What Works and What Doesn’t:

A Critique of Resonant, Transformational and Authentic Leadership

Applied in the Asian Context

by

Rachel Marie Carbonell-Laguio

September 29,2018

1
 Introduction

Views of Leadership have evolved through time, focusing beyond just traits and qualities

of the leader. Studies have now looked into the followers and the dynamics and impact of this

relationship on performance and organizational effectiveness (Avolio, Walumbawa & Weber,

2009). Although this seems to be a huge milestone in the study of leadership, an area that

remains of great interest is leadership across cultural contexts, driven in part by the globalization

of organizations (Avolio et al, 2009). No word has evoked as much passion in recent times as

the word “globalization,” which carries an array of meanings among different people and

disciplines; globalization is a historical process that has connected the world and influenced it,

for better or worse, in every aspect of life (Yale Global Online, 2017).

Leadership is said to be a universal experience; but while it may be so, this phenomenon

is influenced by the interplay of cultural variations, especially in the way it is operationalized

(Dorfman-Howell, et al., 1997). Culture reflects the shared values of its members, and that it can

and will influence leadership practices and approaches to employee motivation and provide the

standards or guidelines for defining appropriate behavior (Erez, 1994).

Leadership theories have grown from studies within the Western context and as this is so,

conflicting viewpoints exist in leadership literature concerning the transferability of specific

leader behaviors and processes across cultures (Dorfman, et al, 1997). The objective of this

paper is to review how some of the underlying assumptions of Resonant Leadership,

Transformational Leadership, and Authentic Leadership, apply in an Asian context. These three

leadership models all put significant emphasis on the need for the leader to have self-awareness,

the ability to inspire followers through a vision, to involve the followers in achieving this vision

2
and to use coaching or mentoring to connect what people want for themselves with the

organization.

What are the Resonant Leadership, Transformational, and Authentic Leadership Models?

Resonant leadership is being attuned to people’s feelings and moving them in a positive

emotional direction, speaking authentically from one’s own values and resonating with the

emotions of those around him/her (Goleman, Boyatzis, McKee, 2002). It is seen as one that is

indispensable at this time and age of riding through quantum changes. But while all these

happen on the outside, the battle is conquered first from within. Emotional Intelligence, how a

leader handles himself and his relationships, further defined in terms of four domains, namely,

self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, and relationship building (Goleman, et.al,

2002) now adds to the qualities of what makes great and successful leaders. A leader may not be

perfect on all four domains, but self-directed learning describes a process where leader can

improve by working on the competencies that comprise each of these domains . There are four

styles of leadership that create resonance in a group. These are Visionary, Coaching, Affiliative,

and Democratic. Each style builds resonance, has a positive impact on a group’s climate, and, if

and when used appropriately, can produce results. The mark of an effective professional in any

field is that they know how to skillfully use the appropriate tool for each situation, including

some styles that that the authors refer to as dissonant styles -- Pacesetting and Commanding

Styles, and which they have advised to proceed with caution and to be used sparingly.

Following the same themes of speaking authentically from one’s own values, influencing,

inspiring, and driving people positively through emotions is Transformational Leadership.

3
Transformational leadership consists of leader behaviors that induce followers to act for certain

goals that represent the values and the motivations, the wants and needs, the aspirations and

expectations of both the leaders and followers (Burns, 1978, p.19). These are behaviors that

transform and inspire followers to perform beyond expectations while transcending self-interest

for the good of the organization (Avolio, et al, 2009). Transformational leaders are those who

stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes, and in the process,

develop their own leadership capacity (Bass and Riggio, 2006). The four components of

Transformational leadership are Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual

Stimulation and Individualized Considerations (Avolio, et al., 2009).

Authentic leadership contains several aspects of the transformational leadership model.

