieved July 6, 2006, from http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/addresses/2Feb1995.ht

Roche, W. K., & Ashmore, J. (1997). The changing shape of trade union membership in the Republic of Ireland 1990–1996 (Working paper). Dublin, Ireland: University College Dublin, Smurfit School of Business.

Ronen, S., & Shenkar, O. (1985). Clustering countries on attitudinal dimensions: A review and synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 435–454.

Ruth, S. (1988). Understanding oppression and liberation. Studies, 77(308), 434–443.

Scannell, Y. (1988). The Constitution and the role of women. In B. Farrell (Ed.), De Valera's constitution and ours (pp. 123–136). Dublin, Ireland: Gill & Macmillan.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method and applications (pp. 85–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Scott, D. (1995). European stamp design: A semiotic approach to designing messages. London: Academy Editions.

Sedgwick Noble Lownes. (1998). The guide to employee benefits and labour law in Europe 1997/8. Croydon, England: Author.

Smyth, A. (1985). The floozie in the jacuzzi. Circa (November/December 1989), 32–38.

Stewart, J. C. (1997). Multi-nationals and transfer pricing. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 4(3), 353–371.

Sweeney, P. (1998). The Celtic Tiger: Ireland's economic miracle explained. Dublin, Ireland: Oak Tree Press.

Walshe, J. (1999). A new partnership in education: From consultation to legislation in the nineties. Dublin, Ireland: Institute of Public Administration.

Warnes, H. (1979). Cultural factors in Irish psychiatry. Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa, 4(4), 329–335.

Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1973). Unobtrusive measures: Non-reactive research in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.

World Bank. (2005). Country data retrieved August 30, 2005, from http://www.worldbank.org/data/countrydata.html

_______________

¹The Battle of the Boyne was fought in 1690.

¹Former CEO of Heinz.

²CEO of Renault Distributors, Ireland. This book topped the Irish bestseller list for a number of weeks.