Question 1: Class, when we talk about leadership the topic of what makes a good leader is always discussed. Indeed, multiple research and theories have tried to identify what makes a good leader. This question is compounded when we discuss it in a global sense. In your opinion what traits should a global leader have? How would you determine if the person has the traits you identified, and if they did not how would you develop them?
Question 2: Class, there really is not a right answer to this question, other than it depends, as Phillip points out. Herein lies the twixt, performance management, which includes mentoring, coaching and counseling, is tricky enough when employees are all in the same area. When we had the elements of culture, Hofestede's cultural dimensions, communication, the context of the culture (low or high), the distance between the rater and the ratee in an overseas environment performance management becomes even tougher. There are certain guidelines that HR should follow depending on whether or not the organization is centralized, decentralized, or regional. Each one has its pros/cons when it comes to leadership development for an expatriate. Perhaps one of the most challenging is when the expatriate reports to a local manager, which could either be decentralized or regional. When this happens we bring into the picture the cultural dimensions identified by Hofestede as well as whether the culture is high/low context for the rater/ratee. Generally, speaking when there is a conflict it lies on the cultural dimension/context vector. For example, Asia is generally considered to be high context, whereas Germany is considered to be low context. The question turns to how can HR develop, prepare an expatriate for these differences to help them achieve? This is where HR will have to consider a mentor, perhaps a former expatriate that was assigned in the same area, coaching through training and feedback to help them understand and work with the differences, or ultimately counseling where the expatriate needs to improve. Perhaps the hardest question to ask is how should the expatriate be judged? Should it be the same as their counterparts in the home office, or should be judged independently based on criterion that is unique to their assignment?
Question 3: Class, Pauline has some good points. Let's delve on this a bit more, in my second post in the first discussion forum, I posed the question how should expatriates be rated? In other words, would you the same performance management system and standards for an expatriate as their counter-parts in the home office? If the answer is yes, how would you account for cultural differences that may arise between a local rater? If the answer is no, what would you adjust in a performance management system to ensure that the expatriate is rated fairly based on their assignment? If you change the performance management standards for the expatriate, how would that impact on their consideration for other positions in the home office once their assignments are completed?