These two leadership styles are the only styles that have been combined under a single style

called “authentic transformational leadership” (Nichols, 2008, as cited in Celik-Akgemci, et al,

2016). Besides, it is necessary that a leader be authentic in order to be viewed as transformational

in both Bass’ (1985 as cited in Celik-Akgemci, et. al, 2016) and Burns’ (1978, as cited in Celik-

Akgemci, et. al, 2016) conceptualizations. Transformational leaders have been described as

being hopeful, optimistic, developmentally-oriented, and of high moral character, all of which

describe authentic leaders (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). An authentic leader is a leader who is

aware of his or her values and also acts and leads accordingly. By staying true to one’s own

values, the leader is demonstrating a sense of authenticity and genuine behavior, which increases

his or her credibility as well as earns the trust of his or her followers (Avolio-Gardner, et al.,

2007). The model of Authentic Leadership has four constructs: self-awareness, relational

transparency, balanced processing and internalized moral perspective (Avolio-Gardner, et.al.,

2007).

4
 The writer sees four underlying assumptions common across the leadership models of

Resonant, Transformational, and Authentic, leadership. These are,

1. Self- awareness, being attuned to one’s own values, to emotional tendencies, and to

one’s own strengths and weaknesses;

2. Moving people towards a common and compelling vision, inspiring and motivating

them;

3. Tapping into the followers’ ideas, getting commitment through participation,

involving them in problem-solving, even challenging deeply held assumptions; and

4. Being a coach and mentor, connecting what a person wants with the organization’s

goals.

The succeeding sections look at the extent to which these above-mentioned assumptions

apply in the Asian context. It is important to note however, that Asian countries differ along a

number of dimensions, with each country having a unique social, technological, economic,

political, environmental and demographic characteristics that determine market and organization

maturity (Ulrich, Sutton, 2011). Jenkins (2004, cited by Ulrich and Sutton) noted that “one

fundamental principle applies in Asia and elsewhere -- leadership is not one size fits all.” The

approach therefore is to look at what is shared across a majority of Asian countries and generally

across various disciplines, but predominantly more within the business or corporate environment

where the writer has been exposed to.

5
 Critique and Analysis

Self-awareness has been cited as the most important capability for leaders to develop and

is the inevitable starting point for managing one's psychological preferences (Stanjor, n.d.).

Successful leaders know where their natural inclinations lie and use this knowledge to boost

those inclinations or compensate for them; self-awareness impacts companies’ bottom line and

companies with strong financial performance tend to have employees with higher levels of self-

awareness than poorly performing companies (Brokaw, 2012).

Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee (2002, p.73) describe self-awareness as associated with three

emotional intelligence domains, namely,

• Emotional self-awareness: Reading one’s own emotions and recognizing their impact;
using “gut sense” to guide decisions;
• Accurate self-assessment: Knowing one’s strengths and limits; and
• Self-confidence: A sound sense of one’s self-worth and capabilities

The above-mentioned definition underscores the importance of having an accurate view of

one’s strengths and limitations and a sound sense of one’ self-worth but does not include the

aspect of how a person views the self, relative to the social context she or he operates in. The

model has a different domain called self-management where the person takes responsibility for

how he or she reacts towards external events, and other domains that define emotional

intelligence which is a core dimension in Resonant Leadership.

Both authentic and transformational leadership models capture a social dimension to how

self-awareness is formed. The authentic leadership model defines self-awareness as an “an

understanding of how one derives and makes meaning of the world and how that meaning-

making process impacts the way one views himself or herself over time” (Walumbwa et al.,

2008, p. 95). Transformational leadership describes a leader who is attuned to moral and ethical

values and sees oneself as a role model to his or her followers. These two models’ construct of

6
self-awareness seem to reflect what Asian leaders include in defining who they are, but to which

extent this factor of ‘others’ influences their actions and decision is the area of interest.

People generally define themselves in relation to three broad categories of characteristics --

physical, personality, and social. Ip and Bond (1995, as cited in Stanjor, n.d.) found that Asians

include more references to themselves as occupants of social roles, for example, “I am Joyce’s

friend” or social groups, “I am a member of the Cheng family” than Americans. Similarly,

Markus and Kitayama (1991) reported that Asians are more than twice as likely to include

references to other people in their self-concept than Western counterparts. This greater emphasis

on either external and social aspects of the self-concept reflects the relative importance that

collectivistic and individualistic cultures place on an interdependence versus

independence (Nisbett, 2003).

