13

Culture and Leadership in South Africa

Lize A. E. Booysen
University of South Africa

Marius W. van Wyk
University of South Africa

1.  HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE CULTURE AND LEADERSHIP IN SOUTH AFRICA

Introduction

South Africa is a land of contrasts (Booysen, 1994; Booysen, 2001, 2005). The country is multicultural and comprises 11 official languages. Though South Africa is a relatively rich land and the economic giant in Africa, it is a developing economy—it has severe shortage of jobs. Almost half of the country's population is without work. With economic, sport, and cultural sanctions lifted, apartheid legislation scrapped, and a new constitution, a truly democratic government was elected in 1994. Despite this, management power resided almost exclusively with White men; in 1994, white men held more than 80% of management positions (Central Statistics Service [CSS], 1995a, 1995b, 1996). A comparison between the 2000 and 2002/2003 Commission for Employment Equity reports shows that whereas there is an increase in the employment of Blacks in management, White men are still overrepresented (Commission for Employment Equity, 2003).

Figure 13.1 depicts the percentage distribution of “legislators” by race and gender. The category “Legislators” refers to decision makers who provide the direction of a critical technical function, such as postmaster, dean, school principal, and so on.

Due to the dominance of White men in management in South Africa, especially in 1995 when this sample was drawn, this chapter is mainly based on a White male sample only. However, some subsequent GLOBE-related research that includes Black as well is discussed in the section Eurocentric Versus Afrocentric Leadership.

Figure 13.1. Percentage distribution of legislators by race and gender. From South African Department of Labor. (2003). Annual Report—Commission for Employment Equity 2002–2003.

Historical Overview of South Africa¹

In this section, major historic developments of South Africa and its different groups are highlighted as background.

Prehistory Up to 1652. Although the debate on the “Out of Africa” hypothesis² continues, there is clear evidence that the first group that populated South Africa were the San (colloquially referred to as “Bushmen”).³ These Stone Age people were “hunter-gatherers” and some San communities started keeping cattle and sheep that they acquired from the Bantu-speaking groups. The Khoikhoi (the name used for the pastoralist San) and the San (reserved for that subgroup that remained hunter-gatherers) continued to reside separately, though at the end all merged into one group called Khoikhoi—“Hottentots” according to the Dutch in the 17th century.

Khoikhoi leadership rested with a “khoeque” (“rich man”) who was often assisted by a second-in-command. The leadership position passed from father to son. The Khoeque was not ostentatious and important decisions and the dispensing of justice was the domain of the chief in conjunction with a council of clan leaders and/or all the male members of the tribe. A Khoeque who abused his authority was quickly sanctioned by the group. A plausible description of the Khoikhoi communities was that of collectivism and egalitarianism. For the San, everything was regarded as communal property until the communities developed into pastoralists, where individual ownership started to emerge (Oakes, 1994, pp. 20–25).

The indigenous Bantu-speaking groups in the northern regions also reared cattle, cultivated crops, mined gold, tin, iron, and copper, and coexisted with the Khoisan tribe peacefully. “Bantu” is the scientific term for the language group to which all indigenous South Africans, except the Khoisan, belong. Two main language subgroups, namely, Nguni and Sotho language groups, can be distinguished, leading to numerous further groupings based on history and tribal loyalties. Members of this language group migrated to the Transvaal and Natal by 300 AD (Oakes, 1994, pp. 26–31).

Historically, White South Africans are descendants from English, Dutch, French, German, and Portuguese settlers. Men of different colors, “Coloreds,” who are the descendants of slaves, the indigenous Khoisan people, and White settlers, may be said with some justification to represent the only group that can truly lay claim to being South Africans.

The First Europeans in South Africa. About 500 years ago, the first Europeans visited the eastern and southern African coasts in their quest to find a sea route to the east. Portugal took the lead in these explorations, and in 1488 Bartholomew Dias opened the sea route to the east for Europe by rounding the southernmost tip of Africa. He named the Cape the “Cape of Good Hope.” Following Dias, other Portuguese explorers came, such as Vasco Da Gama and De Saldanha. Although the sporadic contact between the European seafarers and the Khoikhoi were mostly of a peaceful commercial nature, clashes continued when the Dutch superseded the Portuguese (cf. Oakes, 1994, pp. 32–35).

The Dutch East India Company established a refreshment station at the Cape of Good Hope in 1652 under the command of Jan van Riebeeck, a merchant. Within 60 years of interaction, the Khoikhoi's social and economic order had been more or less being destroyed. (A major contributing factor was the outbreak of a smallpox epidemic in 1713.)

The Period 1652–1948. Van Riebeeck had strict instructions to preserve peace with the Khoisan. These “Vryburghers” (“free citizens”) were not permitted to enslave the local Khoisan. Consequently slaves primarily came from present-day Java, Bali, Timor, Malaysia, Madagascar, China, and parts of India to cultivate the land. In the early years of the colony, many White men married female slaves. Such marriages were later regarded as socially undesirable and the White man was punished. Male chauvinism dictated that White women who indulged in sexual intercourse with male slaves were subjected to criminal sanctions.

From 1660 onward, a new breed of Dutch settlers emerged, namely the “Trekboers,” who can be called the first White Africans. They inadvertently caused the official area of the colony to expand, reaching the Great Fish River by 1778. In 1688 French Huguenot, poor, unemployed, and landless refugees arrived in the Cape to further swell the ranks. The defining characteristics of the Trekboers can be encapsulated by the words “fiercely independent,” “defiance of authority,” “poor,” “nomadic,” “religious fundamentalism,” and “illiterate” (cf. Oakes, 1994, pp. 54–56).

From 1771 onward, the Trekboers came up against the Xhosa. Both groups were mainly cattle farmers and the first of eight “frontier wars” between the colonialists and the Xhosa broke out in 1781.

As a result of political events in Europe, the British colonized the Cape in 1795 until 1802, thereafter a brief return to Dutch rule, and then the British reoccupied the Cape in 1806. Many Dutch colonialists could not accept this and for various other reasons migrated north, which culminated in what became known as the “Groot Trek” (the “Great Trek”). The Great Trek must surely be the single most important origination point of Afrikaner nationalism, “Afrikaner volk” (the other being the Anglo Boer War, battles with indigenous nations, and the emergence of the Afrikaans language). The Trekboers, or “Voortrekkers” (as these migrating Trekboers were called), wanted to establish their own independent state because they saw themselves as the modern version of the biblical people of Israel—the “chosen people.” This explains the Voortrekkers’ view of the Blacks they encountered on their migration as being heathens.

In successive frontier wars, the British sided with the colonialists against the Xhosa resulting in the latter's final defeat in 1858. In the early 1800s, African societies of Southern Africa were beset by upheavals caused by chieftains fighting each other for political supremacy, cattle, and grazing territory. One such leader was Shaka, generally regarded as the father of the Zulu nation. By the time of Shaka's murder, by his half-brother Dingaan in 1828, the different tribes formed the most powerful and feared military machine in Southern Africa.

In 1854, representative government was granted to the Cape colony. All adult males, irrespective of race, had the franchise provided they occupied property worth at least 25 British pounds. The Black vote (restricted to men) in the Cape Province was later abolished in 1956 by the National Party Government.

In 1854, the Boer Republic of the Orange Free State came into being. In 1860, the Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek (the “South African Republic”) was established. By 1870, the Cape colony had 200,000 White inhabitants and the two Boer Republics approximately 45,000. The discovery of diamonds in 1867 near the banks of the Orange River and the Witwatersrand gold strike in 1886 have important consequences, which are listed next.

First, the need for labor and the transformation of the Voortrekker republics’ was stimulated. To obtain the necessary labor, Blacks were stripped of their property rights and huts; other taxes were introduced to force them to work on the mines. The embryonic system of migrant labor (which exists to this day) was expanded. Second, the unimaginable mineral wealth of the Boer republics caused the British government to annex the republics. Third, large conglomerates such as De Beers and Anglo American owe their existence to the diamond and gold industry. Fourth, the small White populations of the Boer republics were swelled by the influx of immigrant fortune seekers. Fifth, these immigrants brought with them the notions of trade unionism. The first recorded strike took place in 1871. The trade union movement played a decisive role in the transformation of South Africa in the 20th century.⁴

Two of the people most closely associated with the diamond industry are Barney Barnato and Cecil John Rhodes. Rhodes went on to become the prime minister of the Cape colony. Rhodes, an ardent imperialist, had the vision of constructing a railway from “Cape to Cairo.” The establishment of new colonies farther to the north (present-day Zambia and Zimbabwe, respectively) can all be traced to Rhodes's imperialist ambitions.

One of the most significant Afrikaner leaders in Afrikaner mythology is Paul Kruger. Kruger was elected as president of the Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek in 1883 and remained head of state until his exile in 1900. Kruger enacted all sorts of preconditions before “Uitlanders” (foreigners) could be granted the franchise. Kruger's effective disenfranchisement caused the British government to invade the Zuid Afrikaansche Republiek. After failed negotiations, war was declared on October 11, 1899—the Anglo-Boer War. After initial victories by the Boer forces, the superior numbers of the British forces began to come. The war then moved into a second phase by the decision of the Boers to avoid pitched battles in favor of guerrilla tactics. These proved highly successful but elicited a vicious response from the British, burning all farms and forcing women and children into concentration camps, where approximately 28,000 Whites died. These inhumane actions provided another impetus for Afrikaner nationalism. African farm workers were also placed in concentration camps, with deaths in these camps totaling at least 14,000. No recognition was given to the Blacks nor was mention ever made of the existence of Black concentration camps. Eventually, on May 31, 1902, a peace treaty was signed at Pretoria, bringing an end to the Anglo-Boer War.

South Africa also has a small but politically influential Indian population. When sugar cane was first produced in Natal in 1851 the farmers lacked a source of cheap labor. Consequently, Indian (“coolie”) indentured labor (152,000 ) was imported between 1860 and 1911 and approximately 52% decided to remain. In addition, some Indians came to Natal at their own expense, mostly as traders. This group formed the elite (commercial) of Indian society. In 1893, a young lawyer came to South Africa. His name was Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. His ejection from a first-class railway carriage, reserved for Whites, was “the most important factor” for his struggle against racist laws using his philosophy of “passive resistance.”

On May 31, 1910, the Cape and Natal colonies united to form the Union of South Africa. The Act of Union excluded Blacks who formed the forerunner of the ANC (African Natinoal Congress), the South African Native National Congress (SANNC), in 1912. In 1913, the notorious Natives’ Land Act was passed by the Union government, which in time meant that Blacks, the majority group, were entitled to a meager 13% of the total land mass of South Africa.

Afrikaners started to rebuild their community around political and financial institutions. Their sense of being unjustly treated only served to fire their nationalism, which culminated in 1948 in victory at the polls.

The Period 1948–1994. “Although total separation on every level between black and white became official policy only after the National Party election victory in 1948, its foundation had been laid nearly half a century previously in a policy then known as segregation— not by Afrikaners but by British Government officials” (Oakes, 1994, p. 312).

It indeed is true that many of the pillars of what later became to be known as “apartheid” (literally meaning “separateness”) were laid long before 1948, such as the Mines and Works Act (1913), the Natives’ Land Act (1913), the Native Affairs Act (1920), the Natives (Urban Areas) Act (1923), and the Industrial Conciliation Act (1926).

The National Party (NP) won the election in 1948 on promises to preserve White power in general, and Afrikaner power in particular. The NP instituted a battery of legislation, and introduced laws such as the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act and the Immorality Act (outlawing sexual and marriage unions between people of different races), the Population Registration Act (allowing for the classification of people according to race), the Group Areas Act and the Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (reserving residential suburbs and public areas for the exclusive use of designated race groups), the Pass laws (requiring Africans to carry “reference books” at all times), and the Bantu Education Act (introducing a system of inferior education for Africans).

The NP government successes at the polling booth can be ascribed to many factors, some of which are: events in the rest of Africa where independence from colonial rule was accompanied by instances of massacres, one-party rule, the ascendancy of dictators, and the adoption of “African socialism”—all of which played in to the hands of a party that built its support on “swart gevaar” (“black danger”) propaganda; the economic boom experienced in the country; the cold war between the superpowers; and the increased support of English-speaking White South Africans for the NP.

In the early years, the courts opposed many of the apartheid legislative but the government started to appoint judges sympathetic to its cause. The major surviving achievement of the South African judiciary was the notion that the courts remain a separate branch of the state. A curious characteristic of the NP government was its ostensible respect for the law. It took the government no less than 4 years to achieve its aim of depriving the Coloreds of their vote in the Cape Province.

In 1961 South Africa became a republic, after having left the commonwealth. It was also in this year that the ANC adopted the strategy of the armed struggle. During the 1960s and 1970s the South African economy grew rapidly.

