1

Images of 'African Leadership and Management in Organisation Studies: Tensions, Contradictions and Re-visions

Professor Stella M. Nkomo Graduate School of Business Leadership

University of South Africa Pretoria 0003 South Africa

Work phone: 27 11 652 0365 Fax: 011 652 0299

Email: nkomosm@unisa.ac.za

Inaugural Lecture University of South Africa

7 March 2006

Do not cite or quote without permission of the author.

2

Introduction

This paper is the product of a reflective process instigated by a specific event: my

anxiety about whether twenty years of teaching leadership and management in the United

States would serve me well in South Africa, my new home. That anxiety evaporated when I

arrived five years ago only to learn there was little adjustment required since the texts

prescribed for the modules assigned to me were all from the United States and more than

familiar. Despite the momentary relief, engagement with my students was unsettling. Not

only was Africa invisible in the texts and materials for the module, the prescriptions were

inadequate for the kinds of questions students raised. For the past four years, I have been

thinking deeply about Africa and leadership and management, especially the project of writing

‘African1 leadership and management’ into the field of organisation studies.2

The interest in this project is heightened by the urgency of the issues faced on the

continent. Transformation and change are dominant themes on the African continent today as

leaders in Africa seek ways to address the persistent challenges of poverty, illness, and

unemployment. Initiatives like NEPAD and the African Union reflect a growing belief among

African leaders that Africa must solve its own problems and look for answers from within.

Effective leadership and management are viewed as critical elements to facilitate successful

change for the continent.

Within organisation studies, theories of leadership and management have generally

omitted the voice of the racial ‘Other’ whether it is Africans or other non-Western perspectives

(Cox & Nkomo, 1990; Nkomo, 1992; Prasad, 1997; Prasad, 2006). The West has defined

whether, where, and how these ‘Others’ were supposed to exist; to be seen or to be ignored

(Said, 1979). The result has been stereotyped images of the ‘Others’ including Africa and the

solutions to its development challenges. Western leadership and management discourse has

1 African leadership and management is placed in quotes to indicate the discomfort with reducing a large, diverse continent to a single label as well as to denaturalise the idea of ‘African’ 2 Organisation studies has its proximate historical roots in the socio-political writings of nineteenth century thinkers, such as Saint Simon, who attempted to anticipate and interpret the nascent structural and ideological transformations wrought by industrial capitalism (Reed, 1996). Organisation studies today generally refers to many and varied approaches to the study of organisations. There are a number of subjects of study that fall under this broad umbrella (e.g. leadership theories, strategic management, etc.).

3

typically set up its authorial subjects as the implicit reference and yardstick by which to

encode and represent cultural ‘Others’ (Mohanty, 1984).

In an extensive review of extant leadership theory, House & Aditya (1997) reported

98 percent of leadership theory emanates from the United States and has been developed

primarily by studying American leaders. Yet, leadership theory is largely represented as

universal. Minnick (1990) points to faulty generalisation or nonexclusive universalisation as a

significant error in the production of knowledge. The error occurs when one group (American

leaders) is studied but the knowledge generated then represents the whole concept—

leadership. This point can be further illustrated by the use and non-use of prefixes. The prefix

‘American’ is suppressed when we speak of leadership theory, yet we find ourselves having

to attach the prefix ‘African’ to any discussions of leadership in Africa.

This paper focuses on two questions: (1) How is ‘African leadership and

management’ portrayed in organisation studies literature? (2) What are the possibilities for re-

writing ‘African leadership and management’ in organisation studies? The latter question is

explored within a broader discussion of current trends in leadership theory. The paper is

ultimately concerned with problems of representation and identity: of how difference is

represented both in the sense of representation as depiction and representation as speaking

for (Gunew, 1998). Altogether, this paper surfaces some key tensions and contradictions if

‘African leadership and management’ is to be re-written into organisation studies.

Methodology

In my search for African leadership and management, I reviewed the organisation

studies literature. Articles and texts to address my questions were found through

computerized library searches using the following electronic databases: Academic Search

Elite, ABI/Inform Global, and Emerald. Additionally, reference sections of major organisation

studies texts, literature review papers and edited volumes were searched for any reference to

African leadership and management. Books focusing on ‘African leadership and

4

management3 were also reviewed. Five of the most well-known management and leadership

textbooks were also scrutinized. 4

An analysis of the literature reviewed reveals tensions between stereotypical colonial

images of ‘African leadership and management’ and proposed counter-images that often

reflect the excesses of cultural relativism. One of the challenges of posing alternative views is

the danger of romanticing the “Other’ and the uncritical acceptance of these new perspectives

(Ghandi, 1998). Finding alternatives between colonised images and counter-images is not an

easy one. This paper problematizes the dilemma recognising that the question of cultural

identity is continuously being formulated and reformulated within an increasingly global

context within Africa. This suggests more than one narrative is needed to avoid essentialising

'African leadership and management.’

'African Leadership and Management’ in Organisation Studies Literature

All of the texts uncovered were reviewed to identify images and representations of

African leadership and management. An overall impression is the general scarcity of texts,

materials and reference to Africa in organisation studies. In terms of reference to specific

African leaders, Nelson Mandela is frequently cited as an example of extraordinary

transformational leadership or portrayed as the epitome of servant leadership. President

Mbeki is given as an example of rigid leadership in Barbara Kellerman’s book Bad

Leadership. She defines a rigid leader as: “Although they may be competent, they are unable

or unwilling to adapt to new ideas, new information, or changing times” (Kellerman, 2004: 41).

Shaka Zulu is used by well-known leadership scholar Manfred Kets de Vries to demonstrate

the nature of despotic leadership in his book Lessons on Leadership by Terror: Finding

Shaka Zulu in the Attic.

In addition to these few references to African leaders, other representations fall into

four broad categories. First, there is work that appears under the general rubric of what I refer

to as the African management development. This body of literature focuses on the need for

capable leadership and management in Africa. The second stream of work falls within the

3 These books include works by Christie, Lessem, & Mbigi, 1993; Edho (2001); and Mbigi (1997; 2005).

5

body of literature on national culture that has become quite prominent in organisation studies

in recent years. These texts examine ‘African leadership and management’ in the context of

describing Africa’s national culture primarily within Geert Hofstede's (1980) seminal typology.

