Cave Canem! The Art (Or Science?) of Western Management In An African Context By Nadine Mendelek Theimann & Kurt April Western Management Limits in African Organisations The West has continued to supply leadership and management ideas, political systems, and economic infrastructures to Africa, from colonial times to present. Understandably, most Western theories that are continuously being used in organisations in Africa, with their seemingly good intentions, have not achieved the desired outcomes, because many Africans find it difficult to relate to them and have to sacrifice their authenticity in order to fully embrace them. Some have identified the limitations of perspectives and practices formulated solely in the West (Blunt & Jones, 1992; Kamoche, 1993, 1997; Nzelibe, 1986), while others have offered empirical evidence on the nature of extant practices, pointing to their appropriateness or lack thereof (Blunt & Jones, 1986; Kamoche, 2000a; Seddon, 1985). This growing critique has highlighted the need to understand the African context as well as the indigenous thought system and, in particular, the perspective of the African worker. The unquestioning use of Western models of management in Africa merely stifles the incentive to examine critically the real needs of organisations on the continent. The results of these imposed theories are counter intent and innumerable unintended consequences, as the leadership- and management styles are not well guided by theories that are meaningful to the majority of the African populace. True to the ‘African Way’, African theories are seldom captured in literature, and specifically not in organisational literature – the wisdom of the ages usually used to be passed on through the oral tradition. This no longer appears sufficient, as many Africans, particularly educated and skilled Africans, have been drawn to, and into, urban lifestyles, thus separating them from the traditional forms of oral transfer and additionally placing them in direct contact with often dominant Western organisational norms and cultures – and it has therefore become imperative that such traditional- and contemporary African wisdom be captured in supplementary communication forms, e.g., modern African music, art, popular-, praxis- and academic literature. The acceptance of socio-cultural, economic and political realities in Africa leads us to make the following statements: The use of Western planning techniques cannot be assumed to guarantee any anticipated outcome (Jones, 1989), because the African environment is adaptively complex – exhibiting a complicated order without predictability, that is rarely stable but over short time periods is dynamically stable – and which contrasts much of the experiences in industrialised countries. There should be congruence between African- and Western cultural values and applied leadership styles in Africa and, therefore, the African leadership style must agree with the merged, and emerging, hybrid cultural values to be effective. The collectivist values, inherent in African society, need to be made explicit and globally credible, and there needs to be a management mapping, of practices and techniques, that tend to contradict them. For example, as Jones (1989) points out, it is not difficult to understand why Western performance appraisal and management by objectives schemes may find intellectual acceptance by African managers, yet fail in practice. Jones (1989) also claims that similar considerations apply to teaching African managers about the benefits claimed, in the Western context, for delegation of authority, sharing of information and a generally more participative management style. A common observation is that the current management style of African managers tends to push decisions upward in the organisational hierarchy. It involves managers in routine, trivial activities, and hinders the sharing of information within the organisation, thus possibly reducing its capacity to anticipate and cope with change. It encourages highly dependent behavior and reduces opportunities for subordinates to engage in more interesting work. African managers require highly developed political skills and political acumen, both in monitoring developments that may affect them, as particularistic criteria influence decision-makers inside and outside their employing organisations, as well as with governmental and civil society bodies who legitimise and provide the “license to operate” for their organisations, and in their relationships with organisational superiors, colleagues, subordinates, community members and family. Such skills are not necessarily a major focus in Western management development strategies. According to Jones (1989), African managers require well-developed diplomatic skills in two contexts: (a) with their boss who expects to be treated deferentially, far more than is the case in Western views of such a relationship, and (b) with the extended family and kinship groups who put demands on him or her from outside the organisation that may well conflict with the manager’s organisational role. When African managers are taught the Western organisational values of effective and efficient use of scarce resources, it is important that they consciously balance this against the consideration of what it means to be responsible with respect to resources, values and others’ hope. African managers therefore must understand the implications of implementing these values in their respective societies, where there is a greater concern for social relationships than for workplace performance, where there are social expectations about the role of organisations that are greater than is customary in the West, where time is circular and at any one point an African employee will consider past, present and future dimensions of time, and where the notion of considering the individual as a resource is strange. African workers tend to have higher expectations about the organisation’s ability and willingness to accept a degree of responsibility for their welfare and development than is the case in the industrialised West (Jones, 1989). At the same time, there is a more economic attitude toward work, involving fewer considerations of loyalty to the organisation, and the worker is often motivated by stimuli beyond the workplace. An uncritical teaching of Western motivation theories to African managers needs to be challenged. African managers should more deeply develop the art of noticing-, and developing more confidence in the validity of, their own experiences, others’ experiences and how these shape their world views. It should be made unacceptable for Africans to defer such mental model construction to Westerners and other outsiders. Four interrelated premises are commonly used to support the above assertions that African ways of leading and managing are “the” way forward. These have variously been articulated, and can be briefly stated as follows: Firstly, African leading and managing, inspired by native cultures, can offer valuable leadership and management lessons. Secondly, that it is best suited for the African context. Thirdly, it has the capacity to inspire the transformative processes, so necessary in a dynamic Africa. And finally, it is the best approach for the multicultural context which characterises Africa. Hence, this assertion implies that African leading and managing are the best routes toward a better society, quality of life and business culture. If we pause to consider some of the assumptions underlying these premises we might consider the following in turn: The “Valuable Leadership & Managerial Lessons” Premise There is something original in the quality and experiential texture of African polities and the exercise of leadership and management within these polities that differs from those of other polities, such as, for example the Northern European, Eastern, North American, Middle Eastern, or Latin and thus offers something of value that these do not have (Lessem, 1996). These qualitative aspects of leadership, broadly deriving from the uniqueness of “native or indigenous cultures” are potent in their own right. They therefore have value in current contexts and situations that differ from their original ones and are transferable to different polities, and therefore can be valuable contributions to leadership practices in the government, institutions, firms and other forms of social organisation. The “Suitability” Premise The suitability premise assumes that “when in Africa, do as Africans do”. It assumes that leadership and management should primarily emerge from, and be adapted to, local conditions and cultures. The interactive dynamic among the dimensions of leadership, councillorship, governance (management) and followership that together are important determinants of leadership cultures, should therefore all preferably have a common cultural substrate. To express it differently, there should be a significant skein of African cultural and leadership values woven into the rope of leadership in the continental context. The “Transformative Potency” Premise This transformative potency assumption by implication holds that African leadership and management have great potential to transform people and attitudes. By implication such a view raises the inherent status of African leadership and management, implying that “other”, exogenous leadership/management cultures are not necessarily appropriate for sustaining a broad-based transformation in the subjects of African society, and by extension its organisations and other collectivities, to an equal extent. This is because they do not tap into the deeper psychic resources of indigenous collectivities as well as African leadership/management is capable of doing. Such other leadership/management cultures are therefore not as potent in releasing creative energies. African leadership and management are inherently somehow generative, and have transformative potency, capable of creating new and greater awareness and of inspiring subjects to greater outputs. This is not necessarily limited, however, to subjects of indigenous extraction. This implicit raising of the status of African leadership- and management culture relativizes the status of exogenous leadership/management cultures, and “emancipates” African leadership and management to hold its own in relation to them. Through such a relational re-positoning, elements of exogenous leadership/management cultures can therefore legitimately be rethought or modified, augmented by, or integrated with African leadership and management. The “Multicultural” Premise The multicultural context assumption suggests that African leadership and management are better suited to a multicultural context such as on the continent, characterised by language, religious, spiritual and ethnic diversity. This suitability is apart from the fact that, even the subcultures are of African origin, which was noted under the suitability premise above. Rather, African leadership and management have qualities that allow for a leadership/management culture that is more integrative in character. Hence its underlying integrative premises make it a better custodian of minority interests and promoter of diversity for dealing with diversity, perhaps more tolerant of minority interests and, an African (person) is best able to lead a (predominantly) African polity or organisation. This makes it incumbent upon us to define the desired outcomes of leadership/management actions in Africa. For the sake of analytical practicality, we can identify three perspectives that leadership/management culture can embrace, but wish to offer the latter as the way forward. Convergence, Divergence and “Cross-Vergence” Perspectives Increased international business activity and emphasis on globalization have rekindled interest in the convergence/divergence thesis that dominated much of the US and European management research in the 1950s and 1960s. An extension of the framework is the inclusion of “cross-vergence” (Ralston, Gustafson, Cheung & Terpstra, 1993), which seems to embody the disparate positions of convergence and divergence. The convergence thesis maintains that economic ideology drives cultural values. Ralston, Gustafson, Cheung & Terpstra (1993) deconstruct the argument that exposure to Western ways of engaging in business will result in adoption of Western values. They state that this argument suggests that the demands and opportunities of a technologically advancing society shape value systems that respond to industrialization, rather than to indigenous cultural forces. As a result, industrialised nations will share common values with regard to economic activity and work-related behaviour. Advocates of the convergence view hold that, over time and irrespective of culture, human resource management practices will tend toward common human resource management universals, and that these universals are present in all industrial or industrialising societies. Culture is treated merely as something accidental that happens to be as it is, but also could have been different. However, while convergence could occur at the level of organisational structure and technology (macro-level variables), individual attributes and values (micro-level variables) might remain culturally distinct. According to Child (1981), external factors impose certain limits within which organisations develop in harmony with the culture of the country. It could be argued that although culture variables do not have much to do with how an organisation is structured, they may have much to do with how it functions. With respect to a structural variable such as ‘formalisation’ (the presence of formal rules and procedures), there are few cultural prescriptions, but the extent to which employees adhere to the rules will differ among cultures. The divergence perspective recognises country and cultural differences. Its proponents maintain that culture is deeply rooted and drives the values of any society beyond economic ideology. The divergence perspective is consistent with the dominant view of some cross-cultural theorists (e.g., Hofstede, 1980, 1997; Adler, 2002) who emphasise that all management practices are in large part culturally determined. There is little consensus on the significance of cultural variables, however. Opinions differ along two main dimensions. The first concerns the contrast between institutional-level and individual-level variables. Organisational structure is primarily a concept from organisational sociology, and tends to be defined at the institutional level. The second dimension concerns the role of culture. The lack of consensus reflects a paucity of research on the relationship between organisation-level and individual-level variables, and how the two levels interact. Ward, Pearson, Entrekin & Winzar (1999), as well as, Ralston, Gustafson, Cheung & Terpstra (1993) refer to the anthropology roots of acculturation theory to suggest a third alternative. When two cultures meet, a blending may result in some new crossbred-form of values. The “cross-vergence” perspective recognises the importance of economic ideology and national culture, and the interaction between the two. “Cross-vergence” results “when an individual incorporates both national culture and economic ideology influences synergistically to form a unique value system that is different from the value set supported by either national culture or economic ideology” (Ralston, Holt, Terpstra & Kai-Cheng, 1997: 183). Moreover, the cross-vergence perspective is consistent with a more balanced perspective of global integration and local responsiveness. Country-specific characteristics, such as culture, socio-economic factors, political-legal climate, and technological factors, however, influence the meaning, interpretation and implementation of the foreign practices in these organisations. Cultural Synergy and Change Management: … Adler (2002) devoted a whole chapter to cultural synergy, with a strong emphasis on organisational change theory. Multiculturalism may be a disintegrative influence, where members of cultural groups tend to make in-group, out-group decisions (Hogg, 2001), but also strengths may be drawn from cultural diversity in increasing creativity and better decision-making (Govendo, 2005). Recent work on multicultural teams suggests that highly heterogeneous teams develop a strong hybrid culture, that are better at learning in the accommodation and elaboration dimensions, compared with those that are less heterogeneous (Driver, 2003; Yang, Watkins & Marsick, 2004). An inability to revert to previous identities and norms could explain it. This necessitates the need to develop a new common culture and dialogic identity (April & April, 2006) through information-seeking toward hybrid socialisation, when coordination and communication are required among a number of different participants (Morrison, 1993). A common sense of identity within the emerging culture may be discernible by investigating such inferred variables as: agreement on the perceptions of organisational and management attributes, in terms of what the current situation in the organisation is; what the desirable ideal situation should be, in terms of management style and organisational factors, such as level of hierarchy, decision-making process and control, and how this contrasts with the way these aspects are likely to change. Logically, organisations are likely to