A Comparative Study of Leadership and Leadership EffectivenessBetween Taiwan Region and Mainland China－Taking Electronic & IT Industry as Example

• Main Authors: chou chin chin, 周清菁
• Other Authors: Yenpo Tang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2005
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/19230182343653888314

碩士 === 中國文化大學 === 國際企業管理研究所 === 94 === In the rapid industry globalization of 21st century, it doesn’t matter what business scale or scope is, nor owner’s preference, Taiwanese enterprise are inevitably getting under the construction of global integration and alliance, mutual dependence and competition at the same time. Therefore today’s enterprises, especially those transnational firms, have necessity to consider national culture difference in order to diminish conflicts on management, and meantime reach a balance among the firm’s operations and administration, changes of environment and technologies, and culture distance between branch/subsidiary and its parent company. This study combined the concept of Transformational /Transactional Leadership and Cross Culture Leadership Theory to exam the relationship among leadership style, work-related cultural values and organizational outcomes in electronics and IT industry between Taiwan Region and Mainland China. The results of statistical analysis demonstrate that Mainland China has higher score in dimensions of power distance, uncertainty avoidance, collectivisms, and masculinity, and there is downgrading trend in long-term orientation. As to the leadership style, all dimension of transformational leadership are positively related to organizational outcomes, and also demonstrate plural impact in both regions after correlated with culture cognition. Therefore organization leaders could face much difficulty in case of adopting same standard of management in this complicated multi-culture globalization, an effective leadership and serious attention on the difference of cultural cognition should be helpful to create wider vision and diminish distracted gap on management.