The third category consists of representations of ‘African leadership and management’ that

appear in discussions of precursors to management theory in popular management textbooks

(e.g. Griffin 2005). Finally, there is a small but growing body of literature on African

management philosophy. Each of these streams is discussed more fully.

African Management Development. In this body of literature, the portrayal of

African leadership and management is one of deficiency and incapacity (e.g. Kiggundu, 1991;

Safavi, 1981; Waiguchu, Tiagha, & Mwaura, 1999). One of the earliest published articles on

this theme was published in the Academy of Management Review (one of the top journals in

the field of organisation studies) in 1981. Safavi (1981: 319) argues that "the inability of

African nations to train capable managers for major institutions has been the main inhibitive

factor to real economic and social development." Unequivocal statements like, "Unfortunately,

the African civil service has lost the capacity to manage" appear in the text.

Safavi (1981) offers a model of management education in Africa based on an

extensive review and analysis of management development in 57 countries and territories of

Africa. The author admits painting a rather gloomy picture of management education in

Africa. His model underscores the conflict between African reality (i.e. culture, limited

resources, poverty and under education) and the use of Western knowledge in management

development (i.e. Western concepts and assumptions in the design of management

education). In a similar fashion, Kiggundu (1991) also points to the lack of high-level

managerial skills as one of the main reasons for Africa's underdevelopment and lack of

economic, social, and political progress. In his article, he also offers proposals for

management development content and processes in Africa. Ironically, although the authors

tend to point to the legacy of colonialism in the underdevelopment of managerial talent and

the inappropriate fit between African contexts and Western ideas of management and

administration, their prescriptions call for more Western ideas and approaches to

management. For example, Kiggundu (1991) calls for the development of skills in strategic

4 These texts are: Griffin, R. W., 2005; Robbins, S. 2004; Hellriegel, D. & Slocum, J. 2004; Lewis, P

6

management, negotiation, resource development and utilisation, operations management,

production and administration, and cross-cultural interactions and communications. They also

use Western benchmarks for their evaluation of ‘African leadership and management’. As

Jackson (2004) notes, these scholars often end up perpetuating the binary categories of

developed vs. developing and reinforce Western management and leadership as the solution

to complex social, economic and political problems.

Leadership and Management Literature on National Culture. Representations of

‘African leadership and management’ can also be found in the expanding body of research on

national culture in the organisation studies literature. The underlying argument of this work is

the observation that U S theories of leadership and management may not apply outside the

borders of the United States because of differences in national culture. One of the most

pervasive models of this research has been the work of Geert Hofstede. Hofstede (1993:89)

defines national culture as, “The collective programming of the mind which distinguishes one

group or category of people in a nation from another.”

In a 1993 article, Hofstede makes reference to Africa in a section labelled

"management transfer to poor countries." Specifically, he writes:

There is a broad regional pecking order with East Asia leading. The little dragons have passed into the camp of the wealthy; then follow Southeast Asia (with its overseas Chinese minorities), Latin America (in spite of the debt crisis), South Asia, and Africa always trails behind (emphasis mine). (Hofstede, 1993: 87).

A table in the text of the article is quite telling (see Table 1). In the table, he lists the

national culture dimensions scores of ten countries. ‘West Africa’ is listed as one of the ten

countries (the other countries listed are USA, Germany, Japan, France, Netherlands, Hong

Kong, Indonesia, Russia and China). There is no footnote indicating ‘West Africa’ is a region

of a continent and not a country, leaving one sceptical of Hofstede’s awareness of the error.

This error reflects a general tendency in the literature on national culture. While authors

argue for particularism and uniqueness of national cultures, often-broad generalizations

prevail. This is particularly evident in reference to Africa. The cultural identity of a single

country or a few countries is taken to represent the whole. The recent seminal Globe Study

of 62 nations conducted by Robert House and a group of international scholars also reflects

Goodman, S. & Fandt, P. 2003; and Yukl, G. 2002.

7

this tendency, not only in regard to Africa but generally. There is reference to the culture of

‘sub-Saharan Africa’ when only five African countries are included in the study (House,

Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004; Javidan, Stahl, Brodbeck & Wilderom, 2005).

According to this body of knowledge, African culture has high power distance (the degree of

inequality among people which the population of a country considers as normal); values

collectivism, avoids uncertainty, and a strong humane orientation. A major problem here is

the homogenization of Africa overlooking the diversity of cultures within countries and across

the continent.

‘African leadership and management’ in Management Textbooks. The

management textbooks reviewed also make reference to management in Africa although not

explicitly (e.g. see Griffin, 2005).5 The representations most often appear in sections

discussing management history and its origins. Typically, the reference is to the building of

the great pyramids in Egypt as an example of the existence of management in antiquity. For

example, the text found in the 8th edition of Management authored by R W Griffin (2005:42)

reads: "The practice of management can be traced back thousands of years. The Egyptians

used the management functions of planning, organizing and controlling when they

constructed the pyramids."

George's (1968:4-5) publication, The History of Management Thought, offers a more

telling in-depth discussion of Egyptian management:

The building of the pyramids with a technology that would be considered primitive by modern standards, affords us testimony of the managerial and organisational abilities of ancient Egypt. . . The managerial planning of where the stones were to be quarried, when, what size, and how they were to be transported required the practice of what today might well be called long-range planning. . . By using masses of labour the Egyptians were able to accomplish tasks that astonish us. While their system of organisation may appear unwieldy, cumbersome, and even wasteful, they actually had no reasons to economize on labour since more peasants, mercenaries, and slaves were always available simply for the asking . . . We find also that the Egyptians were aware of sound managerial practices and principles. They understood and appreciated, for example, managerial authority and responsibility, and they recognized the value of spelling out job descriptions in detail.

The text has an undertone of astonishment in the degree to which management

existed in Egypt. He continues, "If control via records and paper is the hallmark of an

5 Griffin notes in the preface to the 8th edition that more than a million students have used the textbook since 1984 in preparation for their careers in business.