The above-mentioned studies show that Asians generally define what they know of

themselves in the context of how they think the group or networks they belong to, view them.

The extent this is beneficial to both the leader and the organization depends on how the leader’s

own personal values and beliefs are influenced by the social space he or she moves in, which

oftentimes, is the family or a smaller network within or outside the bigger organization they lead.

Even more important is how these set of values of beliefs are based on the moral foundations of

respect and integrity and on the existence of dependable governance and institutions.

Complications arise when this collectivistic nature overrides what should be morally upright

in a situation. For example, because of their emphasis on public aspects of the self, collective

cultures promote greater feelings of shame and guilt than individualistic cultures, often perceive

their success and those of others as being due to situational factors rather than assuming personal

responsibility for their success or even failure (Carducci, 2012). Where there is a lack or absence

7
of moral foundation, strong and dependable governance and institutions to protect a group’s

rights, leaders often act in favor of this closely-knit network (Puri, S., Zhao, S., Chandrasekar,

N.A., 2017) which could lead to ethical concerns, face-saving or fulfilling what Filipinos call

‘utang-na-loob’ (Kaut, 1961), at the expense of defying some basic moral principles or ethically

sound decisions. Authentic leadership calls for the leader to lead and act in accordance to one’s

own values and morals; within this model, the internalized moral perspective allows the leader to

self-regulate one’s behavior by resisting societal and group pressures (Walumbwa et al., 2008).

There is wisdom to why Resonant Leadership theory differentiates self-awareness from the other

three domains of emotional intelligence. Self-management, social awareness, and relationship

management all serve as an internal check-and-balance and puts to test the authenticity or

accuracy of what the leader knows of himself or herself. In the Asian context, as discussed

earlier, this internal check and resistance to societal pressures are often where the struggles are.

The second common underlying assumption across these three theories is that effective

leaders move people towards a compelling vision and in the process get them inspired and

motivated.

The Asian Leadership Index report (2014) showed that across the region, “visionary” tops the

list as the “most wanted” leadership trait in an ideal leader. Forty percent of all respondents from

across the eighteen countries picked visionary as their most important trait. When asked to define

the attribute, the region selected “has a dream for our company/group that I believe in” as

their definition from a variety of behavioral descriptors. Visionary as a trait is different from

what being a visionary leader is. Goleman et.al (2011) describes visionary leaders as able to

“articulate where a group is going, but not how it will get there—setting people free to
innovate, experiment, and take calculated risks. Knowing the big picture and how a given
job fits in gives people clarity; they understand what’s expected of them. And the sense

8
 that everyone is working toward shared goals builds team commitment: People feel pride
in belonging to their organization.”(p. 102)

This definition presents two dimensions to look into. First is the leader’s ability to

articulate where the group is going while providing clarity on what the expectations are, and

second is allowing people to freely innovate and participate towards the journey of achieving this

vision. The way transformational leadership is defined is similar in that the leader creates a

vision that people can relate to, an intellectually stimulating working environment, and treat

people as individuals (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Authentic leaders need insight into what defines a

future state and to know how to lead the team there, initiates open and authentic communication

by expressing thoughts and feelings as well as genuine concern for employees to promote

authentic and equal communication among employees (Walumbawa et.al, 2008). Again, two

dimensions are being referred here – creating and articulating a vision and allowing people to

contribute which when put together, results in inspiring and motivating followers.

The ability to articulate a vision and inspire people describes these leaders as having

higher will and energy, charismatic, enthusiastic, self-promoting, individualistic, assertive,

outspoken and direct (Buckley, 2017).

A test was done to find out how Asians were on these characteristics (Buckley, 2017).

