| Course | LDR 731 Contemporary Issues in Leadership (LDR/731) |
|---|---|
| Week | 7 |
| Paper type | Doctoral global leadership analysis |
| Length | about 1,162 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | DBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 731 Week 7
An American Playbook in Gliwice and Penang: Global Leadership and Culture-Contingent Expectations at a Multinational Glass Company
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/731: Contemporary Issues in Leadership
Week 7 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Maumee Glass Group, its plants and its leaders are composites written for a model paper.
The invented Maumee Glass Group, followed through six weeks of leadership questions, employs about 60 percent of its people outside the United States. Its plants include Monterrey, Mexico; Gliwice, Poland; and a newer facility near Penang, Malaysia, which makes thin glass for electronics. Chief executive Laura Brandt, who had led mostly American businesses, introduced the same leadership practices everywhere in her first year: large town hall meetings with open questions, public recognition of individual top performers, a performance review system that ranked employees within each team and required managers to place 10 percent in the lowest category, and an informal, direct communication style in which she encouraged employees to call her by her first name. A year later, engagement survey results varied widely by site, and turnover at Penang rose from 8 to 15 percent. Okafor, who runs global operations, is trying to work out why one set of habits drew such mixed responses from site to site. This paper examines global leadership research.
Culture and Leadership Expectations
People hold implicit theories about what good leaders are like, and these theories are shaped by culture. A practice that signals strong leadership in one setting may signal weakness or disrespect in another.
The GLOBE Project
House et al. (2002) introduced the GLOBE project, a multi-country study of how cultural values relate to leadership expectations. The project measured cultural dimensions such as power distance, collectivism, uncertainty avoidance and assertiveness and asked managers to rate attributes that contribute to or impede outstanding leadership. Some attributes, such as integrity, being visionary and being inspirational, were endorsed nearly universally; others, such as autonomy and individualism, were viewed differently across cultures.
Lessons From GLOBE for Managers
Javidan et al. (2006) translated GLOBE findings into lessons for managers working across cultures. Using the example of a manager moving among countries, they showed how expectations about participation, directness, status and individual recognition differ from one society to another, and how a leader who succeeds at home can stumble abroad by applying the same behaviors. They stressed that leaders should learn local expectations without assuming every individual fits the national pattern.
Defining Global Leadership
Mendenhall et al. (2012) proposed that global leadership differs from domestic leadership in degree along three dimensions: complexity, the number and variety of factors leaders must manage; flow, the amount of movement of people, information and resources across boundaries; and presence, the extent to which leaders must physically cross boundaries. Global leadership, in their view, means leading in conditions high on all three.
Monterrey
Monterrey employees responded well to recognition and to the chief executive's warmth during her visit, consistent with GLOBE's finding that charismatic and team-oriented leadership are widely valued. They disliked the ranking system, which some managers implemented by publicly discussing low performers, which employees experienced as shaming. Engagement fell slightly.
Gliwice
Gliwice employees viewed town halls skeptically. Several said that asking the chief executive questions in public felt staged and that real concerns would not be welcomed, especially after cost cuts. The informal style seemed less sincere than a formal, consistent one. Engagement fell sharply, compounded by the furnace failure.
Penang
At Penang, forced ranking caused the most damage. Teams there had worked collaboratively, and ranking members against one another undermined cooperation. Public recognition of individuals made some employees uncomfortable. Several team leaders refused to place anyone in the lowest category and were criticized by headquarters. Turnover nearly doubled.
The ranking system was designed to reward individual stars; at Penang it taught people to stop helping each other.
What Local Leaders Said
Interviews with the three international plant managers added detail. The Penang manager said she had warned headquarters that ranking would damage team cohesion but was told the system had to be consistent. The Gliwice manager said employees respected leaders who were prepared, formal and reliable, and that spontaneous town halls felt unprofessional. The Monterrey manager said recognition worked well but that criticism needed to be private to preserve dignity. Each manager knew how to adapt the practices; none had been asked.
The Cost of Uniformity
Turnover at Penang alone cost an estimated $1.1 million in recruiting and training for specialized thin-glass operators, and two key engineers left for a competitor. Uniform practices saved headquarters some effort but imposed real costs on the sites where they fit poorly.
Ohio Is Cultural Too
The playbook fit Ohio better but not perfectly. Long-serving Toledo employees disliked forced ranking as well, seeing it as a break with the company's loyalty tradition. The practices reflected the chief executive's prior industry and national context, not a neutral standard.
What Stayed Universal
Some elements worked everywhere: the chief executive's visible commitment to customers, clear goals and her personal integrity, consistent with GLOBE's universal attributes. Employees across sites wanted honest information about the company's future.
Global Leadership at Maumee
In Mendenhall et al.'s terms, Maumee's leadership situation is high in complexity, with four countries and several product lines; moderate in flow; and low in presence, since senior leaders rarely visit plants outside Ohio. The low presence limits leaders' understanding of local conditions.
A Global Core
The company should keep a small global core: its values, safety standards, ethical code, the balanced scorecard measures from Week 3 and honest communication about strategy.
Local Adaptation
Practices should adapt locally. Recognition can emphasize teams at Penang and individuals in Ohio. Performance reviews should drop forced ranking company-wide in favor of goal-based reviews, with local leaders deciding how feedback is delivered. Communication can use smaller, structured forums where large open town halls feel staged.
Involving Local Leaders
Plant managers and local human resources leaders will form a global leadership council to review practices before rollout, bringing local knowledge into decisions.
Training Leaders for Global Roles
Leaders who will work across sites, including the top team and plant managers, will complete short training on cultural differences in leadership expectations, treating GLOBE findings as prompts for discussion with local colleagues, not as fixed rules.