In total an estimated 3.5 million people were uprooted in the name of apartheid. The scheme was that Blacks should realize their political aspirations in Black “homelands” while still being available as inexpensive labor pool. However, apart from being too small to sustain large numbers of inhabitants, the homelands had very little infrastructure and mismanagement. Due to these, an unstoppable stream of Blacks migrated to the cities.

By the late 1980s, South Africa's economy was in tatters and it became clear that although the overthrow of the government was not possible, neither was a decisive victory over the liberation forces. Two events provided a window of opportunity to break this stalemate. First, the events in Eastern Europe removed the perceived threat communism posed; and second, after having suffered a stroke, P. W. Botha, a staunch apartheid regime state president, was replaced by F. W. de Klerk as leader of the government in 1989. On February, 2, 1990, De Klerk announced in parliament that organizations such as the ANC and the SACP would no longer be banned and that Nelson Mandela was to be released from prison, thereby opening the way for negotiating a new democratic constitutional dispensation.

Present-Day South Africa: The Post-Apartheid Era (1994– ). After the first democratic elections in 1994, Nelson Mandela was inaugurated as the first Black state president and leader of South Africa. He served a crucial and vibrant 4 years, then Thabo Mbeki became and still is the president of South Africa.

The ANC is still, however, reaping what it had sowed in the 1980s when it had called for the townships to be made ungovernable. Despite calls from Mandela himself, township residents largely refuse to pay for services such as electricity and municipal services and infra-structural upgrading. Also, in what has become known as the “lost generation” (those school children who abandoned their schooling in the wake of the 1976 riots) poses a major danger to stability with millions of Black adults having very little education.

Unemployment is in excess of 30%; crime and violence remains unresolved impeding economic growth. Violence and killings between ANC and Inkatha supporters continue in the Natal province. Also, whereas the different ethnic groups were united in their struggle against apartheid, indications are that tribalism is now coming to the forefront. Corruption by senior government officials, appointed not on ability but rather as reward for their participation in the struggle, is rife. More worrisome is the ANC's apparent failure to appreciate that for democracy to flourish, a free press and vigorous public debate must be tolerated. The tendency too frequently is for the government to react angrily to well-founded criticism by branding it as “undemocratic,” “unpatriotic,” or “racist.” Under such conditions, elections in South Africa for the foreseeable future will amount to nothing more than a “racial/ethnic census,” with the Inkatha Freedom Party drawing its support from Zulus, the White political parties being supported by Whites and Coloreds, and the ANC being supported by Xhosa speakers and some other ethnic groupings.

Despite these negatives, South Africa presently probably has the best government it ever had. Under the constitutional regime adopted as a result of the negotiations between the ANC and the NP that preceded the 1994 elections, South Africa has a model Constitution and a constitutional court with the power to review parliamentary legislation. Also, though much is made of corruption by government officials, this must be placed in context. Under the NP rule corruption was hidden from public scrutiny; under the new Constitution, the corruption is at least exposed.

There is a rapid rise in a new Black elite with considerable pressure being brought to bear on private industry to appoint Blacks and to enter into empowerment deals and joint ventures with Black business. However, due to a rigid labor market and continued trade union militancy, millions of people remain unemployed with little hope that any of the fruits of political liberation will translate into an increased standard of living for them. Further exacerbating the unemployment and crime problems is the fact that large numbers of Africans from the rest of Africa flock to South Africa as illegal immigrants.

In 1996, 57% of the population were living in poverty, two thirds of whom were African black. The general income distribution of South Africa was among the most unequal in the world, and the White per capita income was almost nine times higher than that of Africans. For the first time in history, in August 2001 the total income of the Black majority outstripped the total income of White minority (Census 2003, South African government Web site).

Although whites as a group still hold on a relative basis greater economic power than other groups in South Africa, there are numerous corporate and government initiatives aimed at redressing the economic status of blacks, most notably affirmative action, equal employment opportunities, and Black economic empowerment (BEE) measures.

A Finance Week study on the progress of BEE, published April 2005, showed that in regard to the direct and indirect shareholding and control on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE), South African Whites effectively own and control a little more than 50% of the JSE (Rautenbach, 2005).

As happened elsewhere, one could expect that whereas the disparities in wealth between groups will decrease, the disparities in wealth within the beneficiary groups will increase, because the acts, in all likelihood, will have the affect of benefiting the least disadvantaged among the previously disadvantaged groups, rather than accelerating the absorption of the millions of uneducated poor into the labor market.

South African Demographics. In this section, some telling demographics of South African society are summarized. The overall picture is one of inequality on a number of important indicators, which is not surprising given the country's apartheid heritage. However, it is fairly certain that inequalities within the Black group will soon, if this has not already happened, overtake the inequality prevalent in society as a whole. In Table 13.1 the proportional population group composition of the total South African population (1996 and 2001 figures) is depicted.

TABLE 13.1

National Demographics by Population Group

Note.  Numbers are in millions. The term population groups is used to designate Asians, Africans, Coloreds, and Whites. The term Black is used as a collective noun referring to Asians, Africans, and Coloreds. From A. Roux (1996).

South African people are still classified by population group. However now, different from in the past, membership of a racial group is based on self-perception and self-classification, not on a legal definition. The total classification of the population in the Census 2001 (Census, 2003) was based on, African Black, 79%, Colored 8.9%, Asian or Indian, 2.5% and White 9.6%. Black Africans constitute more than three-fourths of the total population. There are 53% females and 47% males; we have 31 different cultures, and 45 million people in total.

The educational level of Africans has improved over recent years with proportionally more completing 12 years of schooling (matric) and postmatric qualifications. From the October 1995 Household Survey (CSS, 1995, p. 75) some data regarding levels of education of the population 20 years and older by population group are summarized in Table 13.2.

For the first time, in 1995, the majority of university students were Black, constituting 51% of all university students. This is estimated to increase to 72% by the year 2020. In 1995 Blacks, Coloreds, and Asians made up 63% of university enrollment.

The passing of the Employment Equity Act by Parliament in 1998 should have a major impact on the composition of the labor force in years to come. In terms of the 1998 act, Africans, Indians, Coloreds, women, and people with disabilities must be adequately represented in an employer's labor force so as to reflect the national demographics of the country. Various administrative control measures as well as punitive measures are provided for and employers are required to submit “employment equity plans” and annual reports to account for their efforts in reaching affirmative action goals. Companies that do not comply with the provisions of the act are excluded from public-sector tenders and noncompliance constitutes a material breach of existing contracts. The antidiscrimination provisions of the act are applicable to all employers, whereas the affirmative action provisions are applicable to companies employing 50 or more employees as well as smaller employers whose annual turnover exceeds stipulated maxima, depending on the sectors in which they operate.

A Historical Overview of Industrial Relations in South Africa. With the discovery of gold and diamonds round about 1867–1870, South Africa entered its own unique industrial revolution, due to large numbers of immigrants, industrialization, and the development of unions happened simultaneously. The first union in South Africa, the Society of Carpenters and Joiners, was formed on December 23, 1881. This union had only White members, who were mainly British mine workers. The secondary industries created a large demand for skilled, mainly White, overseas labor. Consequently, White mine workers received high salaries in comparison with the unskilled Black workers and thus color and skill became synonymous. The concept of the “color bar” arose between the mining companies and the White unions. The mining companies tried to lower the requirements into relatively simple tasks so that unskilled (Black) workers could perform them. In this way, the mining companies were able to replace some skilled workers with semiskilled or even unskilled workers. Guild unions protected skills by regulating the admission of apprentices against the huge Black unskilled labor force.

TABLE 13.2

Level of Education by Population Group

Note. From 1995 Household Survey data (Central Statistics, 1995).

The war with Britain (1899–1902) virtually destroyed the economies of the two Boer Republics by the plundering of farms and the destruction of large numbers of livestock. The White farmers, who were also unskilled or semiskilled, were therefore forced to move to the towns with scarce job opportunities, competing with Black workers who were willing to work for lower wages. This was the beginning of the so-called “poor White” problem. In the 1920s there was a drop in the gold price and a recession in the international and South African economies, which was further worsened by large-scale unemployment among the soldiers who had returned from World War I.

The government introduced relief schemes at the end of 1920 to help the unemployed Whites. In 1920, the Low Grades Mines Commission recommended that the expensive White labor be replaced by Black labor. This caused widespread strikes involving approximately 23,000 White workers. Martial law was declared and bloody fights broke out between strikers and government forces. When the strike ended on March 18, 1922, altogether 247 people had died and the unions were defeated, which resulted in the Smuts government being defeated and replaced by the so-called PACT government with General Hertzog as prime minister. The new government gave preference to the appointment of Whites. The large-scale employment of Whites led to the White labor force being increasingly associated with the political status quo. One of the direct results was the promulgation of the Industrial Conciliation Act, Act 11 of 1924, on March 3, 1924. This act made provision for, among other things: the appointment of industrial councils; the implementation of a system for the registration of unions, employers’ organizations, and industrial councils; the exclusion of Black workers (White, Asian, and Colored benefited) from the definition of an “employee” under it. The objectives of the act were to provide for collective bargaining, to prevent or solve industrial disputes, and to create a framework within which unions and employers’ organizations could regulate their relations. But exclusion of Black workers polarized the South African labor force into “Black” and “non-Black.” The Industrial Conciliation Act was replaced in 1956 by a new act. The following are some of its important provisions: Job reservation gained unequivocal statutory authority; any further registration of racially mixed unions was prohibited; an industrial tribunal was created to hear labor disputes and act as arbitrator; strict restrictions were imposed on the constitutions and finances of unions; and restrictions were imposed on the political activities of unions.

Black workers went on strike countrywide in 1973. For the first time, there was a realization of the actual power of black workers. Because no unions were officially involved in these strikes, it dramatically pointed out the shortcomings in existing Black labor legislation (Finnemore & Van der Merwe, 1986, p.7).

From 1973 to 1977, the real power of unregistered unions grew steadily and employers increasingly recognized and negotiated directly with unregistered unions. Other factors that exerted pressure were the Soweto riots of 1976, overseas disinvestment in South Africa, as well as the growing shortage of skilled workers (Finnemore & Van der Merwe, 1986, p. 8). The strikes of 1973 and the strong growth of unions necessitated the former state president to appointed the Wiehahn Commission of Inquiry into Labor Legislation on June 21, 1977.

One of the most important recommendations made by the commission was that freedom of association had to be granted for all workers: The commission also recommended that all racial prejudice should be removed from the Industrial Conciliation Act, Act 28 of 1956, and more specifically that all workers have absolute freedom, that statutory job reservation be abolished immediately, that certain job reservation measures be removed through consultation between employer and employee parties, that Blacks should be allowed as apprentices, and that an Industrial Court be established with equitable jurisdiction. This last recommendation proved to have far-reaching effects of “unfair labor practice” to confer a myriad of new rights on employees and unions. Furthermore, legal provisions that made it compulsory to have separate amenities for Whites and non-Whites at workplaces were to be repealed. Separate or shared amenities would therefore not be compulsory but be regulated by means of collective bargaining.

The government's reaction to the commission's report was generally positive. The Wiehahn Report empowered the trade union movement (most notably the Congress of South African Trade Unions [COSATU]) to bring pressure to bear on employers and the National Party government to effect political changes.

After the democratic elections in April 1994, a new Labor Relations Act (Act 66 of 1995) came into force. This act extended its ambit to cover almost all workers (the public sector, farm and domestic workers), including job security for employees participating in a legal strike, and awarded further organizational rights to trade unions. It created the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) to speedily resolve labor disputes. The creation of the National Economic, Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) in which the state, labor, and capital negotiate, formally institutionalized social corporatism in the country.

Today South Africa has one of the most progressive labor law dispensations in the world, although there is concern about unemployment, new jobs, and foreign investment. Other legislative interventions include the Labour Relations Act 1995, which took effect in 1996; the Constitution of South Africa, 1996; the Basic Conditions of Employment Act in 1997; the Employment Equity (EE) Act and its antidiscrimination provisions, which came into effect on Women's Day, August 9, 1999; the Skills Development Act of 1998; and the Skills Development Levies Act of 1999. The intention of the last two acts is to shift the focus away from only affirmative action appointments to also recruitment, succession planning, and development and training of persons in the designated groups (Blacks and women) and to address the skills gap. These changes were followed by the establishment of the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) Commission in 1999, and the subsequent strategies and policies set by government and industry alike. The Black Economic Empowerment Act was implemented in 2003 and the Black Economic Empowerment industry charters with proposed quotas for Black ownership and management followed. In 2004, the government sensed disparities and possible clashes between different industry charters and published a draft Code of Practice aimed at providing guidelines to the various branches of industry on how to set up their BEE schemes (Booysen, 2005).

2.  GLOBE STUDIES IN SOUTH AFRICA

Methods and Procedures

The South African data were collected over a 4-year period, from 1994 to 1997. It included the collection of qualitative and quantitative data from junior, middle, and senior White men from one organization in the telecommunications sector (Telkom⁵) and two organizations in the financial services sector (Standard Bank⁶ and Sanlam⁷), as well as participant observations, unobtrusive measures, and media analysis on culture and leadership in South Africa. A total of 666 respondents participated in this research, comprising a sample of 232 White male South African managers, 426 management students of mixed race and gender, of which 82% were White men, and 8 South African leadership specialists.

