{"title":"Responsible leadership toward garnering legitimacy from stakeholders in India: an institutional perspective","authors":"Sadhna Sargam, Ashish Pandey","doi":"10.1108/ccsm-09-2022-0156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Understanding societal expectations of a leader's responsibility and context-specific challenges in less-researched emerging economies has become imperative for foreign Multinational enterprises (MNEs) to survive in these contexts while developing globally responsible leaders. Identification of institutionally sanctioned characteristics, competencies and strategies that assist leaders in dealing with such challenges while achieving shared value has wider implications for academics, practitioners and the literature on responsible leadership (RL), which is the purpose of this paper. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted in-depth interviews of 28 senior indigenous leaders in 3 Indian Multinational corporations (MNCs) in construction sector, following a grounded theory approach. Findings The authors identified three vital institutionally driven challenges and four individual-level societal-driven factors, subsequently influencing leaders' strategic decisions and choices to deal with such challenges beyond passive conformance. Contrary to the previous findings, this study also briefly discusses that a mere ethical climate is insufficient; organizations must develop a holistic values climate that works as contextual factors to influence RL. Originality/value Contrary to the previous findings suggesting Indian leaders' conformance to constraining forces to RL, by adopting a multilevel approach, the authors identify the context-specific strategic behaviors that responsible leaders adopt in dealing with such forces responsibly. Thus, it is the first multilevel inductive approach conducted in a non-Western context, offering a discrete understanding of RL while addressing some of the inconsistencies in the literature and contributing to cross-cultural leadership research. Also, findings highlight the factors of RL that are more emic and etic for generalization.","PeriodicalId":51820,"journal":{"name":"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management","volume":" 31","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cross Cultural & Strategic Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ccsm-09-2022-0156","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose Understanding societal expectations of a leader's responsibility and context-specific challenges in less-researched emerging economies has become imperative for foreign Multinational enterprises (MNEs) to survive in these contexts while developing globally responsible leaders. Identification of institutionally sanctioned characteristics, competencies and strategies that assist leaders in dealing with such challenges while achieving shared value has wider implications for academics, practitioners and the literature on responsible leadership (RL), which is the purpose of this paper. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted in-depth interviews of 28 senior indigenous leaders in 3 Indian Multinational corporations (MNCs) in construction sector, following a grounded theory approach. Findings The authors identified three vital institutionally driven challenges and four individual-level societal-driven factors, subsequently influencing leaders' strategic decisions and choices to deal with such challenges beyond passive conformance. Contrary to the previous findings, this study also briefly discusses that a mere ethical climate is insufficient; organizations must develop a holistic values climate that works as contextual factors to influence RL. Originality/value Contrary to the previous findings suggesting Indian leaders' conformance to constraining forces to RL, by adopting a multilevel approach, the authors identify the context-specific strategic behaviors that responsible leaders adopt in dealing with such forces responsibly. Thus, it is the first multilevel inductive approach conducted in a non-Western context, offering a discrete understanding of RL while addressing some of the inconsistencies in the literature and contributing to cross-cultural leadership research. Also, findings highlight the factors of RL that are more emic and etic for generalization.
期刊介绍:
Cross Cultural & Strategic Management (CCSM), is dedicated to providing a forum for the publication of high quality cross-cultural and strategic management research in the global context. CCSM is interdisciplinary in nature and welcomes submissions from scholars from international business, management and other disciplines, such as anthropology, economics, political science, psychology and sociology. The goal of CCSM is to publish discerning, theoretically grounded, evidence-based and cutting edge research on issues relevant to all aspects of global management. CCSM is especially interested in theoretical and empirical papers that investigate new and unique ideas and/or are multilevel (micro-meso-macro) and/or are multidisciplinary in nature. Research papers submitted to CCSM are expected to include an answer to the question: What is the contribution of this paper to the literature and the field of international business and managing in the global context? CCSM accepts theoretical/conceptual and empirical papers based on quantitative and qualitative research endeavors that advance our overall knowledge of international business. This includes research that yields positive, neutral or negative findings as long as these studies are based on sound research methodology, and have a good command of the theory/literature that pertains to the phenomena under investigation. These studies should also provide a more in-depth interpretation of the reason(s) for the findings and include more detailed recommendations for future research directions.