8

advanced civilization, the Egyptians of the New Empire would have to be considered civilized

indeed” (George, 1968:8). Other than the reference to Egypt, 'African' management is largely

invisible in management textbooks. What is problematic is the notion that management

practised in Egypt was "pre-scientific." Discussions of ‘precursors to management theory’ in

the texts are typically followed by a formal treatment of management theory as represented

by classical management theory and scientific management theory (e.g. Griffin, 2005:42). In

these texts, there is no reference to the other great ancient civilizations in Africa (e.g.

Timbuktu, Songhai, Empire of Mali, and Mapungubwe).6 Riad (2005) would suggest this is

consistent with the tendency to position ancient Egypt as the only country on the African

continent relevant to the recorded history of all knowledge.

African Management Philosophy. In the last few years a body of literature has

arisen in response to Africa's relegation to the margins of global considerations of leadership

and management as well as practice. This field of study has become known as African

management philosophy. Edoho (2001:74) defines African management philosophy as:

The practical way of thinking about how to effectively run organisations--be they in the public or private sectors--on the basis of African ideas and in terms of how social and economic life is actually experienced in the region. Such thinking must be necessarily interwoven with the daily existence and experience in Africa and its contextual reality.

Proponents of African management philosophy argue that Africa's effort to engineer

authentic development will continue to be unsuccessful until endogenous leadership and

management systems are established and institutionalised (Anyansi-Archibong, 2001; Blunt &

Jones, 1997; Edoho, 2001; Kamoche, 2000; Mangaliso, 2001; Mbigi, 1997, 2005; Ngambi,

2004). The call for indigenous approaches to management and leadership falls within the

broader cry for an African Renaissance that seeks to reclaim the aesthetics and identity of

Africans (Makgoba, 1999; Mbeki, 1998; Mudimbe, 1988; Nzelibe, 1986). It is also consistent

with postcolonial theory that calls for the colonized to re-claim a culture of their own, a history

of their own, aesthetics of their own, all based on an essence of their own, free from and

independent of the images of the 'Other' (Said, 2002; Prasad, 1997; Mohanty, 1984; Ghandi,

1998; Spivak, 1990).

6 Diop, C. A. 1987. Pre-colonial black Africa. .Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill & Company.

9

A major question driving the field is: If Africa was better managed in the past, what

went wrong and how can it be reclaimed? Colonialism is identified as the culprit for the often

corrupt and ineffective management of organisations in many African countries. The

underlying belief is that if indigenous African management and leadership can be reclaimed

and reinstutionalised in Africa, there would be a positive effect on resolving significant

problems of poverty, economic stagnation and development.

The emergent voices of African management philosophy are responding to the

historical domination of Eurocentric leadership and management practices in Africa (Horwitz,

2002; Jackson, 2004; Thomas & Schonken, 1998). Scholars argue that these practices are

inadequate because leadership and management challenges in Africa are embedded in a

very different cultural, political, economic and social context ( Blunt & Jones, 1997; Jaeger,

1990; Jackson, 2004). They also critique the stereotypical portrayal of Africa as primitive and

the assumption that there is little to be learned about leadership and management from Africa

(Mangaliso, 2001).

Beginning with the work of Nzelibe (1986), a number of articles and books have been

written arguing for a rejection and/or limitation of Western management thought and practice

in Africa and the adoption and incorporation of African philosophy into management (Anyansi-

Archibong, 2001; Edoho, 2001; Khoza, 2001; Mbigi, 1997, 2005; Ngambi, 2004). Blunt &

Jones (1997) assert it is unrealistic to suppose the Western functional paradigm of human

resource management--transformational leadership applies in Africa, which has a totally

different cultural and economic context. The belief that colonialism brought management to

Africa is rejected by these scholars. In fact, these scholars argue the importation of scientific

management (Taylorism) and European notions of administration and bureaucracy disrupted

and essentially clashed with African management thought and practice. Nzelibe (1986: 9)

states:

Development of the principles of management was marred, however, by contact with the Western world, contact marked by decades of economic exploitation, social oppression and the importation of scientific management, all of which have left acute problems for management today.

Kiggundu (1991) suggests that during colonisation the various colonial powers first

destroyed or denigrated local institutions and management practices, and then replaced them

with their own colonial administrative systems out of the belief in Western cultural, biological

10

and technological superiority over Africans. Indigenous perspectives were ignored or

devalued (Afro-Centric Alliance, 2001). Africans were developed only to the extent of carrying

out lower level administrative tasks as civil servants in colonial governments. Higher-level

management skills of Africans were not developed because they were not expected to

assume managerial responsibilities. As a result, at the independence of many African states,

few Africans were trained to assume high-level management positions in modern post-

colonial states (Kiggundu, 1991; Rodney, 1974). Dia (1996) argues that many of Africa’s

problems today are due to a structural and functional disconnect between informal,

indigenous institutions rooted in Africa’s history and culture and formal institutions mostly

transplanted from outside.

Proponents of African management philosophy look to the history of Africa and the

presence of indigenous knowledge systems that resulted in effective management during the

pre-colonial era (Edho, 2001; Kiggundu, 1991; Ngambi, 2004; Nzelibe, 1986). Describing

management systems during the pre-colonial period remains problematic because of the

scarcity of written documentation of such systems. However, this has not prevented scholars

from offering descriptions of ‘African leadership and management’ systems. In offering such

descriptions, scholars draw heavily from the literature in African studies and writings of

African historians (e.g. Davidson, 1991; Mazrui, 1986).

How are the basic dimensions of ‘African’ management and leadership described in

these writings? While writers often point to the vast diversity of Africa, the focus is on offering

generalised descriptions of ‘African’ management. Whereas Western management thought is

said to advocate Eurocentricism, individualism and modernity, ‘African’ management thought

is said to emphasize traditionalism, communalism, co-operative teamwork, and mythology.

Traditionalism has to do with the adherence to accepted customs, beliefs and practices that

determine accepted behaviour, morality and characteristics of individuals in African society.

