Exploring Societal Culture and Preferred Leader Behavior in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Introduction

Even though there has been a growing interest in societal cultures and leadership studies (Littrell, 2013), some transitional economies and post-socialist societies still lack their own comprehensive and exploratory scientific studies on the topic, and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIH) is not an exception. A literature review indicates how studies on cultures and preferred leader behavior in BIH are sporadic and sparse. Considering the economic context, the business environment in BIH is considered fragile (i.e., transitional, post-conflict, and bears a certain amount of risk) (Berberović et al., 2019), which is often related to the historical and political context (Ortlieb et al., 2019). During the last three decades, the command-planned economy and respective managerial practices were changed with the market-oriented economy and more participative managerial approaches. Finally, considering social context, BIH is one of the rare countries in the Western Balkans included in this broad study of cultural values and preferred leader behavior, with such a rich ethnic and religious mix.

The main aim of this study is to explore relationships between societal cultures and preferred leader behavior in the transitional, post-socialist context. Thus, the study provides an encompassing, descriptive, and exploratory view of employees’ preferred leader behavior, relying upon culturally contingent leadership theory (House et al., 2004) and a follower-centric approach. Firstly, the study reflects on societal cultures and leadership in BIH, which is followed by data, methods, and results from the present research. Lastly, findings are discussed, and directions for further research, limitations, and conclusions are provided.

Cultural Profile of Bosnia and Herzegovina

As the only European socialist country, former Yugoslavia was included in the famous Hofstede research (Hofstede, 1980). Former Yugoslavia had high indices for Power Distance (PDI = 76) and Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI = 88) and low indices for Individualism (IDV = 27) and Masculinity (MAS = 21). Scores on presented cultural dimensions were related to the authoritarian political culture, utter support for developing state-owned enterprises, and the greater importance of recognition and well-established social relationships instead of high work achievement and material gains. To the best of our knowledge, after Hofstede’s research conducted in former Yugoslavia, only a few studies related to cultural influence on business practices have been examined in BIH. Dabić et al. (2015) observed cultural differences and decision-making styles in a comparative study conducted in several countries, including BIH, observing five cultural dimensions on a sample of graduate students. The Country Comparison Tool provided by Hofstede Insights (https://www.hofstede-insights.com/) offers data on six cultural dimensions: Power Distance (PDI = 90), Individualism (IDV = 22), Masculinity (MAS = 48), Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI = 87), Long-Term Orientation (LTO = 70), and Indulgence (IVR = 44). Finally, Lacko et al. (2022) examined measurement invariance with Individualism-Collectivism self-report scales in seven countries, including BIH, where the study participants were college students.

Leadership Profile in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Regarding leadership research, Bogdanić (2012) argues that there has been a lack of empirical research and insights in the field, adding how middle managers in BIH prefer participative leadership and reject autocratic leadership. Several studies (e.g., Mujkić et al., 2014; Skopak & Hadžiahmetović, 2022) have discussed leadership styles (i.e., transformational, transactional) mainly in the broad context of organizational behavior. With such a small pool of leadership studies in BIH, finding any that discuss preferred leader behavior is challenging. Clearly, in this field, BIH represents an under-researched context. To sum up, in the post-socialist period, the leadership style in BIH’s companies was labeled as participative. However, available data on the cultures and leadership are insufficient for a more serious portrayal of the preferred leader behavior in the business sector. The paucity of knowledge about societal culture and leadership phenomena, specifically on samples of employees, perplexes companies’ business activities and leadership behaviors in BIH. Hence, we aim to present a cultural and leadership behavior overview that might serve as a current depiction in the field, stimulate interest in future research, and create recommendations for managers, employees, and scholars.

Hypotheses Development

Recognizing the complexity and multi-purpose of studies that treat cultural and leadership constructs, this study explores several issues. To assess the relationships between cultural values and leader behavior, the index scores results of cultural values are first interpreted, and then, respondents’ preferences toward leader behaviors are examined. The literature demonstrates how leader behavior differs across cultures (Ahmad et al., 2021). Notably, to avoid failures, both followers and leaders should adequately manage cultural differences (Littrell & Nicolae Valentin, 2005). In addition, Hanges et al. (2016) discuss how cultures shape leadership outcomes, particularly in the interplay between leaders and followers. Based on the presented literature and to achieve the main aim of the study, the following research hypothesis is proposed:

Greenfield (2014) discusses how sociodemographic variability is related to cultural values and posits that members with different sociodemographic backgrounds within the country might exhibit different cultural values. Besides discussing country as a unit of analysis, certain studies (e.g., Akaliyski et al., 2021; De Mooij & Beniflah, 2017; Taras et al., 2016), advocate research of additional factors such as non-spatial (i.e., gender, generation, ethnicity, religion), socioeconomic status, or occupation, that might be related to the variations in cultural values. In addition, Minelgaitė et al. (2018) debate how followers’ sociodemographics might shape their attitudes toward preferred leader behavior. Relying on the literature and respecting the country’s diversity, we propose the second hypothesis as follows:

Data and Method

In order to provide additional insights into the business sector, we aimed to collect data from employees in business organizations. All data and results are observed for the whole country and the two respective geographical regions. The first region (Bosnia) includes the northern part of the country (including towns Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Tuzla, and Zenica), while the second region (Herzegovina) includes the data obtained from the southern part of the country (including town Mostar). Since the country’s economy is concentrated in the five biggest towns, most respondents come from these areas. The data collection process was held during 2021–2023 using an online survey and distributing the questionnaire with snowball technique. Values Survey Module 2008 (VSM08; Hofstede et al., 2008) and the Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire version XII (LBDQXII; Stogdill, 1963) were employed as measurement instruments. Specifics on the methodology (in terms of research instrument development, content, validation, translation, sample selection, and data analyses) used in this research are provided in this Special Issue’s Editorial (Ljubica & Littrell). Sample consisted of 484 respondents, where 55.8% were females and 41.9% were males. The average age of participants was 37, while the youngest respondents were 19 and the oldest 67. Details on the descriptive characteristics of the sample are provided in Table S1 (all tables are presented in the Supplemental File).

Findings of the Study

Index scores corresponding to seven cultural dimensions were computed for the country and two observed regions (Table S2). The results of the analyses implicate that societal culture in BIH has low scores on Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation and high scores on the Indulgence dimension. Statistically significant differences among cultural dimensions for the two observed regions were found only for Individualism and Masculinity, where Individualism is higher in the region of Herzegovina and Masculinity is higher in the region of Bosnia. Since five other cultural dimensions have not exhibited significant differences among the two observed regions, we posit that cultural values in BIH are relatively homogeneous.

In the next step, the preferred leader behavior was explored. Integration was identified as the most preferred leader behavior (Table S3). A comparison of leadership behavior has not revealed any statistically significant differences in leadership preferences between the two observed regions.

Pearson correlation coefficients were computed to estimate the relationships between dimensions of societal cultures and preferred leader behavior (Table S4). Since findings imply cultural variations in Individualism and Masculinity, these dimensions are discussed on a regional level. However, on a country level, we present correlations for five cultural dimensions (Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Long-Term Orientation, Indulgence, and Monumentalism).

On a country level, the results indicate the absence of a relation between the dimension of Power Distance and dimensions of preferred leader behavior. However, significant, both positive and negative, but weak correlations were found between four cultural dimensions and six preferred leader behaviors. The cultural dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance only shows negative correlations, namely with Demand Reconciliation, Role Assumption, and Integration. Long-Term Orientation exhibits only one correlation. Precisely, it negatively correlates with leadership behavior Tolerance of Uncertainty. However, Indulgence exhibits only positive correlations with Integration and Superior Orientation. Finally, Monumentalism is positively associated with the Initiation of Structure. There was no significant correlation between cultural dimensions and the following leader behaviors: Representation, Persuasiveness, Tolerance of Freedom, Consideration, Production Emphasis, and Predictive Accuracy. To summarize, on a country level, Uncertainty Avoidance has the greatest number of correlations with preferred leader behavior. In contrast, only one correlation is noted for Long-Term Orientation and Monumentalism, while Power Distance is not linked to leader behavior.

Inspection of relationships on the intra-regional level was conducted for cultural values of Individualism and Masculinity. In the region of Bosnia, Individualism displays six significant correlations, out of which two are positive with Demand Reconciliation and Role Assumption. In comparison, four negative correlations were found with Initiation of Structure, Production Emphasis, Predictive Accuracy, and Superior Orientation. Regarding Masculinity, two significant negative correlations were found with Tolerance of Uncertainty and Predictive Accuracy. In the Herzegovina region, Individualism negatively correlates with Production Emphasis and Superior Orientation. Finally, Masculinity positively correlates with Superior Orientation. To sum up, intra-regional analyses exhibit greater numbers of significant correlations in the Bosnia region for both Individualism and Masculinity compared with the Herzegovina region.

The results depict leader behaviors related to cultural values and provide directions for leaders on both the country and intra-regional levels, indicating whether leader behaviors are positively or negatively related to cultural values. Finally, the obtained findings confirm the interplay between cultural values and preferred leader behaviors and support the first hypothesis.

In order to test the second hypothesis, a multivariate analysis of variance was conducted for the following sociodemographic variables: gender, age, educational level, nationality, job level, industry, and form of ownership of the company. To avoid the risk of first-type error, the Bonferroni adjustment was performed prior to analysis (Pallant, 2016). Four of the seven observed variables significantly differ across societal culture value dimensions. In terms of gender, the test results implied that men are more prone to risk compared to women since gender differences were found only for the cultural dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance (F = 2.275, p = .028; Wilks’ Lambda = 0.964). Considering educational level, differences were found only for the dimension of Individualism (F = 1.707, p = .049; WL = 0.947), where test results suggest that respondents with higher education (i.e., postgraduate, doctoral degree) are more prone to Individualism, compared with respondents with lower educational levels.

