This article explores issues related to the delivery of leadership training courses by Western universities in developing nations. It argues that past theories, including cross-cultural perspectives, are too limited to comprehend the complexity of the processes involved. Instead it posits a more dynamic concept of intercultural understanding as an explanatory framework. It also argues that the pedagogy employed is a more powerful instrument of change than subject content. This is illustrated through analysis of responses from 52 participants in a leadership training program conducted in China in 2002.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI). (n.d.). Retrieved from www.adbi.org.
2.
Australian Vice Chancellors’ Committee. (2001). Offshore Programs of Australian Universities. Retrieved from www.avcc.edu.au.
3.
AymanR. (1993). Leadership perception: The role of gender and culture. In AymanR. & ChemersM. M. (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions.San Diego: Academic Press.
ColemanM. (1998). The management style of female head teachers. Educational Management and Administration, 24(2), 163–174
12.
CollardJ. (2003). The relationship of gender and context to leadership in Australian schools. In BegleyP. & JohannsonO. (Eds.), The ethical dimensions of school leadership (pp. 181–189). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
13.
DanielJ. (2002). Education for all in the commonwealth: What are the issues?Public lecture, Australian National University, Canberra, pp. 1–5.
14.
DelpittL. (1993). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. In Beyond silenced voices: Class race and gender in United States schools (pp. 119–139). Albany: SUNY Press.
15.
DuRuiqing. (1992). Chinese higher education: A decade of reform and development.New York: St. Martin's Press.
16.
GreenfieldT. (1975). Theory about organization: a new perspective and its implications for schools. In HughesM. (Ed.), Administering education: International challenge.London: Athlone Press.
17.
HalpinA. W. (1959). The leadership behavior of school superintendents.Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago.
18.
HargreavesA. (1997). Rethinking educational change. In ConnorsC. & d'ArbonT. (Eds.), Change, challenge and creative leadership: International perspectives on research and practice.Hawthorn: ACEA.
19.
HodgkinsonC. (1991). Leadership: The moral art.Albany: State University of New York Press.
20.
HodgkinsonC. (2003). Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow: A post-modern purview. In BegleyP. & JohanssonO. (Eds.), Ethical dimensions of school leadership (pp. 221–231). Dordrecht: Kluwer Press.
21.
HofstedeG. H. (1980). Cultures consequences: International differences in work-related values.Beverly Hills: Sage.
22.
HofstedeG. H. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind.London: McGraw-Hill.
23.
HofstedeG. H. (1994). Cultural constraints in management theories. International Review of Strategic Management, 5, 27–48.
24.
HolmesL. (1981). The policy process in communist states: Politics and industrial administration.London: Falmer Press.
25.
JonesP. W. (1992). World Bank financing of education: Lending, learning and development.London: Routledge.
26.
KuhnT. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions.Chicago: Chicago University Press.
27.
LimerickD., CunningtonB., & CrowtherF. (1998). Managing the new organization.Warriewood: Business Publishing.
28.
MerchantB. (2002, September). Bridge people: Agents for social justice. Paper presented at the Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration conference, Umea, Sweden.
29.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (n.d.). Retrieved from www.oecd.org.
30.
OslandJ. S., & BirdA. (2000). Beyond sophisticated stereotyping: Cultural sense making in context. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 65–77.
31.
OzgaJ. (1993). Women in educational management.Buckingham: Open University Press.
32.
PutnisP., & PetelinR. (1996). Professional communication: Principles and applications.Sydney: Prentice Hall.
33.
ReddingS. G. (1994). Comparative management theory: Jungle, zoo or fossil?Organizational Studies, 15(3), 323–359.
34.
RibbinsP. (1996). Producing portraits of educational leaders in context: Cultural relativism and methodological absolutism. Paper presented at the Commonwealth Council for Educational Administration and Management, Malaysia, 1–16.
35.
RuschE. A., & MarshallC. (1995). Gender filters at work in administrative culture. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association conference, San Francisco.
36.
SchonD. A (1988). Educating the reflective practitioner.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
SergiovanniT. J. (1984). Cultural and competing perspectives in administrative theory and practice. In SergiovanniT. J. & CorballyJ. E. (Eds.), Leadership and organizational culture.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
38.
ShakeshaftC. (1987). Women in educational administration.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
TrompenaarsF. (1993). Riding the waves of culture.London: Nicholas Brealy.
40.
WalkerA., & DimmockC. (2000) Insights into educational administration: The need for a cross-cultural comparative perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 20(2), 11–22.