change in a positive way if the perceptions of the various stakeholders concur about the current nature of the organisation and its management, and the desirable character of change. The hybridization of management systems is an important consideration in Africa. Concepts of “cross-vergence” indicate that, rather than a tendency toward convergence (the coming together of value systems) in regions and countries that have had high levels of influence from other cultures, there is a tendency toward “cross-vergence” (the developing of hybrid value systems as a result of cultural interactions). …Toward Hybrid Leadership & Management Models? African humanism, that has existed in Africa for thousands of years and embodied in ritual, story, cultural practices, symbolism and myth, takes the human being as the starting point, and emphasises the ‘dignity’ and ‘worth’ of the interconnected individual. A basic premise of humanism is that human beings possess within themselves the capacity for truth and goodness. In Western Europe, humanism originated in the study of classical culture and was part of the renaissance that took place in 14th and 15th centuries. It got its name from one of the era’s most important goals: the promotion of a new educational curriculum. This curriculum consisted of a group of subjects known collectively as the studia humanitatis, or the humanities. The humanities are a group of academic subjects united by a commitment to studying aspects of the human condition and a qualitative approach. Humanities subjects included grammar, rhetoric, history, poetry, and ethics. These disciplines were all studied, whenever possible, in the original classical texts. The humanities curriculum conflicted with more traditional education that was based on scholasticism. Contrary to a humanistic education, a scholastic education concentrated on more ‘factual’ subjects, such as logic, natural philosophy (science), and metaphysics, or the nature of reality. Scholars often clashed sharply over these two systems of education. A lot was at stake in these academic controversies. The controversy was, and still is, related to the issue: ‘what do you use your education for’? As the West traverses a re(discovery) path towards more and more humanistic approaches, particularly in business and in the government today, Africa is beating itself up (aided by the rest of the world) for not being scholastic enough (and for being too humanistic in its leaning – whether that be in government, business or in civil society). Modern Africa still stresses the importance of human needs, both on an interconnected individual basis and, more importantly, on a collective basis. In fact, African humanism requires interconnected individuals to contribute to the welfare of the society in which they reside – not as a post-self action, but as a pre-self intention and action. This, in many ways, underpin what the rest of this book highlights as Africa’s gift to the world, i.e., social leadership within a context of humanistic citizenship. This approach, hybrid in both conscious- and unconscious design, is often not the most expedient or efficient, but promises a more sustainable (yet complex) society and not short-term individualistic trappings as rewards. There is evidence, from India (Jackson, 2002) for example, that hybrid human resource development systems are being designed to manage different Western (instrumental) and Indian (humanistic) orientations in organisations. Their applicability in other regions such as sub-Saharan Africa also needs to be investigated. The Japanese (holistic) management approach has also provided systems of management in East Asia that appear to be successful in collectivist societies, and that may have some parallels with African societies. The influence of Asian management collectivist philosophy has to be taken into consideration, since important investments (particularly in South Africa, but also in other African countries) have taken place in recent years. We believe that the multi-variable contextual framework identified by Budhwar & Debrah (2001) and the integrative framework of De Cieri & Dowling (1998) may be instructive and require empirical testing in a comparative Afro-Asian context (Horwitz, Kamoche & Chew, 2002). Ahiauzu (1986: 54) points out that “though he may work in industry, the African lives in a wider society; and it is from this society outside the workplace that the elements that constitute the framework within which the African indigenous thought-system operates derive”. This thought system includes features like: a high degree of harmony between man and the world around him, the use of symbolism to make sense of the world, a spiritual connection to something larger than the individual, the use of an oral tradition for passing on collective wisdom, and a strong emphasis on family and the immediate community. This importance of family is seen in the network of interrelationships, extended family and mutual obligations, not dissimilar to the paternalism found in Thai organisations (Kamoche, 2000b). This results in a sense of communalism and traditionalism (Nzelibe, 1986; Onyemelukwe (1973) which is not unlike the Confucian influence on Asian cultures (Horwitz, Kamoche & Chew, 2002). This has led some authors like Maruyama (1984) to propose an epistemological shift away from the predominant Western management theories to alternative ones based on Asian and African perspectives. Maruyama proceeds to identify epistemological aspects in which both Asia and Africa share some common ground, inclusive of cultural heterogeneity as a source of mutually beneficial win-win cooperation, a polyocular vision with regard to what constitutes ‘objective’ truth, the mental and spiritual connectedness the worker shares with group members, the idea that the individual assumes a relational existence and dialogic identity whose raison d’etre is located within the community to which he/she belongs. Three dominant types of management organisations in Africa have been identified in the literature by Jackson 2004: (1) post-colonial, (2) post-instrumental and (3) African renaissance. The analysis of those three systems will help illustrate and understand potential and actual conflicts in the workplace, and address issues of cross-cultural management in African countries, as well as how a combination of features from the three models could give rise to hybrid management models. Post-Colonial Leadership and Management Systems Literature often views leadership/management in Africa as: fatalistic, resistant to change, reactive, short-term oriented, authoritarian, risk-reducing, context-dependent, and basing decisions on external, relationship criteria. Kiggundu (1989), for example, describes the internal climate of organisations as follows: understaffing of competent people, poor motivation, risk-aversion, unwillingness to take independent action, close supervision of subordinates with little delegation, operations often inefficient and high-cost with low-productivity, over-staffing of non-qualified personnel, under-utilisation of capacity, poor pay, poor morale indicated by high-turnover and absenteeism. Top leaders and managers are likely to be overworked, while reluctant to delegate work. Those leaders and managers are generally typically learned, articulate and well travelled. However, at the middle-management level, there are weak systems and controls, inadequate managerial expertise and skills with a lack of industrial knowledge. Blunt & Jones (1992 and 1997) also represent the developed/developing world dichotomy. Jackson (2004), however, argues that the tendency to cast the problem into a “developing/developed” world dichotomy is not only pejorative, but it also hampers critical research into the subject. African management in the literature is mostly representative of a post-colonial heritage, reflecting a theory X style of management, in McGregor’s (1960) terminology, which generally mistrusts human nature with a need to impose controls on workers, allowing little worker initiative and rewarding, individually, a narrow set of skills simply by financial means. This system is identified in the literature as being imposed onto African society, originally by the colonial powers, and being perpetuated after political independence (often not economic independence), perhaps as a result of vested political and economic interest, or purely because this was the way managers in the colonial era were trained. There is typically a lack of clear, community/stakeholder-endorsed mission statements or sense of common/shared direction. A lack of results and objectives-realisation are often then observed, and leadership is viewed as detached, highly