Building Presence
Senior leaders will spend time at each international plant annually, including time on the floor, and the top team will add at least one leader with extensive international experience.
Measures
Each measure will be reported by site so that differences are visible rather than averaged away. Measures include engagement by site, turnover, adoption of adapted practices and the global leadership council's assessment of rollout quality.
Conclusion
Cross-cultural research separates the few leader qualities people value almost everywhere from the many whose appeal depends on place, and global leadership adds the strain of complexity, constant flows and the need to be present far from home. Maumee's American playbook met resistance where it conflicted with local expectations, most sharply in Penang's collaborative teams. A global core of values and standards, local adaptation of practices, a council of local leaders and greater senior presence can help the company lead consistently without leading the same way everywhere.
References
House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and implicit leadership theories across the globe: An introduction to project GLOBE. Journal of World Business, 37(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-9516(01)00069-4
Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., de Luque, M. S., & House, R. J. (2006). In the eye of the beholder: Cross cultural lessons in leadership from Project GLOBE. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 67-90. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2006.19873410
Mendenhall, M. E., Reiche, B. S., Bird, A., & Osland, J. S. (2012). Defining the "global" in global leadership. Journal of World Business, 47(4), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.01.003
What the LDR 731 Week 7 instructions ask
Week 7 in LDR 731 typically focuses on leading across national and cultural boundaries. Students explain how culture shapes what people expect from leaders, review research such as the GLOBE project on universally endorsed and culturally contingent leader attributes, define global leadership and its demands and analyze leadership in an organization with sites in several countries. Strong papers use cross-cultural research carefully, avoid stereotypes by recognizing variation within countries, apply findings to specific practices such as communication, decision making and performance management and recommend ways to balance global consistency with local adaptation. Reviewers also look for the voices of local leaders, not only headquarters. Ground the argument in scholarly sources cited in APA form, and include at least one practice that should stay the same everywhere and one that should change.
How this LDR 731 Week 7 example is built
Maumee's new chief executive rolled out the same practices everywhere: open-floor town halls, public recognition of individual achievers, a forced-ranking performance review and a direct, informal communication style. Results differed sharply. Monterrey employees embraced recognition but disliked public criticism; Gliwice employees saw town halls as theater; Penang employees found forced ranking damaging to team harmony. The paper draws on the GLOBE study, which identified leader attributes endorsed nearly everywhere, such as integrity and vision, and others whose acceptance varies by culture, such as participation and individualism. A reflection on twenty years of GLOBE research adds findings on how cultural values shape implicit leadership theories. A definition of global leadership emphasizes complexity, flow and presence across boundaries. The analysis recommends a global core with local adaptation.
LDR 731 Week 7 grading rubric: where the points go
The global leadership paper is assessed on careful use of cross-cultural evidence and practical sensitivity. Reviewers expect GLOBE findings on universal and culturally contingent attributes to be applied accurately, a clear definition of global leadership and analysis of specific practices across sites with evidence from local employees and leaders. They reward awareness of variation within countries and of the risk of stereotyping, and recommendations that distinguish what should be consistent globally from what should adapt locally. A conclusion that names the principles behind the balance, rather than a list of country tips, shows doctoral insight.
LDR 731 Week 7 help: mistakes to avoid
Global leadership papers often slide into country stereotypes, such as all Malaysians avoid conflict. Research describes average tendencies with large variation, so use evidence from the actual sites and qualify claims. Another common weakness is treating headquarters' practices as neutral and others as cultural. American practices are cultural too. Some papers recommend complete localization, losing the benefits of shared values and standards. Distinguish a global core from local adaptation. Others ignore local leaders' knowledge. Involve them. Finally, connect cultural analysis to concrete practices, such as how performance reviews are run or how decisions are communicated, so recommendations can be acted on.
Related LDR 731 sample papers
Other LDR 731 week samples
- LDR 731 Week 1: Senior Leaders, Values and Direction
- LDR 731 Week 2: Deploying Organizational Values
- LDR 731 Week 3: Performance Expectations and Measures
- LDR 731 Week 4: Organizational Learning
- LDR 731 Week 5: Stakeholders and Balanced Value
- LDR 731 Week 6: Leadership and Financial Performance
- LDR 731 Week 8: Controversies and Integration
More DBA sample papers
- LDR 711A Week 7: Shared and Collective Leadership
- LDR 726 Week 7: Self-Directed Work Teams
- MGT 711 Week 7: The Strategic E-Business Plan
- MGT 726 Week 7: Research on Management Innovation
LDR 731 Week 7 questions, answered
What does LDR 731 Week 7 usually cover?
It usually covers global leadership, including how culture shapes leadership expectations, GLOBE findings on universal and culturally contingent attributes and how leaders balance global consistency with local adaptation.
Where can I find a free LDR 731 Week 7 sample paper?
This page holds a complete doctoral paper on how one American leadership playbook fared in Ohio, Mexico, Poland and Malaysia at an invented glass firm.
What is the GLOBE study?
GLOBE is a large research program that studied cultural values and leadership expectations in dozens of societies, identifying leader attributes endorsed nearly universally and others whose acceptance varies by culture.
Which leadership attributes are valued across cultures?
GLOBE found attributes such as integrity, being visionary, inspirational, decisive and team-oriented to be widely endorsed, while attributes such as participation, status consciousness and individualism varied.
What makes leadership global?
Scholars describe global leadership as leading across multiple cultures and boundaries under high complexity, with frequent flows of people and information and a need for presence across locations.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All LDR 731 week samples · All courses