In African societies, the family is positioned as the basic unit of socialisation. African families

are portrayed as close knit and extending far beyond the nuclear family unit concept dominant

in the West. The family system is viewed as the basic building block of any organisation in

African societies. The communalism of African management emanates from the belief that the

individual is not alone, but belongs to the community. As a result emphasis is placed on

11

teamwork and the group. According to African management thought, leaders and managers

should focus on promoting the welfare of the entire group and not the individual. Edoho

(2001) also argues that communalistic life is the centerpiece of African personality and is

distinctively African. Accordingly, traditional African societies had the capacity to share and

care not just for their immediate families but also for their extended families (Edoho 2001:81).

Some scholars go so far as to suggest this sense of community consciousness and

group belongingness explain the widespread practice of nepotism in modern business

organisations in Africa (e.g. Nyambegera, 2002). Kinship also helped to cement relationships

across different administrative hierarchies (Kiggundu, 1991).

Nzelibe (1986) argues that certain basic, traditional values, assumptions and

principles guide African management thought. He points to the elaborate administrative and

managerial procedures dating back to antiquity that enabled many kingdoms in Africa to

complete significant large-scale projects. Africa's ancient empires in Ghana, Mali and

Songhai, and Oyo are given as historical evidence of the existence of effective management

systems and leadership. The principles of authority and delegation of power of the Obas, the

powerful ruling class from the empires of Benion and Ife, are held up as examples of ancient

management concepts. Nzelibe (1986) also points to the building of the great pyramids and

palaces of Egypt as evidence of the existence of the effective ‘African leadership and

management’. Kiggundu (1991) reports that typical administrative systems were relatively

small in size, homogenous in terms of membership, used local technology and indigenous

knowledge systems, and co-existed in relative harmony with the environment. He also

portrays African management as highly personalised and authoritarian derived from conquest

and special relationships with the supernatural. Routine decisions were delegated, but the

person at the top controlled key decision making and implementation processes. However, it

is said that most states had "constitutional" procedures for removing unsuitable rulers.

In contrast, Blunt & Jones (1997) offer a comparison between Western leadership

ideal and leadership in Africa. African leadership is described as authoritarian, paternalistic,

conservative, and change resistant.

Scholars typically point out that before colonialisation most African countries were

made up of small clans and kingdoms. Power was centralized around one or more kings and

12

regional clan chiefs (Mutabazi, 2002). The success of a leader (whether head of a family, clan

or kingdom) lay in his capacity to listen well and to put the community's interest first (Ngambi,

2004). Future heads/chiefs were taught to examine social issues and their effects on the

community (Mutabazi, 2002). Each clan leader enjoyed a certain amount of autonomy. They

learned from experience how to represent and defend community interests without provoking

the anger of the high king of other clans.

Mutabazi (2002) identifies what he calls ‘common social principles in African

leadership’. These principles were generated from a detailed study of fifty interviews with

experts of local traditions--ex-village chiefs, religious chiefs, company executives, and

professors of history and human sciences from several countries7. According to Mutabazi

(2002:207-209), these principles are: concept of life as a universal current which suggests

leaders recognize their position in the never ending cycle while helping others to identify

theirs--life is greater than individuals and groups; human connection to nature--one of the

primary tasks of leaders is to establish harmony with their community and environment;

vertically organized moral order and human relations is generally not characterised by the

development of technical skills but the gradual adoption of a philosophy of universal

fellowship.

Ezzamel (2004) offers an extensive discussion on work organisation in ancient Egypt.

Unlike the cursory treatments described in many management textbooks, Ezzamel (2004)

produces an authoritative account of work organisation that pushes back concepts of division

of labour, administration, and accounting to Ancient Egypt and not classical management

theory.

African management thought is also said to be characterised by a strong belief in the

individual's relation to nature and supernatural beings and connections between the individual

and ancestors (Mbigi, 1997; 2005). Nzelibe (1986:12) argues that the continuity from the

material to the spiritual is the universal basis of African management thought.

One specific doctrine of African culture has been particularly valorized in the South

Africa. Scholars point to the philosophical thought system known as Ubuntu, which embodies

the beliefs, values, and behaviors of a large majority of the South African population.

13

Mangaliso (2001:24) defined Ubuntu as " humaneness--a pervasive spirit of caring and

community, harmony and hospitality, respect and responsiveness--that individuals and groups

display for one another. Ubuntu is the foundation for the basic values that manifest

themselves in the ways African people think and behave towards each other and everyone

else they encounter." Ubuntu is seen as an important value of African culture that can form

the basis of a management truly congruent with the peoples of Africa. Furthermore,

proponents argue Ubuntu can be parlayed into the practice of management for competitive

advantage not just but for Africa but universally (Mbigi, 2005; Mangaliso, 2001). Mangalilso

(2001:32) asserts:

Incorporating Ubuntu principles in management hold the promise of superior approaches to managing organisations. Organisations infused with humaneness, a pervasive spirit of caring and community, harmony and hospitality, respect and responsiveness will enjoy more sustainable competitive advantage.

Accordingly, Ubuntu implies a management approach emphasizing teamwork,

attention to relationships, mutual respect and empathy between leader and followers, and

participative decision-making. However, and importantly, Mangaliso (2001) cautions against

wholesale acceptance of all African customs and practices. Much of the writing on Ubuntu is

prescriptive and largely lacks research depth. African management philosophy relies heavily

on the past which points to the difficulty of articulating a distinctive conceptualization of

contemporary indigenous African culture (Jackson, 2004).

Tensions and Contradictions

Although the literature review demonstrates the scant attention given to Africa in

organisation studies, it reveals representations of 'African leadership and management’ as

well as the tensions and contradictions associated with writing Africa into the study of

leadership and management. In the end, the review raises more questions than answers,

problematizing the search for an 'African' approach to leadership and management. It is

necessary to raise Spivak's (1988) famous question, ‘Can the subaltern speak?’ Postcolonial

theory underscores the larger problem that in the context of hegemonic Western leadership

7 The author refers to the following countries: Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Congo, Senegal, Rwanda,

14

and management knowledge production, the 'African' cannot speak unproblematically. In

their efforts to cancel the negative images and/or invisibility of Africa, African management

proponents often end up repeating the very errors they hope to erase.