centralised, hierarchical and authoritarian (Table 1). Table 1: Comparison of elements of the Western “Ideal” Leadership with East Asian and African Paradigms Element Current Western Leadership “Ideal” Leadership in East Asia Leadership in Africa Influences on leadership practices Paramount concern for organisational performance Drive for efficiency and competitiveness Urgency induced by short-termism of economic model Follower-dependent for operational effectiveness, thus operationally participative Individualistic Emphasis on capital markets and unquestioned instrumental reason Maintenance of harmony fundamental Attention to social networks and particularly familial networks Consensus valued Respect for seniority, age, experience Expectation that managerial authority will be exercised with concern for country and community Highly centralised power structures High degrees of tension as management seeks clarity and control against employee comfortableness in uncertainty and ambiguity Emphasis on control mechanisms rather than organisational performance Bureaucratic resistance to change Acute resource scarcity Individual concern for basic security Stakeholder focus Importance of extended family and kin networks Managing authority Relative equality of authority and status between manager and subordinates Delegation/ decentralisation Teamwork “Empowerment” Leadership from the top Respect for seniority Goals set by top management Acceptance of wide power and status differentials between managers and subordinates Authoritarian/ paternalistic leadership patterns Centralisation Bureaucratic controls Preoccupation with rules and procedures Reluctance to judge individual performance Managing uncertainty High degree of conservatism and stability-seeking behaviour Uncertainty accepted as normal Continuous change viewed as natural Sense of urgency Deep-rooted, shared theologies and philosophies provide relative certainty and security Long-term view of evolving change Hierarchy and conformity stressed Collectivist mutual duties High degree of tolerance of ambiguity Change-resistant organisational hierarchies, reinforced by preoccupation with rules Social networks crucial to provide individual security Managing relationships Trust superficial and offered upfront. Deep trust seldom offered. Tolerance of others Openness valued Open confrontation of differences Open debate and conflict valued. Deep private conversation and dialogue avoided Support of followers essential Drive to secure commitment and high morale Emphasis on maintenance of harmony and personal dignity Deep trust earned over time. No offering of superficial trust Persons valued over issues Avoidance of confrontation and conflict Open debate and conflict avoided. Deep private conversation and dialogue valued Maintenance of social networks important Openness to others Deep trust earned over time. No offering of superficial trust Emphasis on harmony with others, nature and the spirit world Confrontation and differences privately dealt with Open debate and conflict avoided. Deep private conversation and dialogue valued Extended social networks importance for sustainability In the African context, it is probably more correct to write and speak about “leadership”, and in some ways “management”, as socially-constructed concepts, and this being the preferred dimensions for most Africans, as opposed to “leaders/managers” (individual, Western constructs). Hogg’s (2001) ‘social identity theory of leadership’ which views leadership as a group process generated by social categorisation and prototype-based depersonalisation processes associated with social identity, goes a long way in unpacking the social nature of leadership and therefore provides deeper insight into African leadership/management concepts. According to Hogg (2001: 184) “group identification, as self-categorisation, constructs an intra-group prototypicality gradient that invests the most prototypical member with the appearance of having influence; the appearance arises because members cognitively and behaviorally conform to the prototype.” Because most multinational managers and highly skilled Africans take their intra-group norms from the West, the previous colonial West, it is they who are ascribed the apparent influence as leaders – while African employees seek to emulate them in culture, behaviour and norm, often suppressing or denying their authentic selves (as a cost). The belief in modern, urban Africa has always been one which characterised the “employed person at his/her organisation” as separate from the “home person” (effectively enabling depression around the resulting outer-/inner-persona split). As a result, in the workplace, the appearance of influence for the Western prototype-person becomes a reality through depersonalised social attraction processes that make African employees seemingly agree and comply with the leader’s/manager’s ideas and suggestions. Hogg further argues that consensual social attraction also imbues the leader/manager with apparent status and creates a status-based structural differentiation within the group into leader(s)/manager(s) and followers, which has characteristics of unequal status inter-group relations (so characteristic of African workplaces). In addition, a fundamental attribution process constructs a charismatic leadership/managerial personality for the leader/manager, which further empowers the leader/manager and sharpens the leader–follower, or manager-follower, status differential. The leader(s)/manager(s) in return therefore daily views a self- fulfilling, dependent-appearing employee, that hangs off his/her commands and knowledge, and therefore seeks to limit organisational risk through implementing controls. Hence, organisationally in Africa, the emphasis is on control mechanisms, rules and procedures rather than performance, and there is a high reluctance to judge individual performance. These aspects are grouped as “control” factors in Table 2.  Table 2: Comparison of Different Organisational Management Systems in Africa Post-Colonial Post-Instrumental African Renaissance East Asian/Japanese Main principles Theory X Western/post-independence African Instrumental Theory Y Western/’modern’ Functionalist Humanistic Ubuntu Community collectivism Humanistic Corporate collectivism Importance Continuing legacy through political and economic interests Looked to as alternative Influence from multinationals, management education and consultants Some elements may prevail in indigenous organisations Of growing interest internationally Developing importance through East Asian investment May be seen as alternative Strategy Inputs and process orientation Lack of results and objectives Risk aversive Results and market-oriented Clear objectives Calculated risk taking Stakeholder orientation Market and result orientation Clear objectives Low risk-taking Structure Hierarchical Centralised Flatter hierarchy Often decentralised Flatter hierarchy Decentralised and closer to stakeholders Hierarchical and conformity Governance and decision making Authoritarian Non-consultative Often consultative Increasing emphasis on ‘empowerment’ Participative, consensus seeking (indaba) Consultative but authority from top Control Rule bound Lack of flexibility Outside influence or control (family, government) often seen as negative Clear rules of action Flexible Outside government influence decreasing Benign rules of action Outside influence (family, government) may be seen as more benign Consensus and harmony above formal rules May have a lack of flexibility Character May not act ethically towards stakeholders Not very efficient Static Probably not foreign owned More ethically responsible Aims to be successful Change is a feature Probably foreign owned Stakeholder interest may be more important than ‘ethics’ Success related to development and well being of its people Indigenous Harmony and face may be more important than ethics Efficiency May be slow to change Internal policies Discriminatory Employee policies aimed at duties rather than rights Non-discriminatory Access to equal opportunities and clear employee policies on responsibilities and rights Stakeholder interests Access to equal opportunities Can be discriminatory (towards women) Employee relations may be more implicit Internal climate Employee alienation common Weak trade unions Inter-ethnic friction Discourages diversity of opinions Promotion by ascription Emphasis on employee motivation Weak or co-operative unions Move towards inter-ethnic harmony Diverse opinions often encouraged Promotion based on achievement Motivation through participation important Unions protect rights Inter-ethnic harmony taken into consideration Everyone should be able to