Considering that BIH is a multi-ethnic society, we tested if this type of affiliation varies in terms of cultural dimensions. According to Ortlieb et al. (2019), in BIH, ethnic groups are “closely affiliated with a religion, with most Bosniaks being Muslim, Serbs predominantly being Orthodox Christians, and Croats being Catholic Christians” (p. 765). The results of the multivariate analysis of variance showed differences for two cultural dimensions: Monumentalism and Individualism (F = 3.983, p = .000; WL = 0.877). The highest score of Monumentalism was found among respondents that belong to a group of Bosniaks, followed by Croats and Serbs groups, while Individualism is highly expressed by Croats, followed by Bosniaks and Serbs. Results are probably related to the greater cultural similarity of Croats with Western (Individualistic) culture. Bosniaks are also culturally oriented towards the West, while the lower level of Individualism among Serbs can be linked to Collectivist culture and resistance to Western culture among a part of the population.

Relying on the literature (e.g., Dülmer et al., 2015) that discusses inter-generational variations in cultural values, we observed the age of respondents through the lens of four generational cohorts. A significant difference confirmed with Dunett’s T3 posthoc test was found among generations for three cultural dimensions: Masculinity, Long-Term Orientation, and Indulgence (F = 3.414, p = .000; Wilks’ Lambda = 0.852). The younger generations, namely Generation Y (born between 1981 and 1996) and Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2012), exhibited a higher propensity toward Masculinity values, while Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980) and especially Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) have a low propensity toward Masculinity compared with younger ones. Similar patterns in cultural values were found for Long-Term Orientation since Baby Boomers and Generation X are less prone to long-term, and younger ones are more long-term oriented. Finally, regarding Indulgence, the lowest score was found among Baby Boomers, while three other generations obtained high scores on Indulgence. However, a significant difference was found between Baby Boomers and Generation Z. The results suggest that younger respondents are more competitive, motivated for success, and more inclined to a comfortable life than those raised during socialism. Finally, the analysis results showed no differences considering contextual variables (i.e., job level, sector, and industry), thus confirming hypothesis 2.

Discussion and Conclusion

Bearing in mind that this study is probably one of the first of this kind in a transition period in BIH, first, we discuss the main traits of societal cultures and preferred leader behavior. The very low index scores of Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation imply that respondents accept ambiguity and are prone to risk, even though their plans are more short-term oriented. Conversely, the high score value of Indulgence implies that respondents gratify their desires and feelings, which is particularly emphasized among younger generations. Considering dimensions of Power Distance, Individualism, and Masculinity, the respondents did not clearly prefer hierarchical order, collectivistic mentality, and femininity values, as during the first wave of Hofstede’s research (Hofstede, 1980). Monumentalistic values resonate with the view that respondents respect their historical heroes and stand proud and stable. Also, they are related to self-esteem and national pride, which was insisted on in public speech for a few decades in BIH, and many generations of youth were socialized in these circumstances (Janković, 2016). The differences exhibited by younger generations raised in a period of post-socialism suggest possible cultural shifts shaped by transitional dynamics to which younger generations were exposed. This aligns with Dülmer et al.'s (2015) discussion on how factors such as economic development and political systems might relate to shifts in cultural values among different generations.

Second, this study confirms relationships between societal cultures and preferred leader behaviors. Precisely, associations with leader behavior were confirmed for all cultural variables except for Power Distance, implying that power distribution is not tied to employees’ perception of leader behavior in business sectors in BIH. Variations of individualistic and masculine cultural values and their associations with leader behavior were found in the two observed regions. However, since available literature about BIH does not provide knowledge on intra-regional cultural specificities, and considering the multi-ethnic nature of the society, this finding calls for additional exploration since obtained regional differences may reflect variations in ethnicity. The importance of individualistic cultural values for employees’ preference for leader behavior was shown through the greatest number of associations of Individualism and leader behavior on an intra-regional level. However, on a country level of study, Uncertainty Avoidance exhibits the greatest number of links with preferred leader behavior, implying how attitudes toward risk and leader behavior are related and how understanding the cultural dimension of Uncertainty Avoidance is essential for business. Finally, findings suggest that leader behaviors are perceived similarly in the business sector across the country.

This study has several contributions. First, our results are discussed on a sample of employees, compared with the available research that mainly treated non-employee samples. Next, this study offers insights into all seven dimensions of societal culture measured with Value Survey Module 2008 for the first time (to the best of our knowledge), including the cultural dimension of Monumentalism. Also, employees’ perception of the leader’s behavior enhances understanding between leaders and employees and contributes to managerial effectiveness. Additionally, variations in cultural values exhibited among different generations add to the knowledge of generational cohorts.

The study observed followers’ perspective of leader behavior, and since leadership is a dynamic process that includes both leaders and followers, this is recognized as a limitation of the study. Therefore, future studies should include both follower and leader perspectives. In addition, besides relational effects, further studies should observe causal effects between cultures and preferred leader behavior. Moreover, managers would benefit from the feedback on whether employees are more inclined toward task or people-oriented leader behavior. In conclusion, this research confirms the variety of relations between societal cultures and leader behavior and adds both to the field of knowledge and managerial practices, especially in economies that have been in a transition period and with under-researched and vague contexts.

Supplemental Material