Ironically, the representations of 'African' leadership and management’ in Western

texts as well as its alternative, African management philosophy, show a tendency to

essentialize 'African' culture. African culture is largely portrayed as static and

undifferentiated. Whether it is descriptions of Africa's national culture in the management

literature or the alternative conceptions of African culture by mostly African scholars, 'African

culture' is portrayed as a homogeneous concept. They offer certain beliefs and values that all

African people share. Paradoxically, most often they analyze their own country's culture but

then go on to use it as an exemplar of ‘African beliefs and values’ (Hallen, 2002). Similar to

proponents of national culture theory, African management scholars also suggest every

culture must have some sort of philosophy of life or worldview that can be objectively

described (Hallen, 2002). For example, Nnadozie (2001:56) in offering advice on

‘managing African business culture’ systematically compares African and American cultural

dimensions using Hofstede's theoretical framework. Nnadozie (2001) offers what he calls,

'Africa's most common cultural characteristics’ (See Table 2). Critical scholars of African

philosophy contest the portrayal of African culture as fundamentally symbolic and ritualized.

Hallen (2002), for instance, argues that these two overworked characterizations convey the

impression Africa's indigenous peoples express beliefs and values through symbols and

ritualized behaviour rather than discursive verbal statements. Hallen (2002) offers the

example of how misconceptions of time in African culture linger in spite of detailed critiques

of the works in which the idea first appeared. Unfortunately, it is proponents of an alternative

nonperjorative portrayal of African culture who often repeat these misconceptions. For

instance, Nnadozie (2000: 56) states, "Africans have a more relaxed attitude toward time than

Americans do. They consider time as flexible not always firm, hence the so-called ‘African

time’.”

Should it be taken for granted that all of Africa's cultures share certain core concepts,

values and beliefs? Wright (2002) points out that culture is not an object--it is not purifiable.

Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Mali, Ghana, Benin, etc.

15

Thus, it cannot be understood to be pure. In a discussion of the difficulty of defining the

'African', Wright (2002:2) argues, "Identity (especially group identity) does not have a single

point or moment of origin but is always being constructed and identity is not given and fixed

but rather is constantly re-produced in and as performance.” The idea of identity as always in

motion contradicts some of the discursive practices of African management scholars and the

essentialist ways in which 'African' is invoked in their writings.

Proponents of African management philosophy often end up using the binary systems

dominant in Western, positivist management approaches. There is a tendency to present

African culture as largely inherited from the past, preserved relatively unchanged in the

present (Hallen, 2002). This suggests culture is seen as static and unchanging and ignores

the influence of context and time. The general approach of re-claiming the past creates a past

greatness/present backwardness binary that reinforces lingering images of Africa as the

hopeless continent (Fanon, 1968).

Hallen (2002:5) offers the following thought:

If Africa's cultural heritage is to come to terms with the latter-day problems of modern nation-states in a globally international community, then African social, political and economic demands upon and priorities within that community also must have to be enunciated and addressed.

In sum, there is a danger in romanticising Africa and 'African leadership and

management’—essentializing African culture, denying evidence of the influence of

globalisation and the multiculturalism of the continent.

Possibilities for Re-visioning and Re-writing ‘African Leadership and

Management’

Spivak’s (1990) crucial caveat that it is naïve and overly simplistic to believe that the

margins have simply asserted themselves in relation to the centre and come to voice. She

reminds us that, in fact, the margins are being heard at the centre primarily because the

margins have been called up to speak by the centre. A quote by Ian Parker (1992:5) also

points to the difficulty and challenge of re-writing ‘African leadership and management’:

“Language is so structured to mirror power relations that often we can see no other ways of

being, and it structures ideology so that it is difficult to speak both in it and against it.” How

then are we to articulate and explore 'African leadership and management? The re-writing

16

project is even more daunting because of the instability of leadership theory itself. Leadership

is a discipline that is plagued by competing theories and empirical inconsistencies. This is so

much the case that I tell my students, “If you are not confused, then it means you do not

understand the literature.” Since the 1940s, there has been an enormous body of writing on

leadership within organisation studies. Yet, there is little agreement on what counts as

leadership, whether it can be taught, or even if it really makes a difference to how well

organisations perform. Despite these hurdles, the next section of this paper suggests

possibilities for re-writing African leadership and management.

First, there is a need to challenge not only Western notions of Africa in the literature

but also simple constructions of African leadership and management, always questioning

essentialising tendencies in favour of multiple formulations of ‘African’ culture, leadership and

management. Referring to ‘African leadership and management’ as singular may conceal

considerable variation and complexity. The notion of a homogenous African leadership or

management may be just as dangerous as the idea of a universal theory of leadership.

Spivak (1988) questions whether the possibility exists for any recovery of a subaltern voice

that is not a kind of essentialist fiction. Scholars must continually recognise the difficulty of

constructing ‘African leadership and management’ unproblematically given the persistence of

its inevitable heterogeneity. In other words, it is important to avoid reconstructing the

subaltern as merely another unproblematic field of knowing (Odora-Hoppers, 2002).

Africa is a large continent with vast cultural diversity, which makes it difficult to

propose a totalising conception of leadership and management. Jackson (2004) in stark

contrast to the call for a universal African leadership and management approach argues for a

cross-cultural approach given the intercontinental diversity of Africa. Furthermore, the few

empirical studies of leadership and management in various African countries suggest diversity

not uniformity. For example, Jackson (2004; Jackson, 2005) reports significant differences

among managers' values and beliefs in several countries. Within South Africa, studies of

leadership and managerial behaviour have reported inconsistent results with some studies

finding significant similarities in perceptions of national culture among South Africa's various

race and ethnic groups (Thomas & Bendixen, 2000) while others report differences (e.g.

17

Booysen, 2001; Littrell & Nkomo, 2005). The point is we don’t have enough empirical

evidence to reach a conclusion.