Asians scored lower on these attributes. They do articulate a vision, but Asians tend to be more

modest, quiet and self-deprecating. They take time to think and come to conclusions. This

appears to be the antithesis of the Western visionary leader if seen within the model of

transformational leadership. For Asian organizations to develop transformational leaders requires

different processes to the ones used in the West. Asian transformational leaders should be

9
visionary without seeming arrogant, assertive while still reflective, and direct while remaining

modest (Buckley, 2017).

The second aspect of being a visionary leader and the third underlying assumption

common to all three leadership models being reviewed, encourages followers to contribute, to

share their ideas, actively participate, and get involved in problem-solving. By doing so , the

leader gains commitment and support, motivates and inspires the followers. This assumption

focuses on the ability of the leader to gain a balanced perspective of various challenges through

high involvement and arrive at a solution or a decision. From the Asian followers’ perspective,

the leader is seen as someone who is directive while maintaining a harmonious considerate

relationship with his or her followers (Hsu, 1982 as cited in Dorfman-Tate et.al, 2016). Asians

operate with a pervasive sense of hierarchy and power distance, brought about by a culture that

focuses on the family as a primary unit, with elders giving the direction, or religions that teach

respect for the father or the ‘enlightened one’ (Hsu, 1982 cited in Dorfman & Tate, 2016).

Power Distance has been defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of

organizations and institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally (Hofstede,

2011). What is striking about how the leader-follower dynamics is described in this phenomenon

is that inequality is defined from below and is endorsed by the followers as much

as by the leaders (Hofstede, 2011).

Therefore, in the context of encouraging followers to participate, open discussion about

decision making processes tends to be viewed as a challenge to the leader’s authority and

therefore not done (Casey, 1976). Subordinates typically assume the leader has considered all

relevant factors prior to making a decision and in extreme cases, assume the leader to be solely

accountable for achieving the vision. Leaders can be visionaries yet are also expected to be more

10
of directive rather than participative. Such is the case with Singapore’s Lee Kwan Yew. He was

considered the greatest visionary leader Singapore has ever had (Business and Leadership, 2017),

but was also criticized for his iron-fisted rule, forcing several opposition politicians into

bankruptcy or exile, and once invoked Machiavelli in declaring: "If nobody is afraid of me, I'm

meaningless” (Hew Lee Yee, 2015). The Singaporean situation though, was one that called for

not just a visionary style of leadership, but one that called for shifts to pacesetting and to

commanding styles as described in his statement that “the most difficult challenge he faced in

taking Singapore from the third world to the first world was changing the mindset of

Singaporeans, who often felt that they had God-given rights to do what they wanted, when they

wanted, where they wanted, without proper consideration of the social good, public health, or

environmental implications. The only way these mindsets could be changed was by laws and

prompt enforcement,” (Tortajada & Biswas, 2015).

It is also quite common in Asia that the seniors or the superiors take precedence in

seating, eating, walking, and speaking, whereas the juniors or the subordinates must wait and

follow them to show proper respect. The juniors and subordinates refrain from freely expressing

their thoughts, opinions, and emotions, particularly negative ones, such as disagreements, doubts

or anger (Gill, 2017). This behavior is even especially more seen in situations where Asian

followers report to an Asian boss. As experienced by the writer, having worked with leaders of

various race or ethnic origins in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Singapore, there is greater

discomfort in voicing one’s opinions and thoughts to an Asian boss for fear of being

misconstrued as rude or disrespectful. Calling them on a first-name-basis does not come as

natural as it does with a Western leader. Discussing solutions and ideas to solve a problem or

even just voicing out one’s thoughts and opinions about a topic with an American or a British

11
leader can be challenging yet can be done with more ease, sometimes even to a point of openly

arguing one’s point. This is not the case when reporting to an Asian boss.

Aside from high power distance, collectivism is another dimension that affects the extent

of group participation especially in a decision-making process. Probably a step closer to a

process that considers others’ opinions outside of the leader’s, collectivist approach uses

consensus to maintain harmony and equilibrium in the group (Puri-Zhao, et al., 2017), and

encourages a caring, supportive type of leadership, despite still remaining directive in certain

ways (Dorfman, Tate, 2016). This may be closer to what Goleman would call an Affiliative

leadership style (Goleman, 2004) which represents the collaborative competence in action. Such

leaders are most concerned with promoting harmony and fostering friendly interactions,

nurturing personal relationships that expand the connective tissue with the people they lead. Still

far from what might be a discussion where each member freely voices out an opinion, Asians go

with what the group decides on, addressing the ‘we’ rather than the ‘I’ (Puri-Zhao, et al., 2017).