Quantitative Data Collection: September–October 1995. The collection of the quantitative data with the Societal and Organizational Culture and Leadership Questionnaire was done in September and October 1995. The sample consisted of a total of 183 White men, 130 from the telecommunications sector and 53 from the financial services. The data collection with the Organizational Questionnaires was done in September and October 1996 involving 15 White male senior managers, 5 in each organization sampled. A total of 198 respondents participated in the quantitative research.

Qualitative Data Collection: February 1994– June 1997. The collection of the qualitative data spanned an entire 4-year period, and included six consecutive measures and four different data collection techniques. A total of 468 respondents participated in the qualitative research.

Pilot Focus Groups and Interviews: February 1994. The preliminary qualitative pilot data, in the form of focus groups, was collected in February 1994. A total of 70 focus groups were conducted involving 430 management students, who were representative of all nine provinces in South Africa and included Blacks and women as well. Ten white men were randomly selected from the 70 focus groups for in-depth individual interviews.

In-Depth Focus Groups and Interviews: March 1994. These pilot data were used as input to focus group and individual interviews with 20 White male middle managers representative of the nine provinces of South Africa.

Two in-depth focus groups, with seven participants per group were held, together with six individual interviews. In preparation for the focus group discussions, the participants had to complete the “Management Effectiveness Exercise,” which provided each participant with an opportunity to express his own views on behavior that distinguishes outstanding leaders from competent managers. During the focus group the participants had to: (a) discuss the terms leadership and management, (b) define these two terms, (c) list the attributes that distinguish outstanding leaders from competent managers, and (if time permitted) (d) describe how managers in their culture differ from managers in another country that is a major trading partner.

Six individual interviews were held. The purpose of the individual interviews was to explore, in some depth, how South African middle managers define leadership implicitly and explicitly. After an explanation of the study, the interviews were conducted by means of an interview schedule, which included the following 10 questions:

1.  The first question concerns the difference between competent managers and outstanding leaders. What do you see this difference to be?

2.  Now we are interested in your perception of the opposite of outstanding leadership. If the person is in the position of leadership and does not exercise outstanding leadership, what would be the kinds of behaviors in which they engage?

3.  Can you think of a critical incident that illustrates outstanding leadership?

4.  Can you think of another such incident?

5.  Were there any obstacles or constraints faced by the leaders in these incidents? Any opposition, resistance, bureaucratic red tape, or lack of resources, for example.

6.  Can you think of two or three well known outstanding leaders? Who are they? (7) Is there anything that these leaders have in common that make them outstanding and that distinguishes them from others who have been in similar positions?

8.  How is the behavior of these leaders similar?

9.  Can you think of a specific behavior, something each leader did, that illustrates his or her leadership?

10.  Can you think of something a leader did that resulted in your strong acceptance or support of the leader, or in significantly increased motivation on your part, or in willingness to go above and beyond the call of duty in the interest of the leader's vision, objective, or mission?

Intensive Individual Interviews: March–November 1995. Ten White male middle managers were selected from the three organizations; in-depth and follow-up interviews were held. The purpose of the in-depth individual interviews was to further explore, in more depth, how South African middle managers define leadership implicitly and explicitly to ascertain their implicit leadership models. The interviews were taped, transcribed, and content analysis was done.

Unobtrusive Measurement and Participant Observations: November 1996. The unobtrusive measures and participant observations were intended to explore the South African environment and to identify implicit indicators indicative of the prominence of specific leader dimensions comparable to others. These data were collected by means of the Unobtrusive Measurement Questionnaire and Participant Observation Questionnaire. The two questionnaires were conducted on eight leadership specialists; a content analysis followed.

Media Analysis: May–June 1997. The sample for the media analysis comprised the following newspapers, business periodicals, and industry-specific journals over the period May 21 to June 20, 1997: The Star (the largest English-language daily newspaper in South Africa with a circulation area covering the economic hub of the country, primarily Gauteng province, but also with a circulation in a number of other provinces); The Sunday Independent (an English-language Sunday paper with a national circulation); The Financial Mail (an English-language weekly business periodical with a national readership); Finansies en Tegniek (an Afrikaans language weekly business periodical with a national readership); The Sowetan (the largest English-language newspaper focused on a Black readership with a circulation primarily in the Gauteng province); and an in-house publication of each of the three organizations used as representative of the financial and telecommunications industries respectively.

For this phase of the research project, use was made of two research assistants who, independently of each other, identified and coded relevant quotations from the media sample. Their respective coded texts were then compared and in the case of differences between the two research assistants, a quotation was included in the final database only if the researchers could reach consensus on the relevance of the quotation and the appropriateness of its coding. An initial list of “code filters” (i.e., a list of key terms used to identify and code quotations) was generated by one of the authors for use by the research assistants. This initial list was generated by scanning a presample from the selected newspapers and periodicals. Words and phrases that appeared frequently in the media were noted, as well as using the definitions of the GLOBE Societal Culture Dimensions and Leadership Attributes as guidelines and combining these two for a total of 74 potential code filters. This initial list was refined and consolidated into a final one, but only after a dummy run had been executed by the research assistants in order to determine the completeness and relevance of the initial list.

The media analysis was accomplished by making use of the “Atlas” software program. “Atlas” is a computer-aided text interpretation and theory-building software package. The program serves as a powerful utility for qualitative analysis of large bodies of text. The media sample yielded a total of 1207 usable quotes that were linked to 55 code filters. As the last step in the media analysis, one of the authors performed a content analysis on this coded database to group the coded data into a more manageable number of clusters that cohered on a conceptual level. Groupings of quotations that did not fit these schemas and comprised only a small number of quotations were discarded at this stage. Essentially an inductive methodology was used by referring to the GLOBE Societal Culture Dimensions and the Leader Attributes. This second-order coding yielded a number of clusters that were ranked in terms of the total number of quotations each contained. The data were then ranked and compared with the South African rankings of the GLOBE Societal Culture Dimensions and Attributes.

3. SOCIETAL CULTURE: SOUTH AFRICA

This section focuses on the results of the Societal Culture of South Africa and then on the results of the Leadership dimension in South Africa. The quantitative results of the GLOBE project are discussed and supplemented with the qualitative data, namely focus group and individual interview data, participant observations, unobtrusive measures, and media analysis of the cultural dimensions and leadership encountered in the South African society.

Cross-cultural leadership studies clearly show that cultural differences influence individual expectations and assumptions about management (Dorfman, 1996; Hofstede, 1980, 1991, 1994; House, Wright, & Aditya, 1997) and that those management philosophies typically evolve in harmony with the cultures within which they function. However, it is evident from the earlier historical overview that even though South Africa is a complex amalgam of several cultures and subcultures, the South African management and leadership philosophies did not evolve in harmony with all the cultures and subcultures in South Africa. In fact, for historical reasons it evolved in line with Western thinking and the dominant management practices today are Anglo-American, as practiced by the dominant White male group in management.

The manifestation of the nine cultural dimensions as reviewed in House et al. (2004) (see also chap. 1, this volume) in South African White male leadership is discussed next. The quantitative GLOBE results are discussed and supplemented with results from participant observations, unobtrusive measures, and media analysis of the respective cultural dimensions.

Results From Quantitative Study

The South African (White sample) scores and ranks for the nine societal cultural dimensions are provided in Table 13.3. GLOBE distinguishes perceptions of societal cultural practices (“As Is”) and perceptions of societal cultural values (“Should Be”).

Assertiveness. South Africa shows well above average levels of Assertiveness and is ranked 8th out of 61 countries on this dimension. South Africa falls in the Band A with countries like Germany (East 4, West 10), Hong Kong (5), Austria (6), El Salvador (7), Greece (9), United States (10), and Turkey (12). Albania (1), Nigeria (1), and Hungary (2) measured higher on Assertiveness than South Africa; Japan (58), French Switzerland (59), New Zealand (60), and Sweden (61) measured the lowest on Assertiveness.

South Africa's “Should Be” score of 3.69 on Assertiveness ranks average but is much lower than the “As Is” score. The South African “As Is” score ranked 34, which is also average and which indicates that South Africans are of the opinion that they are probably too assertive.

Institutional Collectivism. Higher scores on this dimension reflect the degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward collective distribution of resources and collective action. Essentially it reflects a society's level of autonomy versus collectivism. With a score of 4.62 and a ranking of 11th, South Africa is well above average on the scale and slightly to the top end of the Band A countries on this dimension. Countries grouped in the same cluster as South Africa include, among others, China (7), Philippines (8), Finland (9), Ireland (9), Zambia, (12), Malaysia (12), and Taiwan (14). It seems as if there is a relatively high degree of integration into groups, within organizations and society, in South Africa. Sweden (1), South Korea (2), Japan (3), and Singapore (4) scored higher than South Africa on the Institutional Collectivism dimension. The countries that scored the lowest on this dimension include Greece (61, Hungary (60), Germany (GRD) (59) and Argentina (58).

TABLE 13.3

South Africa (White Sample): Societal Cultural Dimensions

Note. Score: Country mean for South Africa on the basis of aggregated scale scores. Band: Letters A to D indicate the country band Austria belongs to (A > B > C > D). Countries from different Bands are considered to differ significantly from each other (GLOBE test banding procedure, cf. Hanges, Dickson, & Sipe, 2004). Rank: South Africa's position relative to the 61 countries in the GLOBE study; Rank 1 = highest; Rank 61 = score. Dev.:The “Deviation Score” was computed by subtracting “As Is” scores from the respective “Should Be” scores. A positive difference indicates that the society wishes to have more of a particular attribute or dimension whereas a negative score indicates the opposite.

^aA scale's score within-country position compared to the other scales on the same level.

Future Orientation. The essence of this dimension is preoccupation with the future rather than the present and delay of gratification in the interest of future growth, development, or rewards. Higher scores on this dimension indicate a greater degree of Future Orientation. With a score of 4.13 and a ranking of 19, these results indicate a well above average degree of Future Orientation. On this dimension, South Africa is grouped in Band B with such countries such as Finland (14), India (15), Philippines (16), United States (16), Nigeria (19), Australia (19), Hong Kong (21), and Ireland (22). The cluster of countries scoring higher than South Africa on the Future Orientation dimension includes Singapore (1), Switzerland (2), the Netherlands (4), and Malaysia (5). Countries scoring lower than South Africa on this dimension include Poland (59), Argentina (60) and Russia (61). As is generally true for most participating countries, South Africans desire a greater degree of Future Orientation (deviation score = 1.53).

Performance Orientation. Higher scores on this dimension indicate a greater Performance Orientation (i.e., the degree to which a collective encourages and rewards group members for performance improvement and excellence). The ranking of 30th on the “As Is” scale (out of a total of 61 countries) indicate that (White) South Africans are well in the midrange of Performance Orientation grouped together (in Band B) with countries such as Japan (25), Ecuador (27), Zambia (28), Costa Rica (29), France (30), Mexico (32), East Germany (33) and England (34), but South Africans score below such countries like Switzerland (1), Singapore (2), Hong Kong, (3) and Albania (4), and above countries like Hungary (58), Russia (59), Venezuela (60), or Greece (61). Also of interest is the fact that South Africans wish that they were much more achievement oriented (deviation score = 2.12). This desire for a society that is more achievement oriented is in line with the overall GLOBE results and indicates that, generally speaking, most countries want more emphasis placed on achievement in their society.

Uncertainty Avoidance. Uncertainty Avoidance is defined by GLOBE as the extent to which a society relies on social norms and procedures to alleviate the unpredictability of future events. Higher scores on this dimension indicate an aversion to uncertainty (leading to uncertainty-avoiding behavior), whereas lower scores indicate tolerance for uncertainty. With a score of 4.09 and a ranking of 32, South Africa lies on the average of participating countries for this dimension, and at the very bottom of Band B. Sharing Band B on this dimension with South Africa are countries such as Mexico (26), Indonesia (27), Zimbabwe, India, and the United States, all sharing 28, and Zambia (31). The countries that have a higher intolerance for uncertainty, besides South Africa, include Switzerland (1), Sweden (2), Singapore (3), and Denmark (4). The deviation score of 0.58 represents the lowest one for all deviation scores (see Table 13.3). Given the sociopolitical turmoil endemic in South Africa at the time, this is quite remarkable.⁸ Intuitively one would have thought that White South Africans at that time would have wanted a greater degree of certainty, rather than being relatively quite relaxed about the future. However, in comparison with the other sample countries, South Africa is ranked in the middle range (32) for this dimension. Maybe this provides a clue as to why the majority of White South Africans were prepared to endorse the revolutionary changes initiated by the De Klerk Government in the early 1990s.

