Mehta et al. state that there is a relationship between leadership styles, cooperation, and the classification of different cultures using Hofstede’s cultural evaluation framework. The three proposed leadership styles have different impacts on cooperation. The participatory leadership style has high cooperation values by default due to its democratic decision-making process. A directive leadership style leans towards individualism but can force members to cooperate through orders.
The supportive leadership style achieves cooperation through encouragement but does not have any intrinsic mechanisms to facilitate it. The primary factors that affect cooperation and serve to determine the viability of cooperative styles of leadership in different cultures are individualism versus collectivism (IDV), uncertainty avoidance (UAI), masculinity versus femininity (MAS), and power distance (PDI).
IDV, intrinsically, has the highest impact on cooperation, which is higher in collectivist societies. Uncertainty avoidance and power distance have an influence on power distribution among members. A high concentration of power in a small group of individuals favors individualism and impacts cooperation in a negative way. Masculinity promotes competition and power struggle, while femininity is concerned with cooperation and the common good. Therefore, cultures that favor collectivism, femininity, and low power distance have better cooperation, thus favoring cooperative leadership styles.