It is uncommon to hear someone openly voicing out disagreement in a group, and more common

to hear them saying they would go with whatever the group decides on to avoid conflict, and

then ironically hear them saying contradictory remarks to someone in private.

Closely linked to the assumption that effective leaders encourage participation of

followers or members is coaching and mentoring, and connecting what a person wants with the

organization’s goals. The writer wishes to focus more on the coaching aspect rather than

mentoring, as coaching is seen as the most basic type of conversation between a leader and a

follower to help the latter progress career wise and achieve their fullest potential.

Coaching is an emerging leadership development intervention globally (Bresser, 2009).

According to the International Coach Federation (ICF, 2009), coaching is defined as partnering

12
with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their

personal and professional potential. This definition adopts a transformational nature of the

coaching conversation and is also how Goleman et.al (2002) define it when they describe what

coaches do: “coaches help people identify their unique strengths and weaknesses, tying those to

their personal and career aspirations; they encourage employees to establish long-term

development goals, and help them to conceptualize a plan for reaching those goals, while being

explicit about where the leader’s responsibility lies and what the employee’s role will be” (p.

186).

The transformational leader treats each follower as an individual and provides coaching,

mentoring and growth opportunities (Bass, 1985, as cited in Bresser, 2009). True

transformational leaders are concerned about developing their followers into leaders. Sandahl

(2003) describes how “coaching facilitates a peer relationship where both client and coach can

give 100 percent to the work for the sake of the client, while being equal in power and authority

and working together to get the client to the desired destination” (p. 26). At its best, this

approach changes the nature of the conversation: coach and client create a new form of open,

engaged, truth telling. The result is empowering and authentic. What is the implication of having

huge power distance in Asia on this type coaching relationship?

In a study on how social hierarchy impacts on coaching relationship Nangalia & Nangalia

(2010) pointed out that integral to this understanding of coaching derived from the Western ethos

are tenets such as, “coaching is a relationship of equals; the coach must not give advice or tell the

client what to do; a coaching conversation can focus on the client’s agenda without the necessity

for a deep coach-client relationship being established first; a client is an independent agent

responsible for his or her own destiny and actions” (p. 52). In addition, other commonly

13
accepted practice beliefs include that a coach’s background in terms of work experience and

qualifications, gender, and the age of the coach are not as important as the coaching process. In

line with the understanding of Asian ethos, these conventional tenets of coaching do not hold

true. The themes derived from this study and how coaching needs to be adapted are summarized

in Table 1.

Table 1:

A Framework for Cultural Adaptation of Coaching for Asian Clients (Nangalia &
Nangalia, 2010)

Theme Description of Theme Adapting to an Asian Ethos

Accept this position with

humility and grace
Coach is seen as a respected elder or
Status of Coach
teacher Refrain from ‘partnering’ or
‘co- creation’ vocabulary at this
stage

Get comfortable with the idea

of being a mentor
Role of Coach To mentor by sharing wisdom and insight
Accept that sharing wisdom and
insight is part of your role

Use a more directive style at

least in the initial stages of the
relationship

Expectations from To provide guidance, advice, and Talk about your insights from
Coach solutions based on their experience. relevant experience

