Leadership and Stress Orientation of Japanese and Russian Working Adults

Abstract

This cross-cultural study utilized the full range leadership framework developed by Hofstede’s model of culture, and compared leadership styles and cultural values of 461 managerial and non-managerial employees in government and business organizations in Russia and Japan. In this article, we examine the stress, task and relationship orientations of people in Russia and in Japan. As a result of the analysis of 461 responses, some significant differences were found between the two samples. It appears that Russian respondents have higher scores on task (initiating structure) and relationship (consideration style) orientations than Japanese respondents. While gender is a significant factor in task orientation, results did not demonstrate any differences in the relationship orientations and stress perceptions of these respondents. In this article, literature on Japan and Russian cultures is presented along with practical application, suggestions and implications for future studies. The projected results of this study include better cross-cultural understanding, comparison and assessment of Japanese and Russian leadership by foreign and local organizational members.

Unveiling the Effects of Stressors on Task Performance: The Role of Thriving at Work and Resilience

“…Kim et al ( 2010 ) stated that employees with heavy workloads feel emotionally burdened that causes psychological distress. Schaufeli et al ( 2008 ) suggested that work overload is a root cause of distress in employees, which affects their working ability (Nguyen et al, 2018 ).…”

Guest editorial: Creating business and societal value through sustainable development goals in times of crisis

“…While these crises may differ in their origins and scales, they severely disrupted business activities, supply chain operations (Chowdhury et al, 2021;Golubeva, 2021;Natarajarathinam et al, 2009;Sajjad, 2021), influenced the economic, environmental and social aspects (Mofijur et al, 2021), and most recently, a confluence of crises contributed to restraining global sustainable development efforts (Dugarova and Gu ¨lasan, 2017;Eisensee and Stro ¨mberg, 2007;Gallego-A ´lvarez et al, 2014;United Nations, 2023). Such crises have made sustainability, corporate governance and resilience among the most attention-grabbing issues in the corporate world and relevant policy-making circles (Cheema-Fox et al, 2021;Ding et al, 2021;Flammer and Ioannou, 2021;Nguyen et al, 2023a;Olawumi and Chan, 2018;Su arez-Eiroa et al, 2021;Zattoni and Pugliese, 2021).…”