Power Distance. The essence of this dimension is the establishment and maintenance of dominance and control of the less powerful by the more powerful. Higher scores on this dimension indicate a greater degree of Power Distance. Compared to the other participating countries, South Africa scores just below average on this dimension with a score of 5.16. However, this score is still well above the midpoint of 3.5 on the 7-point scale used to measure this dimension. Generally, most participating countries’ score on this dimension reflects a perception that Power Distance is high in most countries. Even the country that scores lowest on this dimension, Denmark, weighs in with a score above the midpoint on the 7-point scale, at 3.89. South African society is ranked 35 and is located in the top of the Band B countries, alongside other such countries as Georgia (30), Taiwan (32), Indonesia (33), Malaysia (34), England (36), Ireland (36), Kuwait (38), and Japan (39). Countries with a lower level of Power Distance than South Africa include Denmark (61), the Netherlands (59), Bolivia (58), and Albania (57). The high deviation score of −2.52 indicates a desire for a society that is less stratified and lends further support to the inference that South Africans regard their society as being more stratified than egalitarian, and wishing that we were a more egalitarian society.

Gender Egalitarianism. Medium scores on this dimension indicate a weak emphasis on gender equality (in the sense of equality for male and female roles). Whereas low scores indicate an emphasis on the male role. High scores indicate a stronger emphasis on egalitarianism. With a score of 3.27 and a ranking of 35, South African society falls slightly below average on this dimension, indicating a slight propensity for the male role. Band B countries grouped together with South Africa on the Gender Egalitarianism dimension include Finland (31), Thailand (31), United States (33), Brazil (34), Indonesia (36), Italy (37), New Zealand (38), and Ireland (39). The cluster of countries that exhibit a greater degree of female orientation compared to South Africa include Hungary (1), Russia (12), Poland (3), and Slovenia (4).

Countries in which greater emphasis is placed on the male role include Zambia (57), Morocco (58), Egypt (59), Kuwait (60), and South Korea (61). The deviance score of 1.33 indicates that South Africans are aware that they should give more encouragement and recognition to female roles.

In-Group Collectivism. Higher scores on this dimension indicate the degree to which individuals express pride, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organization or families. With a score of 4.50 and a ranking of 48, South Africa is below the country average on this dimension. Countries grouped in the Band B with South Africa include Israel (44), Japan (45), Germany (GDR) (46), Namibia (46), and France (49). Countries such as the Philippines (1), Georgia (2), Iran (3), and India (4) scored higher than South Africa on the In-Group Collectivism dimension. The cluster of countries that scored the lowest comprises the Netherlands (58), New Zealand (59), Sweden (60), and Denmark (61). The deviation score of 1.41 could be interpreted as a desire for a more In-Group Collectivist orientation and that White South Africans yearn for a society with a greater degree of integration of the individual into small groups and the organization.

Humane Orientation. Higher scores on this dimension indicate a more Humane Orientation. South Africa is not perceived as a caring or humane society. With a score of 3.49 and a ranking of 54, South Africa is grouped in the Band D together with such countries as Italy (51), Poland (52), Switzerland (53), Singapore (54), Germany (former GDR) (56), France (56), and Hungary (58). The countries that scored lower on the Humane Orientation dimension than South Africa are Germany FRG (61), Spain (60), and Greece (59).

Of all the dimensions, the lack of a more Humane Orientation prevalent in society is most keenly felt by South Africans (deviation score of 2.16). Countries that scored higher than South Africa on this dimension are Zambia (1), Philippines (2), Ireland (3), and Malaysia (4).

Results From Media Analysis

In this section, the South African results of the participants’ observations, unobtrusive measures, and media analysis, based on the cultural dimensions, are discussed. The ranked data from the media analysis are summarized and compared with the South African internal rankings of the GLOBE Societal Culture Dimensions, “As Is” and “Should Be” categories in Table 13.4.

TABLE 13.4

Comparison of Media Analysis Data With GLOBE Cultural Dimensions (Ranking)

Note. “As Is” and “Should Be” rankings were obtained by ranking the scores of South Africa on the different cultural dimensions. Rankings from media analysis were obtained on the basis of relative frequencies per category (at the time of media analysis there were only seven GLOBE dimensions, with Gender Egalitarianism and Assertiveness as one dimension and Institutional and In-Group Collectivism as one). Sum of Ranks are used as an indicator of cultural emphasis (the lower the number the higher the relative emphasis).

Performance Orientation. The qualitative data are in accordance with the quantitative data that the South African society places a high premium on the Performance Orientation dimension. From Table 13.4 it can be seen that the media analysis indicates that it is the second highest-ranked cultural dimension. The quantitative data suggest that the Performance Orientation dimension is ranked the fourth highest in South African culture and the desire is that it should be the highest ranking.

Future Orientation. Future Orientation is ranked as the most prevalent cultural dimension in the media analysis, and it is ranked as third most important in both the “As Is” and “Should Be” categories in the quantitative study. The slightly higher ranking in the media analysis may be ascribed to the emphasis that the South African media placed on the future of South Africa in the years directly after the 1994 elections.

Individualism/Collectivism. Regarding Individualism/Collectivism, Table 13.4 indicates that it is ranked fourth most important in the media analysis, and even though South Africa scored well below average on this dimension, it is rated as the second most important dimension in the quantitative analysis. It should be taken into account that, when this analysis was done, the scores of Institutional and In-Group Collectivism were still conflated in one dimension, Collectivism.

Power Distance. Power Distance is ranked 1 in the “As Is” category and 7 in the “Should Be,” whereas it is ranked third in the media analysis. Thus, both the quantitative data and the media analysis indicate that South Africans regard our society as highly stratified. The emphasis in our Constitution on the value of equality reinforces the notion that South Africans are very conscious of the need to transform our society into a more egalitarian one.

Uncertainty Avoidance. Uncertainty Avoidance is ranked 6 in the media analysis and 5 in the quantitative data.

Humane Orientation. The quantitative and qualitative data indicate that South Africans perceive their society as less humane. The media analysis ranking for this dimension placed it seventh, and the “As Is” ranking is sixth, whereas the “Should Be” ranking is fourth. The greater emphasis found in the media analysis may be an artifact of the nature of mass-circulation newspapers: Stories of atrocities are more likely to be published to promote circulation figures than Good Samaritan stories. Nevertheless, the quantitative data support the inference that South Africans wish that our society was more humane.

Gender Egalitarianism/Assertiveness. Regarding Gender Egalitarianism, the results show that the cultural emphasis on this dimension is rather low. Both the quantitative data and media analyses indicate that South Africa is a masculine society. The slight difference between the media analysis and “Should Be” rankings is possibly a function of the difference in the sample. Whereas the quantitative data was limited to a sample of White males from management (which is dominated by men), the media analysis represented all population groups in South Africa and didn't focus purely on management. Note that when this analysis was done the Assertiveness and Gender Egalitarian scores were still conflated in the Masculinity/Femininity Dimensions.

SUMMARY

In summary, the White male South Africans ranked 8 out of 61 countries on Assertiveness with well above average levels of assertiveness, however their “As Is” score indicates that they are of the opinion that they are probably too assertive. They ranked 30 and are above average on the Performance Orientation dimension, and they wish that they were much more achievement oriented. A national trait that exemplifies South African's need for achievement is the national obsession with sporting victories and individual achievement in other walks of life.

They ranked 19 on the Future Orientation dimension, scoring well above average; a desire for a greater degree of Future Orientation also emerged. Long-term, short-term, and scenario planning is an everyday event in South African organizations.

South Africa is a masculine society, and indeed management is still dominated by (White) men. In terms of Gender Egalitarianism, South Africans Ranked 35, and fall slightly below average on this dimension; the “Should Be” score indicates that South Africans are mildly aware that they should give more encouragement and recognition to female roles.

South Africa scored relatively low on Humane Orientation, and is not perceived as a caring or humane society (they Ranked 54), however, they are acutely aware of this and wish to move toward a much higher level of Humane Orientation.

Compared to the other participating countries, South Africa scores above average on Power Distance, and is ranked 35. Even though this score is well above the midpoint on the scale, which indicates a high level of Power Distance, the high deviation score indicates a desire for a society that is less stratified and more egalitarian.

South Africa scored above average and ranked 11 on the Institutional Collectivism dimension and ranked 48 with a score of 4.50 on In-Group Collectivism. White male South Africans yearn for a society with a greater degree of integration of the individual into groups and communities.

South Africa ranked 32 and measured average for Uncertainty Avoidance with little difference shown between the “As Is” and “Should Be” scores. The traditional South African organization is noted for its many rules, regulations, and procedures for almost every possible event and contingency.

4.  LEADERSHIP: SOUTH AFRICA

In this section, a brief review of the literature and prior research on leadership in South Africa is given. The quantitative results of the GLOBE project are discussed and supplemented with the focus group and in-depth individual interview data and media analysis.

Prior Research on Leadership in South Africa

Binedell (1992) claims that management philosophies typically evolve in harmony with the cultures within which they function. However, although South Africa is a complex amalgam of several cultures and subcultures, for historical reasons, the dominant management practices are Anglo-American. The South African leadership context is furthermore marred by the socialized assumptions: “White is right,” “West is best,” and “Think manager, think male” (Lessem, 1994, 1996; Potgieter, 1996; Sonn, 1996; Steyn & Motshabi, 1996). The leadership picture is made even more complex and biased by the skewed representations of managers in terms of the population groups, as already discussed. In the majority of cases, the South African male manager's first experience of leadership and organizational life was during national military service. This situation prompts Christie (1996, p. 35) to say, “Unfortunately, my view is that the expression ‘You're in the army now’ applies as strongly in the business sphere as it does in the South African National Defense Forces.” Suffice it to say that, because of the exclusivity of the then national service, similar experiences and value systems are not shared by the majority White women or members of other groups in South Africa.

Leadership research in South Africa is not abundant, which made this review problematic. Prior to De Klerk, South African (political) leaders were seen as strong men who took unilateral decisions with scant regard for consensus seeking (Grobler, 1996; Khoza, 1994; Madi, 1995; Manning, 1997; Sonn, 1996). Grobler points out that the future leaders of companies in South Africa should reflect the population composition of the country, and that the leadership philosophy should be aimed at the future and at achievement based on partnership. He continues by saying that the days of autocratic leadership have gone forever—the concepts of demand and control are simply no longer acceptable. Leadership must include elements such as integrity, fairness, democracy, empowerment, broad consultation, respect for the individual, and sensitivity for cultural diversity. Grobler concludes by saying that “the future leader must also be caring, show empathy, be willing to serve, and recognise human worth” (p. 11).

In preliminary research done by Booysen and Van Wyk (Booysen, 1994) on the preferred leadership style of effective leaders in South Africa, they analyzed focus group discussions that involved the participation of 430 first-year Masters in Business Leadership students (all working managers) and 20 middle managers in South Africa. They found that outstanding leaders in South Africa are perceived to show a strong and direct, but democratic and participative, leadership style. They are perceived to be agents of change, visionaries, and individualists. This indicates a preference for a transformational leadership style. Although they are regarded as moderately charismatic, they are seen as being responsible, rather than as agitators.

These preliminary results indicate that South African leaders are also perceived as being sensitive to their followers’ needs and are expected to reflect their followers’ ideas, satisfy their needs, and be respectful and understanding. South African leaders are expected to be pragmatic and creative. By utilizing their interpersonal skills and knowledge, they are expected to be reactive as well as proactive, depending on their analysis of any given situation.

Charlton's (1993, pp. 83–93) findings, in his research into 20 of the most senior leaders and 40 of their followers in a large financial organization in South Africa, corresponds with those of Booysen and Van Wyk. He found that excellent South African leaders have superb interpersonal skills, exhibit candor, and delegate authority, which empowers employees. They openly share goals and values that allow collaborative individualism. He also emphasizes the ability of the South African manager to be competent in self-management, self-aware, and committed to self-development, growth, and personal mastery. They also exhibit an internal locus of control.

Charlton (1993, p. 60) maintains that excellent leaders distinguish themselves through five competencies of vision, namely:

• They develop and communicate a clear future vision.
• They expect uncompromising standards of excellence and pursue improvement on previous standards.
• They create focus and transmit clarity concerning expectations.
• They express a sense of mission that catches attention, inspires commitment, and transforms purpose into action.
• They seek to understand current reality.

He adds that there is a link between the aforementioned strategies and the leader's ability to manage him or herself. This involves diagnosing inappropriate or ineffective behavior and assuming personal responsibility for learning, productive growth, and change. He also argues that a business leader needs to create an empowering environment in which followers are willing or motivated, able or trained, and are allowed the responsibility and authority to perform to their potential. Charlton concludes by saying, “empowerment is both a consequence (indication) and competence of effective leadership” (p. 5).

Godsell (in Charlton, 1993) expresses the opinion that in South Africa, particularly with its multiculturalism and its multilingual workforce, superb communication is of paramount importance, not only from leaders, but on all levels within and between management and employees.