Second, in the search for African leadership and management one must appreciate

the extent to which globalisation has and continues to affect 'African' identity. Research by

the Afro-Centric Alliance (2001) concluded that ambivalence about self-promotion and social

motivation may be a reflection of globalisation pressures. While traditional values of social

motivation and salience of the group still existed in the Malawian and Tanzanian work groups

studied, there was also the pull of individual achievement. The authors call for a contingency

approach to organisation change and management in these two countries. Contingency

approach here does not refer to the contingency approach as defined in the management and

leadership literature but instead for recognising the huge diversity of the continent as well as

considering specific cultural contingencies for Africa. They call for more research and

evidence that articulates Malawians’ and Tanzanians' own perceptions about what kind of

organisational development and management they would like to see. This observation

resonates with a major current in leadership theory: the need to expand the unit of analysis in

leadership research. Overwhelmingly, leadership theory has focused on the leader—his/her

characteristics and motivations (Howell & Shamir, 2005). Followers have been mostly treated

as passive objects. More research is needed to understand followers—what are the values,

beliefs and identities of workers and employees? What are their conceptions of good

leadership?

Yet, at the same time, it is important to grapple with the difficult question of leader

identity.8 Ultimately, the question of African leadership is inevitably about identity. Can one

lead apart from one’s values, beliefs, and understanding of the world and others? One

method of probing the difficult issue of leader identity and its influence on leadership style is a

life story and narrative approaches. Scholars argue we know or discover ourselves, and

reveal ourselves to others by the stories we tell about ourselves (Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach &

Zilber 1998). Shamir, Dayan-Horesh & Adler (2005) argue a leader’s life story can be an

important source of information about the leader’s self-concept and its influence on how/she

8 There is a growing body of work demonstrating the complexity of identity in South Africa. For example, see Booysen, A. E. 23 June 2005. Social identity changes in South Africa: Challenges

18

leads others. The stories leaders tell about themselves may convey important insights into

not only their identities but their leadership practices and justification thereof. One of the

most recent currents in leadership theory is authentic leadership. Although there is no

consensus on the definition of authentic leadership, authentic leaders are viewed as those

who are deeply aware of how they think and behave and are perceived by others as being

aware of their own and others’ values/ moral perspectives, knowledge, and strengths; aware

of the context in which they lead and manage (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans & May

(2004:4).

Third, we need to diversify the very ways we approach the study of leadership and

management in Africa. There is a need for greater emphasis on emic approaches and

qualitative methodologies that do not begin with comparative questions like: Do ‘African’

leaders have similar leadership behaviours to Western leaders? An example of an emic

approach is found in a study of kinship, culture and organisation among the Maasai people in

Northern Kenya. Nicholson (2005) used an ethnographic field study to explore the relationship

between social structure and leadership. He conducted in-depth interviews with a range of

elders, warriors, women and children, asking questions relating to the intersection of kinship,

culture and organisation. Nicholson found clarity and uniformity define a strong culture,

minimalism yields harmony, collectivism has to be culturally reinforced, a service ideal can be

cultivated at all levels of a social system, and alternative models of leadership, power and

authority can operate simultaneously.

However, there is currently a predilection for etic and quantitative studies in our major

research journals. Together with two colleagues, I recently reviewed research published in

South African management journals from 1994-2004. The following journals were included in

our study: South African Journal of Business Management, South African Journal of Labour

Relations, South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, South African Journal of

Management Sciences, Management Dynamics and the Southern African Business Review.

All of these journals appear on the Department of Education list of accredited journals. We

found the majority of management research published in South African journals over the past

decade used quantitative methods. Only 5.9 percent of the studies utilised qualitative

Facing Leaders. (Inaugural Lecture, UNISA). Distiller, N. & Steyn, M. 2004. Under construction:

19

methodologies. Perhaps more instructive than the results of the investigation were the

comments made by one of the reviewer. He/she indicated uncertainty about whether theory

building only comes through qualitative research and wondered why we want to build theory

from South Africa when it would only be inferior at best.

Theory building research within the local context is critical to the development of

leadership and management knowledge. Qualitative methodologies assume a value-laden

approach because data are collected and interpreted within the context in which it is

generated. Such methodologies explicitly recognize the embeddedness of leadership practice

in the culture, economic, technological, and social relations of a society. This is not to suggest

we abandon quantitative studies. To accelerate the development of African leadership theory,

it may well be worthwhile to dissolve the boundaries between qualitative and quantitative

methods and turn our efforts to their intellectual integration rather than separation. This

strategy is consistent with Carlie & Christensen's (2005) recent work on cycles of theory

building in management research. They posit a model of theory building in which researchers

build theory cumulatively as they work through descriptive and normative stages. The

inductive portion of the theory building process is best facilitated by qualitative methods while

quantitative methods are required in the deductive portion of the cycle to test the hypotheses

that have been inductively formulated (Beaty, Nkomo & Kriek, 2005).

Finally, we live in a world of quantum physics which allows us to move away from

binary constructions, and accept yes/no and either/or can exist simultaneously (Ntuli, 2002).

The search for ‘African leadership and management’ should draw upon the past but must also

inevitably be rooted in the present. The answers to finding leadership and management

approaches for helping Africa to solve its problems may be lying right under our nose. We

need to accelerate the production of descriptive studies of leadership on the continent. For

example, South African organisations have undergone unprecedented change over the last

ten years. In the process, we have living examples of how to lead and not lead second order

or transformational change. Preliminary results of my research on change leadership in

South Africa suggests many leaders firmly recognise Dia’s (1996) observation that to perform

effectively, organisations have to be both rooted in the local context and culture and open to

‘Race’ and identity in South Africa today. Johannesburg: Heinemann.

20

outside challenges and influences. We have examples of leaders who are tackling and

succeeding in the difficult task of addressing local issues while managing the pressures of

global competition. We have examples of leadership that embraces a humanist approach to

leading and managing others. Most of these experiences may be lost if we do not begin this

type of writing project today. If not, we risk allowing Rudi Giuliani, Jack Welch and Lew

Gestner to be the authoritative voices on change leadership not just in the United States but

also in South Africa (witness their dominant presence on the shelves of our major

bookstores). This does not mean we should hasten to adopt the heroic leadership model of

the West. In the end, I believe the results of studies of change leadership in South African

organisations will not only assist other leaders but will inform theoretical knowledge about

leading change in organisation studies, opening up new spaces for understanding its

complexity.