Offer suggestions or possible

solutions for the client to
consider

14
 Talk about your experience,
Clients prefer coaches who are more qualifications, certifications,
Selection of Coach experienced, older, knowledgeable, or and professional successes to
better qualified that they are. establish professional
credibility
Share insights from your
experience
Coaches need to provide guidance,
advice, and suggest solutions, in many Offer possible solutions to the
Providing Direction
cases training may be needed to plug client’s situation
knowledge and skill gaps.
Help the client build knowledge
and skills if and as appropriate
Spend time in building
relationship and trust – get to
know the client at a personal
Coaches need to invest time and effort in level
building a relationship with the client –
Building
establishing trust takes time. Clients will Don’t be in a hurry to get to the
Relationships
discuss real issues only when they are ‘real’ agenda
comfortable.
Give feedback only when the
client is really comfortable with
you
Appreciate that the client lives
Clients consider the impact of their and works in a social context
decisions and actions on concerned where his or her decisions will
stakeholders before committing to them. impact those closest to him or
Sensitivity to Social
her
Context
They see themselves as part of the
collective rather than an individual Clients will be hesitant to
driving results independently. commit to actions that put them
dramatically in the forefront

The above framework presents coaching the Asian way, in consideration of the power

distance. Although it deviates from the coach-as-a-partner relationship established in Western

settings, the principle of helping someone think through a situation and come up with solutions

that the person can take accountability for can still be achieved and can still be transformational.

One cannot undermine though the impact of transactional coaching or coaching conversations

that focus on helping another person think through a short term solution or one that focuses on

15
just the symptoms of the problem. In the writer’s personal experience of practicing coaching as

a profession in the Philippine setting, clients do have an initial expectation that the coach is an

expert or has all the answers. Although the coaching process is set and defined within the

framework of transformational coaching, it is inevitable to shift to situations where the coach is

asked for an opinion or even directly for advice and even shift to transactional which, in most

cases is the most practical thing to do. It is therefore incumbent on the coach to be sensitive to

these shifts and handle these in the context of what the client hopes to get out of the coaching

conversation.

Implications and Conclusion

What then are the implications of these differences in the applicability of the

assumptions underlying these leadership models? In the words of Rost (1991), “looking at

leadership through the lens of a single discipline has not worked well in the past, and it will not

work well in the future,” to which the writer would like to add -- and nor does looking through

the lens of a single culture. The writer sees the need to challenge old or existing Asian beliefs

and practices as the world becomes more borderless and as teams become more diverse. For

example, while being collectivists gives leaders the benefit of having convenient external support

systems, there is an equal upside to Asian leaders demonstrating independence and pondering

through within the four corners of their minds with what seems to be just and morally sound

decisions. Power distance serves the benefit of preserving order especially during critical stages

in an organization’s life. However, too much of it stifles empowerment, creativity and the ability

to thrive in global organizations especially outside Asia. Asians can remain calling their leaders

“Sir”, “Pak”, or “Ibu”, but this does not mean they may not voice out their opinions, or claim an

16
achievement they have made, or exercise creativity on the job. There is too much to lose;

strategies may fail, and opportunities go by when people remain quiet or unreasonably defer to

authority.

It is also the writer’s view that Western practices and beliefs have the need to evolve into

one that appreciates more diversity. It is exciting to think of the possibility of having a new

paradigm of leadership evolve, one that very much incorporates ways of looking at leadership

from various cultures, much as the “yin and yang” philosophy captures the beauty and balance of

differences to make up a whole. To insist on being Asian and working the Asian way has both,

positive and negative serious implications on the way Asian organizations and nations progress.

To thrive in the global age, cultures need to evolve and people need to adapt. The writer remains

optimistic and resilient that this can be achieved.

17
 References

Avolio B. J., Walumbawa F.O., Weber T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current Theories, Research,

and Future Directions. Retrieved from

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=managementfac

pub

Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W.L., Peterson, S.J., Walumbwa, F. O., Wernsing, T.S. (2007). Authentic

leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of

Management. Retrieved from : https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913

Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E., Transformational Leadership

Mahwah New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2nd edition

Bass, B.M. (2007). Concepts of leadership in Vecchio, R.P. (Ed.) Leadership: Understanding the

dynamics of power and influence in the organizations. Notre Dame, Indiana, University of

Notre Dame

Bresser, F. (2009). The state of coaching across the globe. The results of the Global Coaching

Survey 2008/2009. Retrieved from www.frank-bresser-consulting.com.