There is no doubt that affirmative action programs have, and will continue to, lead to more cultural diversity in the South African workforce. On the other hand, researchers have identified that a by-product of diverse workplaces is distrust, negative attitudes toward diversity, and perceived barriers to successful careers for newly disaffected groups. Although the resistance, resentment, and aggression shown toward management by a certain faction of workers must be taken into account, the fears and uncertainties of others must also be considered (Human, 1996; Kemp, 1994; Makwana, 1994; Manning, 1997a; 1997b).

These are among the critical human resources issues that South African leaders must confront in the future. On the one hand, they must meet the needs of a culturally diverse workforce that comprises a massive contingent of illiterate, unskilled, and semiskilled people (mainly Black), whereas on the other hand, accommodate an educated, highly skilled workforce comprising mainly Whites. They will need to get people of different cultures and backgrounds together to negotiate and participate. South Africans have to come to terms with each other's cultural differences, acknowledge them, put them into perspective, and discover the strengths and weaknesses in different ideologies. Only if South African managers succeed in resolving these issues can they improve the aggregate potential of South African organizations—through creating the best prospects of unity through diversity (Avolio, 1995; Booysen & Beaty, 1997; Human, 1996; Khoza, 1994; Madi, 1995; Manning, 1996, 1997a, 1997b; Mbigi, 1997).

Results of THE Quantitative Study

The GLOBE leader attribute questionnaire (House et al., 2004) asked respondents to indicate the attributes (traits or behaviors) that they think distinguish highly effective leaders from others. The leader attribute questionnaire includes a number of attribute items relevant to the seven societal dimensions, plus four additional theoretical leadership attribute dimensions: leader integrity, leader generalized competence, leader value orientation, and leader clarity of direction. This section of the questionnaire measures 21 primary factors and 6 distinct second-order factors (cf. House et al., 2004).

Table 13.5 depicts the first- and second-order leadership dimensions as well as the ranking of South Africans (White sample) on the second-order leadership factors compared to the other countries.

From Table 13.5 it is can be seen that in terms of South Africa's own scores, South Africa's highest score is on Charismatic leadership (5.99), the second highest is on the Team-Oriented leadership (5.80), the third highest score is on Participative leadership (5.62), the fourth highest score is on Humane leadership (5.33), the fifth highest score is on Autonomous leadership (3.74), and the lowest score is on Self-Protective leadership (3.19). White male South African leaders perceive themselves as having very high levels of charisma, team orientation, and participation, a high level of humaneness, and lower levels of self-protection and autonomy in their leadership approach.

When South Africa is compared to the 61 other countries, the rankings look as described in the following subsections.

Charismatic Leadership. Even though South Africa's highest score is on Charismatic leadership, it ranked only 19 on this leadership dimension, and it is the third-highest South African ranking compared to the other countries. Other countries that ranked similar to South Africa are Brazil, Denmark, and Guatemala, all ranking 16 with scores of 6.00. The Netherlands, Italy, and Argentina all ranked 20 with scores of 5.98. The countries that ranked the highest on the Charismatic leadership dimension are Ecuador (1 with a score of 6.46), Philippines, (2 with a score of 6.33), and Israel (3 with a score of 6.23).

Team Oriented Leadership. South Africa's second-highest score is on Team Oriented leadership (5.80). Even though this score is well above average and can be seen as high, South Africa is ranked only 31, quite average in terms if the other countries on this dimension, and the fourth-highest ranking compared to the other countries. Countries that scored higher than South Africa are Ecuador (6.21, Rank 1), Brazil (6.17, Rank 2), Greece (6.12, Rank 3), and Bolivia (6.1, Rank 4). Countries that ranked similar to South Africa are Australia, Costa Rica, Ireland, and Namibia (all with a score of 5.81 and Rank 27). Malaysia and the United Sates ranked exactly the same as South Africa, at 31 with a score of 5.8. The countries that scored the lowest on this dimension are France (4.93, Rank 59), Morocco (4.81, Rank 60), and Qatar (4.51, Rank 61).

TABLE 13.5

First- and Second-Order Leadership Dimensions (South Africa White Sample)

Note. Score: Country mean for South Africa on the basis of aggregated scale scores. Band: Letters A to D indicate the country band Austria belongs to (A > B > C > D >). Countries from different Bands are considered to differ significantly from each other (Globe test banding procedure, cf. Hanges, Dickson, & Sipe, 2004). Rank: South Africa's position relative to the 61 countries in the GLOBE study; Rank 1 = highest; Rank 61 = score. Dev.: The “Deviation Score” was computed by subtracting “As Is” scores from ^a A scale's score within-country position compared to the other scales on the same level. Note. ^aA scale's score within-country position compared to the other scales on the same level.

Participative Leadership. South Africa scored the Participative leadership dimension as the third-highest leadership dimension, and it is South Africa's second-highest ranking leadership dimension compared to the other countries, with a score of 5.62 and a rank of 16. Countries who scored similarly to South Africa are he Netherlands (5.75, Rank 12), Australia (5.71, Rank 13), East Germany (5.7, Rank 14), Ireland (5.64, Rank 15), and United Kingdom alongside Zimbabwe (both Ranked 17, and scored 5.57). Costa Rica and Sweden had scores of 5.54 and ranked 19. The countries that scored the highest on this dimension are Canada (6.09, Rank 1), Brazil (6.06, Rank 2), and Austria (6.00 Rank 3). The countries that scored the lowest on the Participative Leadership Dimension are Albania (4.5, Rank 61), Indonesia (4.6, Rank 60), and Mexico (4.64 Rank 59).

Humane Leadership. Even though the South Africa score on the Humane dimension (5.33) is only the fourth highest of South Africa's own scores, it is ranked as 8 out off all the other countries, and it is the highest ranking compared to the other dimensions. Iran (5.75) ranked the highest on this dimension, with Georgia (5.61) in second, Phillippines (5.53) in third, and Nigeria (5.49) in fourth place. Countries that ranked similarly to South Africa are Indonesia (5.33, Rank 5), Taiwan (5.35, Rank 6), Zambia (5.27, Rank 8), and India (5.26, Rank 7). The countries that scored the lowest on this dimension are Morocco (4.10, Rank 59), Russia (4.08, Rank 60), and France (3.82, Rank 61).

Autonomous Leadership. South Africa scored the Autonomous leadership dimension as the fifth highest (second-lowest) leadership dimension, it is also South Africa's fifth-highestranking leadership dimension compared to the other countries. With a rank of 40, South Africa ranked well below average compared to the other countries on this dimension. Countries who scored similarly to South Africa are Namibia and New Zealand, both with scores of 3.77 and ranks of 36, and the Philippines and United States, both with scores of 3.75 and ranks of 38. Japan (3.67, Rank 41), Canada (3.65, Rank 42), Italy and Nigeria, both with scores of 3.62 and ranks of 43 also ranked similarly to South Africa.

The countries that scored the highest on this dimension are Russia (4.63, Rank 1), Kazakhstan (4.58, Rank 2), and Georgia (4.57, Rank 3). The countries that scored the lowest on the Autonomous Leadership dimension are Brazil (2.27, Rank 61), Portugal (3.19, Rank 60), and Hungary (3.23 Rank 59).

Self-Protective Leadership. South Africa's sixth highest score, or lowest score, is on Self-Protective leadership (3.19) and the score is below the scale average. South Africa is ranked 45. The countries that scored the highest on this dimension are Albania (4.62, Rank 1), Iran (4.34, Rank 2), Taiwan (4.28, Rank 3), and Egypt (4.21, Rank 4). Countries that ranked similarly to South Africa are Italy (3.25, Rank 42), Hungary (3.24, Rank 43), Zimbabwe (3.20, Rank 44), New Zealand (3.19, Rank 45), United States (3.15, Rank 47), Portugal (3.10, Rank 48), Austria (3.07, Rank 49), and Australia (3.05, Rank 50). The countries that scored the lowest on this dimension are France and Sweden both with scores of 2.81 and ranks of 58, and Finland (2.55, Rank 61).

Results of Qualitative Study

In this section, the South African results of the focus groups, in-depth interviews, and media analysis, based on the seven cultural dimensions, are discussed.

Focus Groups and Individual Interviews. Prior to conducting the focus group discussions and interviews, the authors did a prestudy in which 430 first-year MBA students had to list the characteristics of competent managers and outstanding leaders. Additionally, they had to indicate how managers from South African differed from those from Russia and Japan. The data obtained in this way were incorporated in the overall qualitative report, because they did not differ significantly from the data derived from the individual interviews and focus group discussions. It was found in the prestudy that the South African graduates, whether Black or White, were unable to differentiate between South African managers and managers in the specified countries, other than in a very vague stereotypical way. There may be various reasons for this: (a) The nature of the question requires stereotyping; (b) South Africans have, in the apartheid years, been so isolated from the international mainstream through sanctions, trade boycotts, travel restrictions, censorship, and demonizing of communist countries, that they cannot be expected to have any authentic or well-informed opinion on this question.

A general observation is that our respondents viewed South African managers as being more similar to Russian managers than to the Japanese. Russian managers are seen to be bureaucratic, conservative, slow-moving, and not particularly innovative. The respondents were also of the opinion that the reality in South African and Russian management/leadership style reflects management, whereas the ideal is that of Japan, which is associated with leadership. Given the results of this large sample, it was decided not to include this international comparison in the focus group discussions. With regard to South Africa's international isolation, a further point needs to be made: All the respondents have some form of tertiary education (management programs, bachelor's degrees, engineering, or postgraduate). Management education in South Africa is largely based on American textbooks and although it was stressed from the outset that this research is not interested in textbook-correct answers, it is suspected that the “American slant” present in our educational system did play a role in the respondents’ personal views and opinions.

The following qualitative data were obtained from the interviews and focus group discussions.

Definition of a Leader.

The Roles and Behavior Expected of Leaders.

Leadership Style in South Africa.

Definition of a Manager. It was decided to include a paragraph on the manager in this chapter because some of the respondents (apart from making the unremarkable observation that the ideal is that the manager must also be a leader) pointed out that in the end there must be convergence between the leader and the manager. Leaders must be contextualized in that they must have the ability to translate their new idea/vision into an organizationally acceptable format and communicate and sell this to their peers, superiors, and subordinates. Leaders must have the ability to “shift gears”: Their vision must be managed in terms of traditional managerial skills such as planning and control.

Managers are trained persons who use their initiative to perform the traditional functions of management—planning, leading, organizing and control to achieve results—within a set time frame and limits. In doing this they must display the ability to listen, communicate, motivate, delegate, and coach. Managers derive their objectives from that of the organization, whereas leaders have more of an “internal locus of control.”

Roles and Behavior of the Competent Manager.

Some of the obstacles to leadership mentioned by the respondents related to South Africa's cultural and linguistic diversity, and lack of transcultural empathy, interaction, and accommodation. Whereas it may make sense in a country such as the United States, where the economically dominant group is also the numerically superior group and hence the dominant political group, to take into account only that group's norms, culture, and perceptions, the same cannot be said in a country such as South Africa, where cross-cultural issues may be determinative of leadership effectiveness.

Media Analysis. In the search for quotations relating to leadership in the media analysis stage of the research, the term leadership was interpreted in a wide context to include political, business, and community leaders but excluding references to leaders and leadership in sport.

In the media analysis, visionary leadership (1), performance-orientated leadership (2), decisive leadership (3), collectivist leadership, which include humane leadership (4), inspirational leadership (5), and integrity leadership (6) came out on top in terms of frequency of occurrence in media reports. With one exception, there is a close correspondence with these results and that of the quantitative data. The high ranking of collectivist leadership (4) in the media analysis can be explained by the stress placed on corporatist policies and practices in the business domain. It is neither politically correct, nor commercially prudent, to praise leadership in the corporate world at a time when the unions have gained much ground in their struggle for greater participative management and consultation rights. Another possible explanation for this specific discrepancy is that the quantitative data focused exclusively on Whites, whereas the media analysis also included the other cultures in South Africa. It may well be that the higher collectivistic leadership score is a more accurate reflection of South Africa's larger population's perceptions.

Combined, Overall Profile of Leadership in South Africa

From the preceding qualitative data, focus group, individual interview, and the media analysis discussion, it seems that outstanding leaders in South Africa are perceived to show a strong and direct, but team-oriented and participative style of leadership. In terms of leadership attributes, it seems that the White subgroup shows a strong preference for charismatic and action-orientated leadership and a preference for considerate and humane leadership with a tendency toward a bureaucratic leadership. Although they are seen as being charismatic, they are also seen as being responsible, not as agitators, and to some extent as visionaries. Even though South African leaders place high emphasis on performance, they tend to be perceived as being sensitive to followers’ needs and are expected to reflect followers’ ideas, satisfy their requirements, and be respectful and understanding. They are seen as quite participative and humane. South African leaders are perceived to be decisive and good negotiators. They are also expected to be pragmatic and creative, by utilizing their interpersonal skills and knowledge. They must act reactively as well as proactively, depending on their analysis of a situation. South African leaders are also perceived to show integrity in their leadership and appear not to be self-protective.

