This study sets out to test the assumption that concepts of leadership differ as a function of cultural differences in Europe and to identify dimensions which describe differences in leadership concepts across European countries. Middle-level managers (N = 6052) from 22 European countries rated 112 questionnaire items containing descriptions of leadership traits and behaviours. For each attribute respondents rated how well it fits their concept of an outstanding business leader. The findings support the assumption that leadership concepts are culturally endorsed. Specifically, clusters of European countries which share similar cultural values according to prior cross-cultural research (Ronen & Shenkar, 1985), also share similar leadership concepts. The leadership prototypicality dimensions found are highly correlated with cultural dimensions reported in a comprehensive cross-cultural study of contemporary Europe (Smith, Dugan, & Trompenaars, 1996). The ordering of countries on the leadership dimensions is considered a useful tool with which to model differences between leadership concepts of different cultural origin in Europe. Practical implications for cross-cultural management, both in European and non-European settings, are discussed.

This laboratory experiment used real-time observation to examine the relationships among goals, work processes, and quantity and quality outcomes using a simple multipath assembly task. Trained observers were able to reliably and accurately document work processes used to perform the task, supporting the use of real-time observation for documenting microlevel task strategies. Results show that (a) work processes were affected by goal content(quantity vs. quality); (b) goal form (gradually difficult vs. fixed and difficult) did not influence outcomes or processes used; (c) work processes and personal goals completely mediated the prediction of quantity outcomes and partially mediated quality outcomes; (d) process-only goals produced a greater number of process changes than outcome goals but led to poorer performance; and (e) outcome goals had a lagged effect on performance. The implications for goal-setting theory are discussed.