Brokaw, L. (2012). Self awareness: A key to better leadership. MIT Sloan Management Review.

Retrieved from: https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/self-awareness-a-key-to-better-

leadership/

Buckley, N. (2017). Is there such thing as asian leadership?. Facet5. Retrieved from

https://www.facet5global.com/facet5-solutions/leading-in-the-asia-century

18
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row

Business and Leadership (2017) . Leadership transformed Singapore. Retrieved from:

https://www.businessandleadership.com/leadership/item/lee-kuan-yew-leadership-

transformed-singapore/

Carducci, B.J.(2012). Expressions of the self in individualistic vs. collective cultures: A cross-

cultural-perspective teaching module. E-Journal of Psychology Learning and Teaching

Volume 11 Number 3 2012. Retrieved from www.wwwords.co.uk/PLAT

Celik, A., Akgemci, T. Akyazi, T. (2012). A Comparison Between the Styles of

Transformational Leaders and Authentic Leaders in Crisis Management. International

Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Feb 2016, Vol. 6, No. 2

ISSN: 2222-6990

doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-i2/2023. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v6-

i2/2023

Dorfman, P.W., Hibino, S., Lee, J. K., Tate, Y., Bautistia, A.(1997). Leadership in western and

asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective leadership process across

cultures. Leadership Quarterly Vol. 8, No. 3

Erez, M (1997). Culture based model of work motivation. In Silverthorne, L. (2005).

Organizational Psychology in Cross-Cultural Perspective, New York University Press,

New York and London. www.nyupress.org

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, B., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Learning to lead with

emotional intelligence. Harvard Business School Press. iBooks.

Hew Lee Yee (2015) Says.com. Retrieved from https://says.com/my/news/11-qualities-in-lee-

kuan-yew-that-made-him-a-great-leader

19
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online

Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-

0919.1014

Jdunihan_78 (2010). Re: Leadership principles are universal. Retrieved from:

https://thepracticalleader.com/leadership-principles-are-universal/

Kaut, C. (1961). Utang na loob: A system of contractual obligation among tagalogs.

Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, vol 17, no.3, pp. 256-272. Retrieved from: Stable

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3629045

Markus, H.R. & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion,

and motivation. Psychological review, 98(2), pp 224-253

Nangalia, L. & Nangalia, A,. The coach in asian society: Impact of social hierarchy on the

coaching relationship. Global Coach Trust, Bangalore, India. International Journal of

Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring Vol. 8, No. 1, February 2010, p. 51

Puri, S., Zhao, S., Chandrasekar, N.A. (2017). The global asian leader: From local star to global

cxo. Center for Creative Leadership.

Sandahl, P. (2003). Coaching an empowering choice. Choice Professional Coaching Magazine.

Stanjor, C. (n.d.) The self. Principles of social psychology. First international edition. Retrieved

from: https://opentextbc.ca/socialpsychology/chapter/the-cognitive-self-the-self-concept/

The Conversation (2017). Four cultural clashes that are holding east asian employees back.

Retrieved from: http://theconversation.com/four-cultural-clashes-that-are-holding-east-

asian-employees-back-72661

20
The Iclif Leadership and Governance Centre. (2015). Report of The Asian Leadership Index

2014. Retrieved from: https://iclif.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ALI-Intelligence-

Report-2014.pdf

Tortajada, C. and Biswas, A. (2015). Lee Kwan Yew a tribute to a visionary pragmatist. The

Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2015/03/lee-kuan-yew-a-tribute-to-a-visionary-

pragmatist/

Ulrich, D. & Sutton, D. (2011)What effective leaders in asia know and do. In Ulrich, D. &

Sutton, D., (Eds.) Asian leadership that works , Mc Graw Hill Higher Education copyright

2011 by Ministry of Manpower Singapore, David Ulrich and Robert Sutton

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S.

J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based

measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126. DOI: 10.1177/0149206307308913

Yale Global Online (2017). Globalization. Yale University. Retrieved from:

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/topics/globalization

21