state their opinions Promotion based on legitimisation of status Aims at employee commitment (job satisfaction may be low) Company trade unions Inter-ethnic relations may not be an issue Consensus rather than diversity of opinions stressed Promotion by seniority External policies Lack of customer/client policies Lack of result orientation Clear policies on customers/clients Result orientation A clear awareness of and articulation of stakeholder interests A focus on business and customer networks rather than explicit policies Management expertise Educated management elite with low managerial expertise High, result-oriented managerial expertise is aimed for Management expertise based on people orientation Management effectiveness based on collective skills People orientation Control orientation People and result orientation People and stakeholder orientation People (in-group) orientation Source: Jackson (2002) The ‘character’ of such overly-controlled organisations may also well reflect local public sector-, local parastatal- or recently privatised local organisations that are not foreign-owned. There is broad agreement concerning the poor performance of the African public sector, which has engendered support for a reduction in its size, all across Africa. Most democracies in Africa occurred during the second half of the previous century and, as a result, much of the public sector is stuck with ex-“war heroes”, ex-“exiles”, ex-“political prisoners”, ex-“labour movement leaders”, and so forth, as government leaders/managers – when many of them unfortunately did not get any formal education and training to lead and manage, and if recently acquired, did not have the time to practice their skills and competences for sufficient periods and over sufficiently complicated- and extensive resources (as many of them sacrificed such taken-for-granted competencies for fighting for democracy for the benefit of the many) – as a result, many are “learning-by-doing” (Gorelick, Milton & April, 2004). In addition, the public sector often finds it difficult to attract the most talented local employees (multinationals and the private sector does so). The post-colonial private sector in a number of African countries are often no more rational in goal-seeking than its public sector, which shares its inefficient performance partly due to the levels of corruption and unofficial behaviour toward their stakeholders (‘character’ in Table 2). Internal recruitment decisions and promotions by ascription are of a particularistic, rather than universalistic, nature, and may therefore be regarded as discriminatory. Employee policies are aimed at duties of workers rather than on rights, reflective of a lack of organisational democracy. Managers who fit in well in a post-colonial system are expected to be motivated by control features of their jobs and economic security. Management principles may be related to an external control, where events are considered as not within the individual’s control, where creative potential is regarded as being limited and people are generally fixed in their ways and not malleable or changeable. Decisions are typically focused on the past and present, rather than the future. Action is focused on the short-term, and success orientation may be moralistic, rather than pragmatic as a result. This may reflect an apparent lack of achievement and status orientations. Management practices stem out of the principles previously defined that lead to an authoritarian leadership style with reliance on the hierarchy, use of rank, low egalitarianism and a lack of openness in communication and information giving. It seems that the main management orientations within post-colonial systems are toward managing internal processes and power relations.  Individuals’ perception about the controllability of what happens to them is a core element of their understanding of how they live and have meaning in the world (Shapiro, Schwartz & Astin, 1996). In initial investigations about the related perception and beliefs of the individuals, clinical psychology researchers found that some clients changed their behaviours more than others after new experiences. The proposed variable to account for this difference, known as ‘locus of control’, has been the expectancy or belief about the reinforcements that follow a behaviour (Rotter, Seeman & Liverant 1962). Western culture promoted internal control orientation as a bulwark against unquestioning submission to authority. People are expected to perceive themselves as the active determiners of their fates and accept full responsibility for their outcomes. This Western socio-cultural emphasis has significantly influenced the development and application of the ‘locus of control’ construct over the years. The dimension of ‘locus of control’ has unfortunately been simply an euphemism for “good guys-bad guys,” with internality being substituted for ‘desirable, intelligent and bright’ whereas externality for ‘failure, dull and inadequate’ (Lefcourt, 1982: 182). The research and practice in the area has been biased by the popular assumption that ‘internal locus of control’ is a positive asset and externality is a deficit (Evans, Shapiro & Lewis, 1993). An ‘internal locus of control’ became the “moral vision” of Western cultural ideology (Christopher, 1996). Since cultural biases and prevailing values have always had significant effect on psychological theory (Gergen, 1985), it is not surprising that the group with more power or prototypical control in society – higher socio-economic Westerners – have defined desired characteristics also for locus of control, that are adopted by researchers and practitioners. Driven by the belief that internality is superior to externality, researchers have apparently continually found confirming evidence for their hypotheses. The measurement tools and criterion situations that have been used in these experiments have focused upon events that are largely in the range of controllability for the subjects under examination. Consequently, internality regarding achievement-related- and performance behaviours were found to be appropriate, and therefore a prognostic indicator of achievement-/performance-facilitating behaviour. An intelligent inquiry about locus of control, however, would question the reality of beliefs in control; consider the delusions of omnipotence, the problems of grandiosity, the creations of God and inevitable life experiences that are beyond man’s ken; and take cultural, conceptual as well as measurement differences into account. Rotter (1966) has suggested that locus of control measures should have a curvilinear relationship in which individuals who believe they are responsible for each and every important event that occurs through their lifetime, should be as aberrant as the individuals who feel themselves to be entirely at the mercy of external circumstances. In this regard, a useful alternative conceptualisation of locus of control is provided by Wong & Sproule (1984). In their study, they noted the importance of distinguishing ‘realism’ from ‘idealism’. When locus of control was assessed, respondents’ reality considerations tended to account for external scores and their ideals seemed to account for internal scores. The authors’ conceptualisation of locus of control has also involved a dual dimensional view. Dual control, or what is called shared responsibility, was described in terms of internal and external control. They labelled the group of individuals, who understand control to be from both internal and external sources, as “bilocals”. Bilocals are considered individuals who strike a healthy balance between their beliefs in internal- and external control. Wong & Sproule (1984) hypothesised that bilocals cope more effectively because they observe an optimal mix between personal responsibility (internal control) and faith in appropriate outside resources (external control). It is argued in this article that emphasising the importance of both internal and external aspects of control, instead of emphasising only on the benefits of being internal (ascribed to Western leaders/managers) or the distresses associated with being external (ascribed to mainly African employees) is a sensible alternative to prevailing discussions of locus of control. Considering this multidimensional focus that came to the perspective, external control beliefs is not necessarily dysfunctional. As described by the measurement scale of Levenson (1981), an external belief may be derived from powerful others, in which a potential for control exists, as opposed to chance. Similarly, Gurin, Gurin & Morrison (1978: 292) argued that scores of greater externality on measures of locus of control among minority (oppressed) groups were incorrectly interpreted in several reports as demonstrating that “cultural values and beliefs in external forces needed to be altered, when in fact their sense of low personal control reflected a correct perception of a harsh environment over which they had little control”. That indicates, early evaluations did not distinguish between realism and idealism aspects of control; thus, it is not possible to understand which factors actually accounted for the observed differences in external control. These findings lend further evidence regarding multidimensional character of locus of control attribution having differing developmental-, social-, and behavioural correlates. Moreover, especially in multicultural environments, bilocals are expected to be better adjusted than controllers (those with internal control beliefs) and controllees (those with external control beliefs) in many ways (Wong & Sproule, 1984). Therefore it is important to take these factors into account while assessing effects locus of control can have on any behavioural change as well as work achievement and performance. Others (Hannerz, 1969; Valentine, 1971; LaFromboise, Coleman & Gerton, 1993) have referred to “biculturalism” when postulating about the impact of cultural acquisition and the creative tension between maintaining a dualistic balance between internal and external control. In African-American literature, it was DuBois (1961) who remarked about “double consciousness” and the “twoness” of living dual cultural realities. The concepts of “bilocals” and “biculturalism” appeal to us as key concepts for making sense out of the collective behaviour and social life, as well as the individual and work life, of the African community, in which they draw upon both a distinctive repertoire of standardised African group behaviour and, simultaneously, patterns derived from the mainstream cultural system of Western derivation. For most Africans, socialisation in both of the systems begins at an early age, at home and in school and through the mass media, and continues throughout life – and is therefore of equal importance. Jackson’s (2002) contribution, tries to capture this notion, in his focus on what he calls “locus of human value”. He distinguishes between an instrumental view of people in organisations that perceives them as a means to an end, and a humanistic view of people, which sees them as having a value in their own right, and being an end in themselves. The Western concept of “human resources” unfortunately typifies the former approach in its view of people as another resource to meet the ends of the organisation. It is likely that this concept would predominate in post-colonial African organisations. The author suggests that the instrumental/humanistic approach may avoid some of the pitfalls of applying a developing/developed dichotomy (as in Jaeger & Kanungo 1990) or of applying a Hofstedian “simplistic individualism/collectivism model” to cultural analysis in explaining differences between indigenous and imported views of human relations. It may also explain the levels of inappropriateness of what is termed post-instrumental management systems. Post-Instrumental Management Systems There is a danger that the objective of development is to make the “developing” world more like the “developed” one through industrialisation, and that this should be reflected in the direction of organisational change and the way people are managed. “Most organisations have been primarily shaped by the narrow range of perspectives and experiences of Western European, White, heterosexual, physically able-bodied males” (Weber, 1993: 93). This is reflected in a trend whereby Western approaches to management are imported into African countries either through multinational companies, Western-governed institutions like the WTO, IMF and World Bank, or through African managers who are increasingly being educated according to Western-styled leadership and management curricula (in Africa and abroad). The contrasting views of training and development perceptions are illustrated in Table 3. The opportunity actually exists for Africans to extract the useful (and discard the dysfunctional) Western insights and knowledge and raise up (in relevance, and in training and development) its context-appropriate native insights and knowledge, thereby creating something quite unique, a hybrid, a gift of difference to the world. The West, and its mentioned institutions, may, in return, achieve the added benefit of enriching its own perspectives and reconstitute its organisations if “… [they dare to] begin to be shaped by more diverse cultures and perspectives, [then] there is every reason to expect that organisations will change” Weber (1993: 93). There may be beliefs, practices and processes in the West or by Western organisations in Africa, which are currently considered right or good, that can be reconsidered. Table 3: Contrast between Western and African View of Training Western African Individual responsibility for self-actualisation Learning viewed as an individual problem-solving process towards positivistic reality, involving puzzlement, perturbation, even discomfort for the learner – knowledge to be hoarded as a source of power and the tension of “not knowing” is skilfully managed at an individual level Individual agency in social relationships, that enables maximised organisational goals Self-confidence in his/her relationship with his/her employing organisation, thereby ensuring positive individual affirmation Heightened awareness of hierarchical levels within organisations mainly, as well as deference to organisational authority Education seen as a way to enhance both individual status and personal growth A view of the professional as an individual of independent judgment The value of self-discovered knowledge as opposed to prescribed knowledge from an early age – and knowledge is to be used for one’s own advancement Power of teacher rests in his/her expert knowledge, information and skills. An emerging view of the teacher-learner relationship as involving interdependence and growing equality as learner approximates teacher’s knowledge Development as involving individual risk and change for learners, but reward is potential individual prosperity Training viewed as an opportunity even if it involves, within a trusting training context, the admission of individual ignorance and shortcomings Increasing degree of openness, as trust is assumed upfront in relationships (mainly among peers) Group determined self-actualisation Learning viewed as a group-responsibility process towards constructivist reality, involving risk avoidance for the group but acquiring additional information on an individual level – knowledge to be hoarded and protected as a source of power and the tension of “not knowing” is skilfully managed at an individual level Collectivist nature of social relationships, that enables compromised group goals Self-confidence in his/her relationship with his/her stakeholder group, thereby ensuring positive individual affirmation Heightened awareness of hierarchical levels within organisations and outside of organisations, and deference to tribal/familial authority Education seen as a way to enhance individual status, rather than for personal growth A view of the professional as better able to make interdependent judgements The value of prescribed knowledge from an early age, with self-discovered knowledge emerging with maturity – and knowledge is to be used for the group’s advancement Power of teacher ascribed to him/her by virtue of his/her position. View of the teacher-learner relationship as one in which the learner stays dependent and cannot easily achieve equality with the teacher Development as involving group risk and individual change for learners, but reward is potential group prosperity Training viewed as a threat rather than an opportunity if it involves an admission of group ignorance and group shortcomings Increasing degree of openness, as trust is developed over a long period of time of intention explicitness (among everyone) Source: Authors, and adapted from Jones (1989), Jackson (2002) When Western human resource practices are implemented in cultures that have a different concept of people, and a different regard for people in organisations, it is likely that incompatibilities will be manifested through lack of motivation and alienation, leading to low productivity and labour strife. Followers may even at times prefer a leader who is kindly, considerate and understanding to one who is overly dynamic and productive, and possibly too demanding. Valuing diversity in African workplaces seems to be compatible with stressing common goals and standards, if