5.  EMIC MANIFESTATIONS OF THE CULTURE OF AND LEADERSHIP IN SOUTH AFRICA

Performance Orientation

Achievement on all levels is important to South Africans. Rugby stars and Olympic champions are remembered long after their achievements have been eclipsed by others. Indeed, for a glorious moment in our history, all South Africans were united in triumph when South Africa won the rugby world cup in 1995. In the rural town of Beaufort West, there is even a museum in honor of Chris Barnard, who performed the first heart transplant. Many individuals are remembered and honored for their mythical heroic deeds, among these are Wolrade Woltemade, Racheltjie de Beer, Dick King, and various Voortrekker leaders as well as some of their opponents and Black adversaries. The emphasis seems to fall on individual achievement rather than the heroics of the collective.

Schooling is compulsory up to the age of 15, or the ninth grade, and no pupil may be refused entry to a school simply because of an inability to pay school fees. At the end of each school year, the newspapers carry short résumés with photographs of pupils who achieved the highest grades for their final-year examinations, these achievers are typically awarded with bursaries for university studies. In particular, the press highlights any pupil who overcame personal hardship to attain good marks. However, the dark side of this achieving ethos is that every year yields its tragic crop of suicides among high school students during the examination period. Among all population groups in South Africa an almost exaggerated importance is placed on academic qualifications and achievements.

In South African organizations, Performance Orientation manifests by extensive use of performance appraisals, employee-of-the-month awards, and promotions based on outstanding performance. Performance excellence is emphasized and usually coupled with merit awards. Leadership awards are awarded not only in organizations but also in the greater community, like the Leadership in Practice Award that is awarded to an outstanding business person every year by one of South Africa's prominent business schools. There are an abundance of certificate programs, short courses, and seminars dealing with performance excellence and quality improvement. In the academic world, awards for outstanding research and lecturing are awarded. Merit bursaries are awarded to pupils and students with exceptional grades and talents.

Future Orientation

In looking at South African organizations, the relatively high ranking of South Africa on this dimension is to some extent understandable. South Africa, in the person of Clem Sunter, developed scenario planning, which is a planning model focusing on different scenarios in 10 to 25 years in the future. Strategic planning is very important, if not number one, on most companies’ agendas. Companies have annually and some biannually have strategic planning sessions or bosberade (the Afrikaans word for strategic planning) or “Indabas” (an African word used for strategic planning), where planning is done for the next year, next 5 years, or even further in the future. These strategic sessions are often planned a year or 6 months in advance.

It is also not uncommon to have a chartered accountant or finance person as executive officer, even in organizations whose core business is not finance. Almost every organization has at least one financial expert on the board of directors. Most companies have strict budgets, are busy with cost-cutting and saving, do long-term planning, and have plans for the next 5 to 10 years.

It is, however, more difficult to explain the relatively high ranking on this dimension, when looking at political leaders and government. Certainly, South Africa's political leaders and their (White) followers have always looked at short-term solutions for the country's internal troubles. Also, the continued export of primary resources rather than enriching it locally for export, so typical of a Third World country, indicates a lack of Future Orientation. On the other hand, the determined search for oil and the development of the oil-from-coal technology and heavy industry in iron and steel may indicate the contrary, although a more plausible explanation for these developments is the international isolation of the country during the apartheid years.

Gender Egalitarianism

In most South African households, the husband is the head of the family who makes almost all the important decisions. The inequality of sharing household chores even where both partners work is a further indication of widespread chauvinism in our society. Until recently, politics, engineering, law, medicine, and other high-profile careers were almost totally dominated by men and these “male occupations” attract good remuneration packages when compared to “female jobs,” such as nursing or speech therapists, which are not well-paid occupations. This male dominance is not limited to the Afrikaner group, but a particularly tragic manifestation of the Afrikaner man as the head of, and sole provider for his family, is the fact that among the Afrikaner group, family massacres occur more frequently than anywhere else in the world.

Even though the South African government occupies seventh position out of 179 parliaments surveyed on their involvement of women, with only Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Finland, and New Zealand ahead of them, men still dominate politics, business, the trade union movement, and the economy in South Africa. The latest statistics (CSS, 1998, p. 41) show that in December 1997, 87% of management in the public service were men, and only 13% women.

From Fig. 13.1 it is evident that in business, very few women are in senior and executive positions. In 1997, women comprised only 1.3% (49) of 3,773 directors of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange's 657 listed companies; only 14 women were listed as either executive directors, chairwomen, or managing directors, and less than 1% as board members. A 2004 Census of South African Women in Corporate Leadership, done by the Business Women's Association of South Africa (BWASA) in association with Catalyst (USA), surveyed the women on boards of directors and in executive management of public companies listed on the JSE as of September 30, 2004 (BWASA, 2005). The results gives a similar picture regarding gender and showed that women constitute only 19.8% of all executive managers and only 10.7% of all directors (Booysen, 2005). In management training, women comprise only 20%, with women lecturing staff on the faculty of business schools only 23%. Because of the historically dominant masculine values in South African organizational cultures, leadership, and leadership training, as well as the minority status of women in management, feminine values in leadership are not yet valued on an equal footing with masculine values.

Humane Orientation

Given South Africa's apartheid history, it is perhaps not surprising that South Africans do not see theirs as a humane society. Paradoxically, the inhumane treatment of other groups ran directly counter to Christian teachings, which meant that the Christian nationalist somehow had to keep a rigid divide between their religious beliefs and their political practices. South Africans regard themselves as conservative Christians and in the latter years of apartheid the churches started (belatedly) to speak up against the apartheid state. Also, because the distribution of crime has become more equally distributed since the abolition of influx control (i.e., it has spread from the Black townships to traditionally White suburbs), the perception is that violent crime has increased.

Power Distance

In most companies, senior staff members enjoy advantages of status such as larger offices, more opulent office furniture, and reserved parking bays. Dress is generally formal and a senior executive is shielded from his or her minions by a formidable private secretary. Organizational structures tend to be more hierarchical, with long power and command lines, and systems and processes in place that support power structures and positional power and authority. Most organizations’ cultures value authority, titles, and power displays. However, there are indications that these hierarchical barriers are being relaxed and in some instances completely dismantled. (Mandela's informal and relaxed conduct, casual attire and “African” shirts may act as a role model in this regard.) In the schools, pupils address teachers in a formal and deferential manner and are not likely to challenge authority. Public works and monuments are frequently named for leaders. At a local level, street names would frequently honor local celebrities.

Individualism/Collectivism

The urbanization level of White South Africans has reached a ceiling, and in keeping with relatively affluent Western urbanized societies, the low level of collectivism is unsurprising. This contrasts sharply with the situation two to three generations ago when families were large and extended, and kinship ties were cherished and maintained. In modern urbanized South Africa, the typical core family of four lives in isolation of its neighbors. This causes an interesting dilemma for upwardly mobile Blacks who move to traditionally White neighborhoods. Coming from communities where neighbors were very much a part of one's everyday life, many Blacks find it a lonely and isolated experience to live in a White urban area. However, as discussed in the introduction, it seems that Africans as a group tend to be more collectivistic than the White group, and it is foreseen that the South African Blacks will measure higher on collectivism than the White sample used in the research on which this chapter is based.

Uncertainty Avoidance

South Africa is noted for its many rules and regulations. For many years, there were “control boards” for anything from maize to fruit to regulate market fluctuations. Perhaps this multitude of control boards, with their blatant interference in the free market in a country that professed to foster a capitalist economy, were the clearest indication of our fear of uncertainty and aversion to risk taking. In the labor market, laws were promulgated to provide for minimum standards of employment, unemployment insurance, and compensation for disabilities and diseases arising from employment. Apart from these laws, the system of industrial councils provided for the negotiation, on an industry-wide basis, of a myriad of rules regulating businesses in a particular industry. Most South African organizations also have numerous rules, regulations, and procedures for almost every possible event and contingency that may happen within their organization.

6.  LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The main limitation of this study is the composition of the sample to which the whole battery of analytic methods could be employed, being exclusively White men. Related to this is the fact that the media analysis included newspapers with a target market other than White men, which makes comparisons between the results of the media analysis and the quantitative data suspect. On reflection, the media analysis should have been done individually, per paper/journal, rather than summing these results combining newspapers and journals. Second, this was done during a time of monumental transition in South Africa, making generalizations across time a risky business. At most, one can say that these results are a snapshot of one sector of our society at a given time and that replication studies will have to be undertaken to determine which conclusions have stood the test of time and which have been overtaken by sociopolitical events.

Possible directions of future research that may be of great significance include the following:

• Interethnic comparisons (the perception that Blacks are a homogenous grouping, though it may have had greater validity in the struggle against apartheid, is an oversimplification and a Eurocentric view; in postapartheid South Africa, ethnic differences and tribal loyalties may reassert themselves). Also an investigation in African management practices, or Afrocentric leadership.
• Investigating the conceptions of leadership between the genders (there are indications that women tend to have a greater affinity for leadership that focuses on relationships and this may correlate with the African concept of “ubuntu,” which holds that “I am a person through other persons”).
• The conceptions of leadership held in the political sphere (the authors hypothesize that some political decisions of our leaders may be explained by an expanded notion of the obligations of a leader toward his or her subordinates).
• The conceptions of leadership held in traditional communities versus conceptions of leadership held in urbanized communities (South Africa's modern Constitution and its Bill of Rights come into direct conflict with many customs and practices in traditional tribal communities).

7.  PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

What should a foreign manager expect while dealing with south African managers? Though it is not possible to provide a comprehensive discussion for the visiting manager, because a large part of this research focuses just on White men, and the South African society transformed rapidly since 1999 when the data was collected, some of the most salient and probable features of the South African world of work are listed here. The central theme is diversity management. With the advent of affirmative action and Black economic empowerment initiatives, the South African workforce has become increasingly diverse (with the exception of lower levels of employment, which are dominated by Blacks). Interpersonal communication (including the correct interpretation of body language) is of great importance because it may lead the visitor to draw incorrect inferences if she or he is not careful. A manager from a country where task orientation is focused on should be aware that South Africans will also express concern over the welfare of the person (greetings are mostly phrased in sentences such as “How are you?” to which one must respond appropriately and extend the same courtesy to the speaker). Male South African managers may tend to be authoritarian, in the sense that they make the final decision, but this is typically preceded by a lengthy consultative process. The visitor may also find that strict adherence to starting times of meetings is not the norm and because of the importance placed on giving each person the chance to voice his or her opinion, meetings may also last longer than expected. Also, European visitors may find that the perceived role of a manager as a man is still much more prevalent in South Africa than is the case in Western Europe, although the presence of young well-educated women in managerial positions is sharply on the increase.

8.  EUROCENTRIC VERSUS AFROCENTRIC LEADERSHIP

Two different leadership approaches in the country, namely an Afrocentric and a Eurocentric conception of leadership, is one of the dilemmas South African managers face. On the one hand is the Eurocentric/Western approach, which has proven value in improving organizational and work performance worldwide and in South Africa and, on the other is the Afrocentric management approach (Booysen & Beaty, 1997). This dilemma is discussed in more detail by looking at research done in this regard subsequent to the GLOBE data collection mentioned earlier, which focused only on the White male manager in South Africa.

Subsequent to the data collection for the GLOBE study, Booysen (1999; 2001) used an adapted version of the GLOBE questionnaire in combination with interviews and focus groups to measure subcultural differences between race and gender in South African managers. The unit of study was White and African Black management; the levels of management included junior, middle, and senior management, from three of the largest retail banks in South Africa. The target population included a total of 18,449 managers. A disproportional probability sample was used to include comparable numbers in the sample across and within each management level. The respondents were selected on a systematic basis, according to specified quotas and stratified in terms of organization, management level, gender, and race. The quota included 840 managers (4.6% of the total population). A total of 263 managers (1.4% of the total population) across all the banks were sampled. As regards the race distribution across the organizations, 119 (45.2%) respondents were Black managers and 144 (54.8%) White managers. There were 90 (34.2%) White male managers, 54 (20.5%) White female managers, 82 (31.%) Black male managers, and 37 (14.1%) Black female managers in the total sample frame. It should be noted that Booysen's (1999) study does not include the “Should Be” scale and is based only on the “As Is” scale. Furthermore, the GLOBE data discussed earlier were collected from White men in 1995 and 1996, just after the first democratic elections in April 1994, whereas the data for Booysen's (1999) study were collected at the end of 1998 and beginning of 1999, and included African Blacks and women.

In summary, in terms of the cultural dimensions, the findings of Booysen's study showed indeed significant differences between the Black and White racial groups on all the dimensions except Power Distance. The findings are depicted in Table 13.6.