My journey to understand how ‘African leadership and management’ has been

studied and portrayed in organisation studies has surfaced tensions and contradictions. I

have come to realise that articulating and writing about ‘African leadership and management’

is ultimately about wrestling with questions of identity. Identity cannot be understood as static

or fixed. The truth is it will not be easy to offer a simple alternative to counter the domination

of Western notions of leadership in Africa. As Stuart Hall (1996:4) eloquently states identities

are:

About questions of using resources of history, language and culture in the process of becoming rather than being, not "who we are" or "where we come from" so much as what we might become, how we have been represented and how that bears on how we might represent ourselves.

The re-writing project and search for ‘African leadership and management’ is then not

for a return to some golden age, but also for the transformation to a new future of a very

different kind, a self-reflexive praxis, a way forward that is achievable through an involved,

humane, and responsible leadership that fosters human development, the collective good,

and societal possibilities (Odora-Hoppers, 2002: ix).

21

References

Afro-Centric Alliance. 2001. Indigenising organisational change: localisation in

Tanzania and Malawi. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16 (1), pp. 59-78,

Anyansi-Archibong, C. B. 2001. Toward an African-oriented management theory. In

F. M. Edoho (ed). Management challenges for Africa in the twenty-first century: theoretical

and applied perspectives. Westport, CT: Praeger: 63-72.

Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F. & Mays, D. R. 2004.

Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower

attributes and behaviours. The Leadership Quarterly 15: 801-823.

Beaty, D., Nkomo, S. M. & Kriek, H. S. Management Theory-Building In South Africa:

An Archival Analysis. Unpublished manuscript.

Boon, M. 1996. The African Way: The Power of Interactive Leadership.

Johannesburg, SA: Zebra Press.

Booysen, A. E. 2001. The duality of South African leadership: Afrocentric or

Eurocentric. South African Journal of Labour Relations. Spring/Summer, pp. 36-63.

Blunt, P. & Jones, M. L. 1997. Exploring the limits of western leadership theory in

East Asia and Africa. Personnel Review, 26, 6-23.

Carlie, P. R. & Christensen, C. M. (2005). The cycles of theory building in

management research. Unpublished manuscript.

Christie, P., Lessem, R. & Mbigi, L. (eds). 1993. African management:

Philosophies, Concepts and Applications. Johannesburg: Knowledge Resources.

Cox, T. & Nkomo, S. M. 1990. Invisible men and women: A status report on race as

a variable in organisation behaviour research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11 (6):

419-432.

Davidson, B. 1991. African civilization revisted. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

Dia, M. 1996. Africa’s management in the 1990s and beyond. Washington, DC: The

World Bank.

Edoho, F. M. 2001. Management in Africa: The quest for a philosophical framework.

In F. M. Edoho (ed). Management challenges for Africa in the twenty-first century: theoretical

and applied perspectives. Westport, CT: Praeger: 73-90.

22

Ezzamel, M. 2004. Work organization in the Middle Kingdom, ancient Egypt.

Organization, 11 (4): 497-539.

Fanon, F. 1968. On National Culture and the Pitfalls of National Consciousness in

the Wretched of the Earth. New York: Grove Press 1968.

George, C. S. (1968). The History of Management Thought. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:

Prentice-Hall.

Ghandi, L. (1998). Postcolonial theory: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press.

Griffin, R. 2005. Management. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Gunew, S. 1998. Diaspora and Exile: Translation and Community. International

Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue Internationale D’Etudes Canadiennes 18: 193-9.

Hall, S. 1996. Who needs ‘identity’? In S. Hall and P. Du Gay (eds). Questions of

cultural identity. London: Sage: 1-17.

Hallen, B. 2005. African philosophy: An analytical approach. Trenton, NJ: Africa

World Press.

Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related

values. Beverly-Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Hofstede, G. 1993. Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of

Management Executive, 7 (1): 81-94.

Horwitz, F. M. 2002. Whither South African management? In Warner, M., & P. Joynt

(eds), Managing Across Cultures, London: Thomson Learning: 215-220.

House, R. J. & Aditya, R. N. 1997. The social scientific study of leadership: Quo

Vadis? Journal of Management 23:409-473.

House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P., & Gupta, V. (eds.). 2004.

Leadership, culture, and organisations: The Globe study of 62 societies". Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Howell, J. M. & Shamir, B. 2005. The role of followers in the charismatic leadership

process. Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30: 96-

112.

23

Jackson, T. 2004. Management and change in Africa: A cross-cultural perspective.

London: Routledge.

Jackson, T. 2005. Managers’ perceptions of organization in Africa: Evidence from

South Africa and Zimbabwe. Unpublished manuscript.

Jaeger A. M. 1990. The applicability of Western management techniques in

developing countries: a cultural perspective. In Jaeger, A. M. and Kanungo, R. N. (eds),

Management in Developing Countries, Routledge, London, 131-145.

Javidan, M., Gunter, S., Brodbeck, Wilderom, C. P.M. 2005. Cross-border transfer of

knowledge: Cultural lessons from Project Globe. Academy of Management Executive, 19 (2),

59-76.

Kamoche, K. 2000. Sociological Paradigms and Human Resources: An African

context. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Kellerman, B. 2004. Bad leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Kets de Vries, M. F. R. 2004. Lessons on leadership by terror: Finding Shaka Zulu in

the Attic. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Khoza, R. 2001. Africa’s leadership challenge. Acceptance speech at the UNISA

Leadership in Practice Award, 10 October 2001. http://www.reuelkhoza.co.za/

Kiggundu, M. N. 1991. The challenges of management development in sub-Saharan

Africa. Journal of Management Development, 10 (6): 32-47.

Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. 1998. Narrative research: reading,

analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Makgoba, W. (ed) 1999. African renaissance. Cape Town, SA: Mafube Publishing.

Mangaliso, M. P. 2001 Building competitive advantage from ubuntu: Management

lessons from South Africa. Academy of Management Executive, 15(3): 23-32.

Mazrui, A. 1986. The Africans: A triple heritage. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.

Mbeki, T. 1998. Africa: The time has come. Cape Town: Tafelberg.