the attention to diversity is not allowed to undermine the emphasis on community, and what the community stands for. And since African employees are engaged in common effort, not individual effort, organisational processes, human resource practices and policies should seek to guide behaviour standards that are not idiosyncratic to the individual, but rather be group-appropriate (shared goals, shared rewards, shared performance standards, shared operating norms, and so forth). Alasdair MacIntyre made the following comments on the relationship between pluralism and a common culture: “If we do not recover and identify with the particularities of our community, then we shall lose what it is we have to contribute to the common culture. We shall have nothing to bring, nothing to give. But if each of us dwells too much, or even exclusively, upon his or her ethnic particularity, then we are in danger of fragmenting and even destroying the common life” (Quoted in Quay, 1991). The statement above captures the challenge for Africans – the wonderful, humanistic orientation for community has to extend beyond particular ethnicities to include community encompassing all ethnicities within a nation state, or even within the African Union. Also, and in contrast to the West (whose focus is on getting teamwork/communal behaviour even though individuals are individually competent) Africans need to be empowered with individual skills and competencies, in order to leverage their ability to work as a collective for the benefit of all. In addition, such a communal orientation needs, through joint effort, to develop a complementary, strong civil society infrastructure that brings together diverse perspectives to enrich understanding of the commonly shared good and common ventures – but all need to be assisted in what they can bring to the whole (a whole beyond the ethnic whole) in a spirit of wanting to cooperate with others. The three key points made above highlights the inherently paradoxical nature of Africa’s dilemma. Such attitude, however, runs counter to Western market philosophies, which espouse the survival of the fittest. In the current Western paradigm, for instance, an important part of the leader’s job is to get rid of poor performers (“mean and lean” organisational paradigm). Vision vested in individuals in positions of power, in the Western sense, may therefore be out of place in many organisations in Africa. It is expected, almost taken for granted, that African organisations will not pull together because of ethnic and/or family-based rifts. The extent to which such manifestations are the case in foreign-owned and Western management-oriented companies in Africa has been little researched or empirically established. For Jones (1989), organisational behaviour is influenced by a complex set of interrelated factors. The Western notion of “rational” behaviour is itself the product of such factors, but it is not automatically applicable in other contexts. What appears to a Western observer of African organisations to be “irrational”, on closer examination can be seen to reflect a set of values that are different from, but no less valid than those of, the West. The African Renaissance System Some African authors have called for a return to African values and indigenous knowledge systems (Stremlau, 1999; Ajulu, 2001; Mbeki et al., 2004). This movement for an African Renaissance follows the precepts of Ubuntu. Literally translated, Ubuntu means “I am who I am through others” in contrast to the Western tenet cogito ergo sum. Mbigi (1997) has more specifically set about defining and elaborating the management philosophy of Ubuntu, which is based on the sense of community. Key values can be summarised as follows: Sharing: a need for security in the face of hardship has provided a commitment to helping one another. This value is not based on simple exchange, but is a result of a network of social obligations, based predominantly on kinship. Deference to rank: simplistic reference to power distance. Although traditional rulers were such by their title to the senior lineage, they had to earn the respect of their followers and rule by consensus. People were free to express opinions and dissension. At the same time, taking one’s proper place in the social scale is an important aspect of the virtue of humility (legitimisation of status). Sanctity of commitment: commitment and mutual obligations stem from group pressures to meet one’s promises and to conform to social expectations (obligations to stakeholders in Table 2). Regard for compromise and consensus: the main characteristics of traditional African leadership are: a chief who personifies the unity of the tribe and who must live the values of his community in an exemplary way; not being an autocrat, the chief must rely on representatives of the people to assist him, to be guided by consensus. Failure to do so would result in his people ignoring his decisions and law. The people are strongly represented, with a duty to attend court hearings, and all have a responsibility to each other collectively to ensure the laws are upheld. As a result of this collective responsibility, everyone has a right to question in open court. The concept of openness: is an important value, and implies that no one should receive retribution for anything said correctly in an open forum. In Table 2, this is reflected in structures that have flatter and more accessible hierarchies, consensus-seeking decision-making, an internal climate of participation and openness, and protection of rights. Management practice also reflects a participative, egalitarian and open approach (Table 4).  Table 4: Comparison of different management attributes in Africa Post-colonial Post-instrumental African Renaissance East Asian/Japanese Management motivators Economic security Control Managing uncertainty Self-enhancement Autonomy Independence Achievement Belonging Development of personal and group Belonging Development in corporate context Elements of economic security Management commitment To business objectives To relatives To organisation To self To results To ethical principles To work To group To people To business objectives (the corporate) To results To work To relatives Management principle External locus of control Deontology Theory X Mistrust of human nature Status orientation Internal locus of control Teleology Theory Y Conditional trust of human nature Achievement orientation Internal and external locus of control Trust of human nature Status and achievement orientation External locus of control Theory Y (in-group), theory X (out-group) Trust of in-group members Relational and relativity aspects of decision making Status through seniority Management practices Reliance on hierarchy Use of rank Low egalitarianism Lack of open communication Lack of open information Some participation Mostly communicating openly Providing open information when necessary Confrontational Participation Egalitarianism Communicating openly Providing open communication Consultative (ringi) Communicating and information giving to gain consensus Maintaining harmony Main orientations Managing process Managing power relations Managing results (external focus) Managing people Managing people (internal stakeholder focus) Managing results (defined by stakeholder interests) Managing people (in-group/out-group relations) Managing results (defined by stakeholder interests) Source: Jackson (2002)  Good social and personal relations: commitment to social solidarity. The tensions of management/labour relations that have been a feature in African organisations can be attributed largely to a lack of human dimension and the adversarial attitudes of colonial employment relations. Where do we go from here? An investigation of management and organisation in Africa must consider the different and overlapping systems previously described, through the lens of cultural interactions. It must consider how these systems vary through the influence of diverse post-colonial systems and their different operating versions (Portuguese, Belgian, French, Dutch, English, German, Arabic, etc.) on the one hand, and the interaction with post-instrumental systems represented by various multinationals present on the African continent (North American, European and Asian companies) on the other hand. It is necessary, however, to first focus on the “African” values and thought system in order to understand their impact on the working behaviour of African leaders and managers. References Adler, N.J. (2002), International Dimensions of Organisational Behavior, 4th Edition, Thomson Learning: South Western. Ahiauzu, A.I. (1986), ‘The African Thought-System and the Work Behaviour of the African Industrial