Performance Orientation

Although both groups scored above average on the Performance Orientation cultural dimension, White managers scored well above average and measured significantly higher than Black managers, who scored above average (p < 0.10). Some quotations from the qualitative data illustrate this point:

• “Blacks are not as results driven as whites.”
• “Whites are performance orientated with the focus on profit margin.”
• “Whites are bottom line driven—if you do not perform you are out.”
• “Blacks focus on people instead of skills.”

It is interesting to note that the Performance Orientation in highly individualistic societies, like the Whites in South Africa, lies on the individual level—individuals strive for their own achievement in life. However, in collectivistic societies, like the African Blacks in South Africa, Performance Orientation manifests at the group level. The score of the White group on this scale of 5.28 is higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 4.11 and nearer to the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 6.23.

Future Orientation

White managers measured higher than Black managers on Future Orientation (p < 0.01). White managers scored well above average, whereas Black managers scored below average and ranked it in seventh place. This finding confirms the arguments of Coldwell and Moerdyk (1981), Meeding (1994), Boon (1996), Prime (1999), and Collier and Bornman (1999), who stress the differences between the linear, sequential, or mono-chronic perception of time by Whites and the cyclical, synchronic, or poly-chronic perception of time by Blacks in South Africa.

TABLE 13.6

T Test Results for Differences Between Blacks and Whites on the Cultural Dimensions (df = 261, N = 119, White N = 144).

Note. From Booysen (1999, 2001).

^* p < .10 (90%).

^** p < .05 (95%).

^*** p < .01 (99%).

# Dimensions are ranked according to group means.

SD = standard deviation.

A linear concept of time that is shared by the Whites is more event related than continuum related. Time is tangible and divisible in this view. Time commitments are taken seriously, and time is seen as a narrow line consisting of discrete, consecutive points. The dominant temporal horizon is the future where consciousness first projects into. Planning and keeping to plans and schedules once made are important. Future planning is important.

Alternatively, if time is viewed as synchronic, poly-chronic, or cyclical, several things can be done at the same time. Time is viewed as a wide ribbon, allowing many things to take place simultaneously; time is flexible and intangible. Time commitments are seen as desirable rather than absolute. Plans can be easily changed and more value is placed on the satisfactory completion of interaction with others than on time commitments. Because of the poly-chronic or cyclical concept of time, Black managers would tend to have a preference for past and immediate or present orientation, and not necessarily focus on planning or making preparations for events to happen in the future (Berger, 1996; Collier & Bornman, 1999; Prime, 1999).

It is also clear that different perceptions of time have implications for organizational practices, for instance, the running of meetings with cultural diverse groups. Sequential cultures, like the White group in South Africa, are likely to upset synchronic cultures, like the African Black group in South Africa, when they insist on running meeting agendas like clockwork. Synchronic people will frustrate sequential people when they seem unable to stay focused on the single specific issue at hand and when relationships are seen as more important than time. The score of the White group on this scale of 5.04 is higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 4.13 and more in line with the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 5.66.

Gender Egalitarianism and Assertiveness

White managers measured higher than Black managers on Assertiveness (p < 0.01) and Gender Egalitarianism (p < 0.05). Whites scored above average on Assertiveness and ranked it in fifth place, whereas Blacks scored below average and ranked Assertiveness in sixth place. Though both groups scored far below average on Gender Egalitarianism and ranked it in last place, there is nevertheless a significant difference between the groups, with Blacks showing more gender differentiation than Whites. The following are illustrations from the qualitative data:

• “Whites are autocratic and aggressive.”
• “Blacks are not assertive.”
• “Blacks do not want female managers.”

As already discussed, Assertiveness and Gender Egalitarianism are the subdivisions of the Masculinity/Femininity cultural dimension. At the organizational level, Masculinity is manifested by aggressive competition, the selection and encouragement of strong-willed and determined management, the pursuit of growth in markets and profits, lean organizational functioning, austere surroundings, and sex role discrimination with respect to higher level positions. Femininity is manifested in participative behavior, power sharing, empowerment, consensus, and collaboration. Networking, teamwork, and cooperation are emphasized, and there is emphasis on feelings, intuition, and relationship building.

The combination of a high level of Assertiveness and a low level of Gender Egalitarianism, as in the case of Whites, indicates a high level of Masculinity. Although Blacks score below average on Assertiveness, they score significantly lower than the already low score of Whites on Gender Egalitarianism, and thus are also high on Masculinity. The score of the White group on assertiveness of 4.78 is higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 4.60 and lower than GLOBE “Should Be” score of 3.69. The Booysen score of the White group on Gender Egalitarianism 3.53 is slightly higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 4.09 and lower than the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 4.60.

Humane Orientation

Black managers scored well above average, whereas White managers scored below average on Humane Orientation (p < 0.10). There is a significant difference on this scale between Blacks and Whites and Blacks tend to be more humane than Whites. The qualitative data support the survey findings as illustrated by the following quotes:

• “Whites are less accommodating than black managers.”
• “Whites are more task focused than people oriented.”
• “Blacks divide/share responsibility in order to protect the non-performer.”
• “Whites focus on short term financial comfort—whereas blacks focus on the community—more people oriented.”
• “Blacks affirm more and build employees'self esteem, they focus on people instead of skills.”

The score of the White group on this scale of 4.24 is higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 3.49 and more in line with the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 5.65.

Power Distance

Although White managers indeed measured higher than Black managers on the Power Distance cultural dimension, this is the only dimension on which there is no significant difference between the scores of the Black and the White groups. However, both Blacks and Whites scored above the scale average on Power Distance. The score of the White group on this scale of 4.80 is lower than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 5.16 and higher than the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 2.64.

Collectivism/Individualism

Black managers measured higher than White managers on Collectivism (p < 0.01). The qualitative data support the survey research and the following themes and patterns emerged from quotes from both groups in regard to this issue:

• “Blacks are collectivistic—go back to the tribe to obtain input—are experienced as being indecisive.”
• “Whites are individualistic—obtain input from team players and then take decisions.”
• “Blacks emphasize the team above the individual.”
• “The black leader takes responsibility for the whole team.”
• “Whites are autocratic dictators.”
• “Blacks are communal, democratic and inclusive.”
• “Afro-centric—more communal way of doing things, joint problem solving. The contact with the employee is through his/her family. Leader rather than dictator—usually elderly experienced person.”

This research thus confirms the findings of Avolio (1995) and Prime (1999), who claim that in South Africa there appear to be both an individualistic and a communalistic orientation, depending on whether the group is White or Black. It also confirms the research of Koopman (1994), who maintains that Whites give primacy to the individual, whereas Blacks see the need for individuals to find their place in a societal structure. This research furthermore confirms Mbigi's (1995a, 1995b, 1997) argument that Africans (Blacks) share the principles of collective solidarity and not the principles of individual self-sufficiency, like Whites. Note that when this analysis was done the scores of Institutional and In-Group Collectivism were still conflated in the Individualism/Collectivism Dimension.

Uncertainty Avoidance

White managers measured significantly higher than Black managers on Uncertainty Avoidance (p < 0.01). This means that White managers show a higher intolerance for uncertainty than Black managers. It is important to note that, although Whites measured higher on Uncertainty Avoidance than Blacks, both groups scored above average on this dimension. Though both groups will display Uncertainty Avoidance behavior, Blacks have a significant higher tolerance for uncertainty than Whites, which is illustrated by quotes from the qualitative data:

• “Whites are more regimented and non-flexible.”
• “Whites are more business like, formal and restrictive.”
• “Blacks are rebellious, want flexibility, want freedom.”

This hypothesis thus confirms the literature (Meeding, 1994; Boon, 1996; Lessem, 1994, 1996) that states that because of several differences between the African and Western worldviews, which can be listed according to causation, time, self, and probability, and the African ontological perspective of not having exclusive control over the future, Blacks tend to have a greater tolerance for uncertainty than Whites.

South Africa is currently going through a transformational period, one that is busy changing the existing intergroup dynamics due to societal power shifts among the different culture groups that took place in South Africa since 1994. Apart from the inherent cultural differences, possible other circumstantial explanations can be given as to why African Blacks show a lower level of Uncertainty Avoidance behavior than Whites. Some of these explanations are as follows:

First, the societal changes that started to take place in South Africa since the first democratic elections and the new Constitution, which guarantees equal rights to all people, gave an enormous amount of power to Blacks that they did not previously have. However, even though the constitutional rights to all people did not formally take away any power from Whites, they now do not have exclusive power anymore and therefore may feel that they have lost some power and opportunities (even to the extent that they feel powerless), which may cause higher levels of uncertainty (Booysen, 2005; Munetsi, 1999; Rowen, 2000; Shapiro, 2001).

Second, in the work situation, changes like the Labour Relations and the Equality Acts and the implementation of affirmative action and employment equity policies can be construed as disempowering to Whites and empowering to Blacks. This may cause lower levels of uncertainty among Blacks, and higher levels of uncertainty among Whites (Helepi, 1999; Pillay, 1999). Third, due to apartheid and the historical dominance of White norms, rules, and regulations, Blacks, being in the subordinate position prior to 1994, learned to cope better with change, uncertainty, and ambiguity. Whites, especially White men, who used to be the dominant group, are still in the process of dealing with their changed status. The score of the White group on this scale of 5.11 is higher than the GLOBE “As Is” score of 4.09 and more in line with the GLOBE “Should Be” score of 4.67.

Cultural Profiles of White and Black South African Managers

The cultural profile of the White South African management group reflects a high level of Performance Orientation, above-average levels of Uncertainty Avoidance, Future Orientation, Power Distance, and Assertiveness, below-average levels of Collectivism and Humane Orientation, and a low level of Gender Egalitarianism. This profile is largely congruent with Western or Eurocentric management systems, which tend to emphasize competition and a work orientation, free enterprise, liberal democracy, materialism, individual self-sufficiency, self-fulfillment and-development, exclusivity, planning, methodology, and structure.

The cultural constellation of the Black South African management group reflects high levels of Collectivism and Humane Orientation, above-average levels of Performance Orientation, Uncertainty Avoidance, and Power Distance, below-average levels of Assertiveness and Future Orientation, and a low level of Gender Egalitarianism. This profile is to a large extent opposed to the Western or European management systems, and comparable to the Afrocentric management system, which emphasizes collective solidarity, inclusivity, collaboration, consensus and group significance, concern for people as well as working for the common good, structure through rituals and ceremonies, patriarchy, respect, and dignity.

A clear parallel can be drawn between the Eurocentric or individualistic models, and transactional leadership. African humanism or Ubuntu is much more closely aligned with transformational leadership. “Specifically, transformational leaders work to create a climate and culture where each individual and the group can achieve their full potential. In doing so, transformational leaders can facilitate the Africanisation of South African organizations” (Avolio, 1995, p. 19).

That there are two different leadership approaches in the country is one of the dilemmas South African managers face: on the one hand, Eurocentric/Western approach that has proven value in improving organizational and work performance worldwide including in South Africa and, on the other, the Afrocentric management approach (Booysen & Beaty, 1997). Supporters of the latter approach argue that, for managers to be relevant in South Africa, they must accept concepts embodied in the indigenous African philosophy. The same dilemma applies to foreign companies who want to do business in South Africa.

However, managers do not, and should not, choose between Eurocentric and Afrocentric management approaches in South Africa; rather, these two sets of values must rather hastily embrace each other. However, previous thinking, action and behavior of the South African corporate world and culture were somewhere between Europe and the United States—not at all in Africa. But, as Madi (1995) argues, with the changes taking place in the new South Africa, even corporate culture has started to realize that we are all in Africa, and that the average South African is 15 years old and Black and they, with their sense of values, perceptions, and frames of reference, will be the workforce of tomorrow.

9.  CONCLUSION

The results herein focused on the White male subcultural group in South Africa, which historically was, and still is, the dominant group in business. There are, however, several other cultural groupings that need also to be taken into account when analyzing leadership in South Africa, as discussed in Section 5. South Africa is at present in a transitional phase and it is foreseen that because of affirmative action and equal opportunity programs, more people of color and women will enter the leadership echelons, and the leadership culture will change.