Mbigi, L. 1997. Ubuntu: The African Dream in Management. Pretoria: Knowledge

Resources.

Mbigi, L. 2005. The Spirit of African leadership. Johannesburg: Knowledge

Resources.

24

Minnick, E. K. 1990. Transforming Knowledge. Philadelphia: Temple University

Press.

Mohanty, C. 1984. Under western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial

discourses. Boundary 2 12 (3), 13 (1).

Mudimbe, V. Y. 1988. The invention of Africa: Gnosis, Philosophy, and the order of

knowledge. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.

Mutabazi, E. 2002. Preparing African leaders. In C. B. Derr, S. Roussillon & J.

Boumais (eds). Cross-cultural approaches to leadership development. Westport, CT:

Quorum Books.

Ngambi, H. 2004. African leadership: lessons from the chiefs. In T. A. Meyer & I.

Boninelli (eds). Conversations in leadership: South African perspectives. Johannesburg:

Knowledge Resources: 107-132.

Nicholson, N. 2005. Meeting the Maasai: Messages for management. Journal of

Management Inquiry 14 (3): 255-267.

Nkomo, S. 1992. The emperor has no clothes: Rewriting ‘race into the study of

organizations’. Academy of Management Review 17(3): 487-513.

Nnadozie, E. 2001. Managing African Business Culture. In F. M. Edoho (ed),

Management Challenges for Africa in the Twenty-First Century: Theoretical and Applied

Approaches. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Ntuli, P. 2002. Indigenous knowledge systems and the African Renaissance. In

Hoppers, C.A. O (ed.) Indigenous knowledge systems and the integration of knowledge

systems: Towards a philosophy of articulation. Claremont, SA: New Africa Education: 53-

66.

Nyambegera, S. M. 2002. Ethnicity and human resource management practice in

sub-Saharan Africa: The relevance of the managing diversity discourse. International

Journal of Human Resource Management 13 (7), 1077-1090.

Nzelibe, C.O. 1986. The evolution of African management thought. International

Studies of Management and Organization, 16(2): 6-16.

25

Odora-Hoppers, C. A. O. 2002. Introduction. In Hoppers, C.A. O (ed.) Indigenous

knowledge systems and the integration of knowledge systems: Towards a philosophy of

articulation. Claremont, SA: New Africa Education.

Parker, I. (1992). Discourse dynamics. London: Routledge.

Prasad, A. 1997. The colonizing consciousness and representations of the other: a

postcolonial critique of the discourse of oil. In P. Prasad, A. Mills, M. Elmes & A. Prasad

(eds). Managing the organizational melting pot: dilemmas of workpalce diversity. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage: 285-311.

Prasad, A. 2006. The jewel in the crown: Postcolonial theory and workplace

diversity. In A. M. Konrad, P. Prasad, P. & Pringle, J. K. (eds.). Handbook of workplace

diversity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage: 121-144.

Riad, S. 2005. Ancient Egypt: Scribes, empire and organization. Paper presented at

the 21st EGOS Colloquium.

Reed, M. 1996. Organizational theorizing: A historically contested terrain. In S.

Clegg, C. Hardy & W. R. Nord (eds) Handbook of Organization Studies. London: Sage: 31-

56.

Rodney, W. 1974. How Europe underdeveloped Africa. Great Britain: Bogle-

L’Ouverture Publications.

Safavi, F. 1981. A model of management education in Africa. Academy of

Management Review, 6 (2): 319-331.

Said, E. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Vintage.

Said, E. 2002. Imaginative geography and its representations: Orientalizing the

Oriental. In P. Essed & D. T. Goldberg (eds). Race critical theories. Malden, MA: Blackwell

Publishers: 15-37.

Shamir, B., Dayan-Horesh, H. & Adler, D. 2005. Leading by biography: Towards a

life-story approach to the study of leadership. Leadership 1(1): 13-29.

26

Spivak, G. C. 1988. Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson and L. Grossberg (eds)

Marxism and the interpretation of culture, London: Macmillan.

Spivak, G. C. 1990. The post-colonial critic. New York: Viking.

Thomas, A. & Schonken, J. 1998 Culture-specific management and the African

management movement, South African Journal of Business Management, 29(2): 53-76.

Waiguchu, J. M., Tiagha, E. & Mwaura, M. 1999. Management and organizations in

Africa: A Handbook and Reference. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

Wright, H. K. 2002. Notes on the (Im) possibility of articulating continental African

identity. Critical Arts 16(2) 1-18.

27

Table 1

Culture Dimensions Scores for Ten Countries PD = Power distance; ID= Individualism; MA= Masculinity; UA = Uncertainty

Avoidance; LT =Long Term Orientation H = Top Third, M = Medium third; L = Bottom Third

Country PD ID MA UA LT

USA 40L 91H 62H 46L 29L Germany 35L 67H 66H 65M 31M

Japan 54M 46M 95H 92H 80H France 68H 71H 43H 86H 30*L

Netherlands 38L 80H 14L 53M 44M Hong Kong 68H 25L 57H 29L 96L Indonesia 78H 14L 46M 48L 25*L

West Africa 77H 20L 46M 54M 16L Russia 95*H 50*M 40*L 90H 10*L China 80*H 20*L 50*M 60*M 118H

*estimated

Source: Hofstede, G. 1993. Cultural Constraints in Management Theories. Academy of Management Executive 7 (1): 91.

28

Table 2

Africa's Most Common Cultural Characteristics

High Social Inequality

Respect for Hierarchies, Title and Age

Importance of Personal Connections and Relationships

The Collectivist Nature of African Socieities

Male Domination

The Preference for Harmony to Conflict in Dealing with Uncertainty

Time Flexibility (African Time)

Emphasis on Tradition and Honor

Increasing Corruption in Some African Countries

Disregard for the Law in Some Societies Due to Lack of Enforcement

The Positive Work Ethic That Goes Along with Low Productivity

Source: Emmanuel Nnadozie (2001, p. 55-56). Managing African Business Culture. In F. M. Edoho (Ed), Management Challenges for Africa in the Twenty-First Century: Theoretical and Applied Approaches. Westport, CT: Praeger.