Man’, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 37-58. Ajulu, R. (2001), ‘Thabo Mbeki’s African Renaissance in a Globalising World Economy : The Struggle for the Soul of the Continent’, Review of African Political Economy, Vol. 28, No. 87, pp. 27-42. April, K. & April, A. (2006), ‘Responsible Leadership Ethics’, in K. April & M. Shockley (Eds.), Diversity: New Realities in a Changing World, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Blunt, P. & Jones, M.L. (1997), ‘Exploring the Limits of Western Leadership Theory in East Asia and Africa’, Personnel Review, Vol. 26, No. 1-2, pp. 6-23. Blunt, P. & Jones, M.L. (1992), Managing Organisations in Africa, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Blunt, P. & Jones, M.L. (1986), ‘Managerial Motivation in Kenya and Malawi: A Cross-Cultural Comparison’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 165-175. Budhwar, P.S. & Debrah, Y.A. (2001), ‘Introduction’, in P.S. Budhwar and Y.A. Debrah (Eds.), Human Resource Management in Developing Countries, London: Routledge. Child, J. (1981), ‘Culture, Contingency and Capitalism in the Cross-National Study of Organisations’, in L.L. Cummings & B.M. Straw (Eds.), Research in Organisational Behavior, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Christopher, J.C. (1996), ‘Counseling’s Inescapable Moral Visions’, Journal of Counseling & Development, Vol. 75, pp. 17-25. De Cieri, H. & Dowling, P.J. (1998), ‘Strategic Human Resource Management in Multinational Enterprises’, adapted from Schuler, R.S., Dowling, P.J. & De Cieri, H. (1993), ‘An Integrative Framework of Strategic International Human Resource Management’, Journal of Management, Vol. 19, pp. 419-459. Driver, M. (2003), ‘Diversity and Learning in Groups’, The Learning Organisation, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 149-166. DuBois, W.E.B. (1961), The Soul of Black Folks: Essays and Sketches, New York: Fawcett. Evans, G.W., Shapiro, D.H. & Lewis, M.A. (1993), ‘Specifying Dysfunctional Mismatches between Different Control Dimensions’, British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 84, pp. 255-273. Gergen, K.J. (1985), ‘The Social Constructionist Movement in Modern Psychology’, American Psychologist, Vol. 40, pp. 266-275. Gorelick, C., Milton, N. & April, K. (2004), Performance Through Learning: Knowledge Management in Practice, Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Govendo, J.A. (2005), ‘Workforce, Diversity and Corporate Creativity’, Handbook of Business Strategy, pp. 213-217. Gurin, P., Gurin, G. & Morrison, B.M. (1978), ‘Personal and Ideological Aspects of Internal and External Control, Social Psychology, Vol. 41, pp. 275-296. Lefcourt, H.M. (1982), Locus of Control: Current Trends in Theory and Research, 2nd Editionnd, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hannerz, U. (1969), Soulside: Inquiries into Ghetto Culture and Community, Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell. Hofstede, G. (1991), Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind, London: McGraw- Hill. Hofstede, G. (1980), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hogg, M.A. (2001), ‘A Social Identity Theory of Leadership’, Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 184-200. Horwitz, F., Kamoche, K. & Chew, I.K.H. (2002), Looking East: Diffusing High Performance Work Practices in the Southern Afro-Asian Context (Paper presented at the 3rd African Regional Congress of the International Industrial Relations Association, CapeTown, South Africa, 6th – 8th March 2002, pp. 1-19). Jackson, T. (2002), International HRM: A Cross-Cultural Approach, London: Sage. Jaeger, A.M. & Kanungo, R.N. (1990), Management in Developing Countries, London: Routledge. Jones, M.L. (1989), ‘Management Development: An African Focus’, International Studies of Management and Organisation, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 74-90. Kamoche, K. (1993), ‘Towards a Model of HRM in Africa’, in J.B. Shaw, P.S. Kirkbride & K.M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Kamoche, K. (1997), ‘Managing Human Resources in Africa: Strategic, Organizational and Epistemological Issues’, International Business Review, Vol. 6, pp. 537-558. Kamoche, K. (2000a), Sociological Paradigms and Human Resources: An African Context, Aldershot: Ashgate. Kamoche, K. (2000b), ‘From Boom to Bust: The Challenge of Managing People in Thailand’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 11, pp. 452-468. Kiggundu, M.N. (1989), Managing Organisations in Developing Countries, West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press. LaFromboise, T., Coleman, H.L.K. & Gerton, J. (1993), ‘Psychological Impact of Biculturalism: Evidence and Theory’, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 114, No. 3, pp. 395-412. Lessem, R. (1996), From Hunter to Rainmaker, the African Business Sphere, Randburg: Knowledge Resources (Pty) Ltd. Levenson, H. (1981), ‘Differentiating among Internality, Powerful Others, and Chance’, in H.M. Lefcourt (Ed.), Research with the Locus of Control Construct, Vol. 1, New York: Academic Press, pp. 15-63. Maruyama, M. (1984), ‘Alternative Concepts of Management: Insights from Asia and Africa’, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, January Edition, pp. 100-111. Mbeki, T., Diallo, G., Nehusi, K., Muchie, M., Friedman, S. & Lewis, R. (2004), African Renaissance 2nd Issue: Who is an African’, London : Adonis & Abbey Publishers Ltd. Mbigi, L. (1997), Ubuntu: The African Dream in Management, Randburg, S. Africa: Knowledge Resources. McGregor, D. (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise, New York: McGraw-Hill. Morrison, E.W. (1993), ‘Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Information Seeking on Newcomer Socialization’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, No. 2, pp. 173-183. Nzelibe, C.O. (1986), ‘The Evolution of African Management Thought’, International Studies of Management and Organization, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 6-16. Onyemelukwe, C.C. (1973), Men and Management in Contemporary Africa, London: Longman. Quay, J. (1991), ‘Center for the Common Good: A Concept Paper’, Vesper International Forum, San Leandro, CA: Vesper Society Group. Ralston, D.A., Gustafson, D.J., Cheung, F.M. & Terpstra R.H. (1993), ‘Differences in Managerial Values: A Study of US, Hong Kong and PRC Managers’, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 249-275. Ralston D.A., Holt D.H., Terpstra R.H. & Kai-Cheng Y. (1997), ‘The Impact of National Culture and Economic Ideology on Managerial Work Values: A Study of the US, Russia, Japan, and China’, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 177-207. Rotter, J.B. (1966), ‘Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement’, Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, Vol. 80, No. 1, pp. 609. Rotter, J.B., Seeman, M. & Liverant, S. (1962), ‘Internal versus External Control of Reinforcements: A Major Variable in Behaviour Theory’, in N.E Washburne (Ed.), Decisions, Values and Groups: Proceedings of a Conference held at the University of New Mexico, New York: Pergamon, pp. 473-516. Seddon, J.W. (1985), ‘The Development and Indigenization of Third World Business: African Perspectives in the Workplace’, in V. Hammond (Ed.), Current Research in Management, London: Francis Pinter. Shapiro, D.H., Schwartz, C.E. & Astin, J.A. (1996), ‘Controlling Ourselves, Controlling our World: Psychology’s Role in Understanding Positive and Negative Consequences of Seeking and Gaining Control, American Psychologist, Vol. 51, pp. 1213-1230. Stremlau, J. (1999), “African Renaissance and International Relations,” South African Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 64. Valentine, C.A. (1971), ‘Deficit, Difference, and Bicultural Models of Afro-American Behavior’, Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 137-157. Ward, S., Pearson, C., Entrekin, L. & Winzar, H. (1999), ‘The Fit between Cultural Values and Countries: Is there Evidence of Globalization, Nationalism, or Crossvergence?’, International Journal of Management, Vol. 16, No. 4, pp. 466-473. Weber, L.J.(1993), 'Ethics and the Praise of Diversity', Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 87-96. Wong, P.T.P. & Sproule, C.E. (1984), ‘An Attributional Analysis of the Locus of Control Construct and the Trent Attribution Profile’, in H.M. Lefcourt (Ed.), Research with the Locus of Control Construct, Volume 3, New York: Academic Press, pp. 309-360. Yang, B., Watkins, K.E. & Marsick, V.J. (2004), ‘The Construct of the Learning Organization: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation’, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 31-55. PAGE 24 PAGE 13 PAGE 30