The most important findings from the results can be summarized as follows:

In terms of cultural dimensions:

• South Africa has shows an above-average level of Assertiveness and ranked eighth out of all the countries; they are, however, of the opinion that their level of assertiveness is probably too high.
• South African has an above-average score on Performance Orientation, with a ranking of 30, and desires to be even more achievement orientated. The media analysis provides strong support for this conclusion in that Performance Orientation ranked second highest of all the cultural dimensions in the media sample.
• South Africa displays a well above average degree of Future Orientation, with a ranking of 19, and desires an even higher degree of Future Orientation. Strong support for this inference is found in the results of the media analysis in which Future Orientation ranked first.
• South African has a propensity for the male role and masculine values, with a ranking of 35, and South Africans are mildly aware that they should value femininity and recognize female roles more.
• With a ranking of 54, South Africa seems to be a rather inhumane society, and of all the dimensions South Africans felt most strongly the desire to become a more humane society. Humane values were also manifestly absent in the media analysis sample and ranked last of the seven dimensions.
• Although South Africa scores in the midrange of countries sampled, with a ranking of 35 on the Power Distance dimension, its score still reflects high on Power Distance, with a desire to be more Egalitarian. Although Power Distance ranked fifth in the quantitative data analysis, it came out third in the media analysis. A possible explanation of this discrepancy in the results obtained by the different data sets could be that whereas the former comprised only Whites, the media analysis included a Black newspaper as well as reports on Black businesses and the pronouncements of Black business leaders. It may well be that Blacks’ sense of Power Distance in society is much higher than that of Whites, thus accounting for the higher ranking obtained in the media analysis.
• South Africa scored well above average and slightly to the top end of the Band A countries on Institutional Collectivism, which shows that there is a relatively high degree of integration into groups and within organizations and society in South Africa. Regarding In-Group Collectivism, South Africa scored below average and is grouped in the Band B countries. The high deviation score could be interpreted as a desire for a higher In-Group Collectivist orientation and that South Africans yearn for a society with a greater degree of integration of the individual into small groups and families. This is also reflected in the media analysis. A possible explanation for this strong collectivistic sentiment from the media analysis could be that, because of our very strong Black trade unions and the nature of our labor laws and industrial relations dispensation, great emphasis is placed on participative management, worker empowerment, and consultative management by spokespersons of corporations. This is good public relations and makes for good copy. Such pronouncements may well have manifested themselves in the media analysis as “collectivist” sentiments.
• South Africa has an average score and ranking of 32 on Uncertainty Avoidance and it seems that there is not really a desire to change this. The results of the media analysis indicate an even lower level of concern with Uncertainty Avoidance. This result is difficult to explain given the transitional phase the society finds itself in; intuitively one would have expected a greater concern with uncertainty but this is not borne out by the empirical data. However, Booysen's (1999) data show a higher level of Uncertainty Avoidance in White men than does the GLOBE study.

In terms of Leadership attributes, it seems that the White subgroup shows a strong preference for charismatic and action-orientated leadership, and a moderate preference for considerate leadership with a tendency to bureaucratic leadership; this fits neatly with the focus group analysis. It thus seems that White male managers in South Africa tend to be charismatic and action orientated in their preferred leader behavior. They are highly future and achievement orientated, showing a high level of Power Distance. Although they also show some tendency toward bureaucratic leadership, they have a moderate tendency to be considerate in their leader behavior. They are showing moderate Uncertainty Avoidance behavior and tend to value Masculinity and the male role slightly more than female roles. White South African managers are not Collectivistic inclined, and perceive the South African society to be rather inhumane.

The discrepancies between the GLOBE data and the media analysis on the cultural and leadership attribute dimensions are probably because the GLOBE data included only the White subgroup, whereas the media analysis included White as well as Black media. It also seems that Blacks have a higher Uncertainty Avoidance propensity and are more Collectivistic than are Whites. The media analysis's findings thus seem more in line with the South Africa's general population, than just that of the White subgroup. The lower ranking on Power Distance is possibly because of the trend toward democratization of the workplace in South Africa.

REFERENCES

Avolio, B. J. (1995). Integrating transformational leadership and Afro-centric management. Human Resource Management, 11(6), 17–21.

Beaty, D. T. (1996). Eurocentric or Afrocentric? Business Day Part 2. Mastering Management. (March 11, 1996).

Bendix, D. W. F. (1979). A synopsis of South African legislation. The report of the Commission of Inquiry into Labour Legislation and the Industrial Conciliation Amendment Act (No. 94 of 1979). Research Series No. 4., Pretoria, Institute of Labour Relations, UNISA.

Berger, M. (1996). Cross-cultural team building. London: McGraw-Hill.

Binedell, N. (1992). New approaches. People Dynamics, 10(3), 1.

Boon, M. (1996). The African way. The power of interactive leadership. Sandton: Zebra Press.

Booysen, A. E. (1994, June 13–14). An introduction to a multination study on leadership and organisational practices. Paper delivered at the Congress on Psychometrics for Psychologists and Personnel Practitioners: Evaluation in Diversity—New Challenges. Escom College, Midrand.

Booysen, A. E. (1999). An examination of race and gender influences on the leadership attributes of South African managers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Africa.

Booysen, L. (2001). The duality in South African leadership: Afrocentric or Eurocentric. South African Journal of Labour Relations, 25(3&4), 36–64.

Booysen, L. (2005, June 23). Social identity changes in South Africa: Challenges facing leadership. Professorial Inaugural Lecture, Graduate School of Business Leadership. Midrand: Unisa Publishers.

Booysen, A. E., & Beaty, D. T. (1997). Linking transformation and change leadership in South Africa: A review of principles and practices. SBL Research Review, 1(l), 9–18.

Business Women's Association South Africa, Catalyst USA. (2005). South African women in corporate leadership (Census 2005). Sandton: Nedbank Press.

Charlton, G. D. (1993). The human race: Leadership (2nd ed.). Cape Town: Rustica.

Christie, P. (1996). Stories from an Afman(ager)! Pretoria: Sigma.

Coldwell, D. A. L., & Moerdyk, A. P. (1981). Paradigms apart: Black managers in a white man's world. South African Journal of Business Management, 12(3).

Collier, M. J., & Bornman, E. (1999). Core symbols in South African intercultural friendship. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(1), 133–156.

Dorfman, P. W. (1996). Part II: Topical issues in international management research. In J. Punnitt & O. Shanker (Eds.), International and cross-cultural leadership (p. 267). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Finnemore, M., & Van der Merwe, R. (1986). Introduction to industrial relations in South Africa. Johannesburg: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

Grobler, P. A. (1996). Leadership challenges facing companies in the New South Africa. Inaugural lecture, Department of Business Management, University of South Africa, Pretoria.

Hanges, P. J., Dickson, M. W., & Sipe, M. T. (2004). 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.

Helepi, G. (2000). Moulding strategic affirmative training and development. People Dynamics, 18(3), 34–36.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. London: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill International.

Hofstede, G. (1994). Uncommon sense about organizations, cases, studies, and field observations. London: Sage.

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

House, R. J., Wright, N. S., & Aditya, R. N. (1997). Cross-cultural research on organisational leadership: A critical analysis and a proposed theory. In P. C. Early & m. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industry/organisational psychology (p. 535). San Francisco, CA: New Lexington.

Human, L. (1996). Future competencies of managing diversity: What South African managers need. In M. E. Steyn & K. G. Motshabi (Eds.), Cultural synergy in South Africa (p. 171). Pretoria: Sigma.

Kemp, N. (1994). Managing diversity and affirmative action. Human Resource Management, 10(4), 26–31.

Khoza, R. (1994). The need for an Afrocentric management approach—A South African-based management approach. In P. Christie, R. Lessem, & L. Mbigi, (Eds.), African management: Philosophies, concepts and applications (pp. 117–124). Pretoria: Sigma.

Koopman, A. (1994). Transcultural management—In search of pragmatic humanism. In P. Christie, R. Lessem, & L. Mbigi (Eds.), African management: Philosophies, concepts and applications (pp. 41–76). Pretoria: Sigma.

Lessem, R. (1994). Four worlds—The Southern African businessphere. In P. Christie, R. Lessem, & L. Mbigi (Eds.), African management: Philosophies, concepts and applications (pp. 17–40). Randburg: Knowledge Resources.

Lessem, R. (1996). The Southern African businessphere. In M. E. Steyn & K. B. Motshabi (Eds.), Cultural synergy in South Africa (pp. 185–208). Pretoria, Sigma.

Madi, P. (1995, March). Moving the centre. People Dynamics, 13(3).

Makwana, M. (1994, July). Growing real talent: Implementing authentic affirmative action. People Dynamics, 12(8), 22–25.

Manning, T. (1996, November/December). Part One: Transformation or profit checkmate of SA business? People Dynamics, 14(18), 16–20.

Manning, T. (1997a, January). Profit through transformation: Part II. People Dynamics, 15(1), 16–19.

Manning, T. (1997b). Radical strategy: How South African companies can win against global competition. Sandton: Zebra.

Mbigi, L. (1995a). The roots of Ubuntu in business: A definitive perspective. In L. Mbigi & J. Maree (Eds.), Ubuntu: The spirit of African transformation management (pp. 77–92). Johannesburg: Knowledge Resources.

Mbigi, L. (1995b, November). Ubuntu: A new dimension for business. Enterprise, 93, 57–58.

Mbigi, L. (1997). Ubuntu: The African dream in management. Johannesburg: Knowledge Resources.

Meeding, I. (1994). Leadership values on middle management level: Similarities and differences between groups. Unpublished MBL research report, Graduate School of Business Leadership, Pretoria, University of South Africa.

Munetsi, W. (1999, January). Affirmative action—A simplistic view. People Dynamics, pp. 26–37.

Oakes, D. (1994). Illustrated history of South Africa: The real story (3rd ed.). Cape Town: Reader's Digest.

Pillay, D. (1999, July 20). Equity law is statutory change management. Business Day.

Potgieter, C. (1996). Women's lives across culture. In M. E. Steyn & K. B. Motshabi (Eds.), Cultural synergy in South Africa (p. 89). Pretoria: Sigma.

Prime, N. (1999). Cross-cultural management in South Africa: Problems, obstacles and agenda for companies. Available at http://marketing.byu.edu/htmlpages/ccrs/proceedings99/prime.htm

Rautenbach, F. (2005, April 8). Indirect BEE through the JSE. Is South Africa making progress? Finance Week Report, pp. 1–37.

Rous, A. (Ed.). (1996). Business futures 1996. Stellenbosch: Institute for Futures Research, University of Stellenbosch Printers.

Rowen, P. (2000, March 18). Black income to outstrip Whites. Sunday Times.

Shapiro, T. (2001, August 14). Top executives are still white, male and underpaid. Business Day.

Sonn, J. (1996). Rewriting the “White-is-Right” model: Towards an inclusive society. In M. E. Steyn & K. B. Motshabi (Eds.), Cultural synergy in South Africa (pp. 1–11). Pretoria: Sigma.

South African Central Statistical Service. (1996). Living in South Africa: Selected findings of the 1995 October Household Survey. Pretoria: Government Printer.

South African Statistical Service. (1995a). October household survey 1994. Pretoria, CSS.

South African Statistical Service. (1995a). Statistical Release PO317. Pretoria: CSS.

South African Statistical Service. (1998). Women and men in South Africa 21 & 41. Pretoria: CSS.

South African Department of Labour. (2003). Annual report—Commission for employment equity 2002–2003. Pretoria: Government Printer.

South African Government Web site. (2005). http://www.safrica.info/women/womeninparliament

Statistics South Africa. (2003). Census 2001. Pretoria: Author.

Steyn, M. E., & Motshabi, K. B. (1996). Cultural synergy in South Africa. Pretoria: Sigma.

Van Tonder, C. J. (2004). Organisational change: Theory and practice. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

_______________

¹An overview such as this does not allow the author the luxury of posing opposing views of history, and evaluating these in lengthy scholarly fashion. Given South Africa's history, it is surprisingly difficult to find good reference works that are not biased. This discussion is largely based on a work coauthored by 12 writers with the assistance of a respected historian as historical advisor and a consulting editor, Oakes. The authors are of the opinion that this collaborative effort succeeded in producing a book that is as ideologically neutral as one could hope to find at this juncture in our history.

²Major palaeontological discoveries such as the “Tuang child” (in 1924 at Tuang in the northern Cape) and “Mrs. Ples” (in 1947 at Sterkfontein in Gauteng) as well as a wealth of other finds prove that a species of early man inhabited the African continent millions of years ago. Fossilized remains of Australopithecus Africanus, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, and Homo Sapiens Sapiens have been found at a number of sites in South Africa.

³The San called themselves “Khoikhoi,” which means “men of men” or “real people.”

⁴See the discussion in the subsection A Historical Overview of Industrial Relations in South Africa.

⁵Telkom used to be a public institution accountable to a cabinet minister. In recent years, it was transformed into a company with the government as its only shareholder. It also brought in foreign partners as minority shareholders and in 2003 it became a truly private company when share were sold on the open stock market to individuals. It is a national organization with a monopoly in the telecommunications sector, but the government is presently considering tenders for allowing competitors to enter this sector.

⁶Standard Bank is one of the three largest banks in South Africa and operates nationally.

⁷Sanlam is the second-largest life insurer in South Africa and was started in the first half of the previous century as art of the Afrikaners’ effort to uplift Afrikaners. It used to be perceived as an Afrikaans organization serving the interest of members of this group. This has changed in recent years. The company operates nationally.

⁸Booysen's subsequent research shows the score on this scale to be significantly higher with a score of 5.11 in 1999. This might indicate that White South Africans were possible, in line with change management theory (Van Tonder, 2004), in denial about the future changes in 1994 when the GLOBE data were collected and more in line with the reality in 1999.