Leadership behaviors in cross-boundary information sharing and integration: Comparing the US and China.

摘要

This study comprises a comparative analysis between the US and China regarding public sector leadership behaviors in the context of cross-boundary information sharing and integration. Based on the literature on leadership, public sector information sharing, and cross-cultural analysis, the research begins with an original case study in China set in the product safety and food safety policy domain. The case explores leadership behaviors of middle-level information leaders in the technological, organizational, and legal context of cross-boundary information sharing in this domain. Qualitative data were collected from in-depth interviews and government documents. The data were analyzed with an inductive approach to identify leadership patterns and boundary-crossing frameworks. The case study examines the nature of boundaries and associated situational variables, traits, power, behaviors, interventions and success criteria.;The patterns observed in the Chinese case were then compared to the results of previously developed and published case studies and related analysis in the US to identify similarities and differences and as well as the impact of macro cultural, political, economic, and social factors on those similarities and differences.;This study extends current knowledge about leadership behavior in cross-boundary information sharing developed in the US into international contexts and new policy domains. First, the study expands the concepts and understanding of boundaries to include a variety of vertical and horizontal factors including new factors such as level of development. It also describes how interaction among boundary factors contribute to situational complexity and associated leadership challenges. The study further identifies essential similarities in leadership between the US and China. It also demonstrates how cultural values can affect and interact with leader traits, power, behaviors, interventions, and success criteria both directly and indirectly to explain key differences between leadership in the two countries. Finally, practical implications for leaders in both China and the US are discussed, and directions for future studies are also suggested.