Search results

The intent of this article is to explore the resultant conundrum that arises when the role of the chief executive officer (CEO) and the role of the chairman of the corporate board are merged into one person. There is a resultant loss in checks and balances and this can result in a decrease in vigilance in the operation of the corporation. Given this loss of vigilance power begins to center in one leader, the CEO/chairman, that can be used for personal gain at the expense of the other stakeholders of the corporation. This creates an environment of greed and corruption that eventually creates mistrust in the viability of the stock of the corporation as well as loss of personnel that can right the course. The article raises the concern and sees an answer for such issues in government regulation as it relates to the corporate structure.

Globalization blurs the boundaries of national identity and national differences between corporations. It is increasingly necessary for corporations to identify with a plethora of nations and cultures. Countries that had never been considered major participants in world trade have suddenly emerged as major economic powers. In the past two decades, world trade has expanded from $200 billion to over $4 trillion (Czinkota and Ronkainen, 1993). Yet, the USA's participation in world trade measured as a proportion of world market share has declined drastically. In the early 1950s the USA accounted for nearly 25 per cent of world exports (adjusted for World War II); in 1991 this figure had declined to 12 per cent (Czinkota and Ronkainen, 1993). In 1987 the USA had a trade deficit of $166 billion, larger than that of any other nation (McEnery and DesHarnais, 1990, p. 43). This situation demonstrates a need for American corporations to develop products with a global consciousness in a cross‐cultural context. It is essential that managers acquire cross‐cultural understanding and skills. International business competition requires managers to have not only a knowledge of how to be a global player, but also the ability to implement that knowledge. In response to this, cross‐cultural managers must deal with certain fundamental issues. Three of the most essential issues are: communication, adaptable management strategies that transcend cultural differences, and sufficient investment in human resources.

This paper explores the real issues in team effectiveness as they relate to leadership, assessment and policies in any business organization. Data are derived from a questionnaire that was given to 60 executives in different business organizations, creating a matrix of 1,020 answers which were then put into the three areas and examined for commonality of issues, trends and tentative conclusions.

Previous studies have demonstrated that perceived job insecurity climate denotes an individual-level stressor. The present study reiterated this notion and investigated whether leadership responsibility moderated the association between perceived job insecurity climate and work-related strain about one year into the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.

A sample of full-time workers (N = 1,399) in the USA was recruited, comprising 663 leaders and 763 non-leaders. Employing a cross-sectional design, the authors hypothesized that perceived job insecurity climate would be associated with work-related strain (i.e. burnout, absenteeism and presenteeism) and that these associations were stronger for employees with leadership responsibilities compared to non-leaders.

Findings revealed main effects of perceived job insecurity climate on burnout but not on absenteeism or presenteeism. Furthermore, leadership responsibility moderated the associations between perceived job insecurity climate and two out of three burnout measures in the hypothesized direction. The findings also revealed interaction effects regarding absenteeism and presenteeism, indicating that these associations are only positive and significant for employees with leadership responsibilities.

Perceptions of widespread job insecurity engender strain among leaders while simultaneously implying a heightened need for effective leadership. Organizations and practitioners should take the present findings into consideration when implementing preventive and restorative measures to address leaders' health and organizational competitiveness when job insecurity increases.

This study found that, as an individual stressor, perceived job insecurity climate is more detrimental to employees with leadership responsibility than to non-leaders.