1. Introduction

1.1. Research Background

Globalization has brought about the inevitable trend of multicultural mixing. In the multicultural workplace environment, how to break through or alleviate the workplace conflicts caused by different cultural backgrounds, such as cultural conflicts and language barriers has become one of the urgent matters. The main focus of this paper is empowering leaders in the context of cross-cultural engagement. This paper will examine the effects of emerging injustices between people from different cultures, based on data from the Pew Research Center’s report titled “Race in America 2019.” Based on the situational leadership model, the third culture and Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory, this paper discusses the multicultural workplace, and uses specific case studies as an exploratory method to demonstrate the essential elements to ensure the authority of managers under such circumstances, namely the subjective cognition and decision-making ability of leaders.

Because of globalisation, technical skills are no longer confined to the domestic talent market but are directed toward the international market. The expansion of the global economy brought about this shift in focus. This shift in emphasis is directly attributable to globalisation’s effects. Within the context of intercultural multiethnicity, governments, and non-profit organisations need to establish a system for the cross-cultural delegation of authority in order to facilitate the improvement of the growth of a wide variety of different groups. The decision taken by a manager or supervisor to grant authority over a task or duties to one or more employees is referred to as “delegation of authority,” which will be abbreviated as “DOA” throughout the entirety of this article. The phrase “delegation of authority” will be shortened throughout this article. The abbreviation DOA refers to the concept of “delegation of authority.” Generally speaking, the range of obligations customarily expected of an employee does not extend to what may be regarded as an authorised subject [1]. According to the executives, employees are regarded to need development, be driven by their work activities, and possess a broad range of competencies. The delegation of power presents extra obstacles in the context of globalisation. Chief among these is the requirement to overcome preconceptions and discrimination based on gender, race, and ethnicity. Second, while attempting to transfer authority in a context involving people of different cultures, certain problems are presented. These obstacles include prejudice, difficulties presented by language barriers, and stereotyping. According to the findings of a survey that was carried out by the Pew Research Centre in 2019 on the subject of racial discrimination in the United States, approximately three-quarters of blacks and Asians (76 percent each), in addition to 58 percent of Hispanics, say that they have experienced discrimination or unfair treatment based on race or ethnicity at least occasionally [2]. And the repercussions of workplace discrimination, including discrimination in employment, promotion, and termination, make it more difficult to obtain “good” jobs and educational training; focus on policies for low-paying jobs and diverse results; monitor “racist” jobs; and fill in the blank [3]. These things, and more, are a result of workplace discrimination. It should be noted that the aforementioned three are not the only ones capable of producing this effect. A person’s capacity for leadership empowerment is frequently subject to the restrictions that are imposed by their cultural heritage, in addition to the influence of the stereotypes and ethnic attitudes that are prevalent in other cultures, when that person is operating in a context that involves multiple cultures at the same time. This is due to the fact that the second point involves multiple cultures. Within the framework of this approach, the leader’s authority is established not so much on the leader’s practical competencies but more on the leader’s subjective cognitive decisions.

1.2. Literature Review

Although many earlier studies focused either on authorisation or cross-cultural management, very little has been done to investigate authorised leadership in transcultural environments. Consequently, this paper aims to analyse the problems and benefits of authorisation in a cross-cultural context based on existing cases and data and to provide reasonable suggestions for leadership skills in this complex environment. The ultimate goal of this paper is to resolve the employer problems that cross-cultural organisations face, such as training, recruitment, promotion, and termination of employees. This discussion significantly contributes to the development of contemporary management and leadership practises in organisations.

1.3. Research Structure

This study will study the impacts of discrimination using the data from the PEW Research Center’s report titled “Race in America 2019.” After that, the advantages and disadvantages of cross-cultural empowerment will be analyzed by comparing different case studies from the real world. Second, certain recommendations are provided based on the theories of cultural factors and personal agency that are currently acknowledged in the academic community. Second, it is grounded in substantial research and applications of Hofstede’s theory of cultural dimensions, the Situation Leadership Model, and the third culture.

2. Methods: Case in point

Case studies are a form of research instrument utilised to collect an all-encompassing, multi-dimensional understanding of complicated situations in the real world. This type of knowledge may then be applied in a variety of contexts. It is a tried-and-true method of research that is frequently applied to the study of a wide range of topics, most notably the social sciences. Case studies can be explained in a variety of different ways, but the core idea that underpins them is the requirement to investigate occurrences or phenomena in a natural setting in greater depth. We have divided the case studies into three primary categories: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective.

In contrast to intrinsic case studies, which are carried out to comprehend particular events, instrumental case studies use particular situations to obtain a more in-depth understanding of a topic or phenomenon [4]. Collective case studies involve looking at a variety of distinct scenarios, either all at once or one after the other, in an effort to gain a deeper comprehension of a certain topic [4]. This can be done either all at once or one after the other.

3. Result

First, a study that was carried out by the PEW RESEARCH CENTRE and was given the title “Race in America 2019” discovered that approximately 76 percent of people of African and Asian ancestry, as well as 58 percent of those of Hispanic descent, had reported feeling influenced by their race or ethnicity. This was the case for people of Hispanic descent as well. This article gives evidence that in the bottom-up cognition of an organisation, minorities are a negative reaction to the organization’s own self-cognitive and external reactions. Ethnic minorities have a self-perception that their treatment is discriminatory, subjectively and objectively, and those ethnic minority shares this perspective. This self-perception may result from a misunderstanding of diverse cultural backgrounds and bad linguistic communication. Alternatively, it may be an accurate reflection of the situation. It has been suggested, for instance, through an assessment of the English and Polish languages, that the emotions represented in one language may be lost in the translation and comprehension of another language due to changes in the vocabulary used and the culture of the two languages. This was done by comparing and contrasting the English and Polish languages. When stated in English, invitations will have a softer and more polite tone than when delivered in Polish, whereas demands that are made in Polish will sound more like instructions to living beings when translated into English [5] This scenario perfectly illustrates how the dissemination of information can be negatively impacted by a wide variety of conditions and languages, eventually leading to a deterioration in the quality of communication. It is feasible that this will assist someone in improving their ability to delegate responsibilities. The negative reception that individuals of minority groups receive from the wider public is frequently the result of stereotyped thinking and poor management of the unknown. Despite the fact that major companies in today’s society encourage varied and diversified cultures, the culture of the organization’s dominant population will continue to dominate the workplace. This is because dominant populations tend to have more influence. Because of this, the organisation is unable to achieve the diversity culture vision it has set for itself, which runs opposed to the culture of diversity that is expected of it [6]. This collision of behaviours and ideas brought about by various origins can foster organisational development and innovation. This is one of the primary reasons for implementing cross-cultural DOA, which is one of the fundamental reasons for implementing cross-cultural DOA. This is one of the key drivers behind DOA’s implementation, which crosses cultural boundaries.

In order for leaders to make headway in the field of cross-cultural empowerment, it is abundantly evident that they need to solve both the bottom-up problem and the orientation problem of organisational culture. Both of these problems stem from the orientation problem of the culture.

In this global context, the second thing that needs to be done is investigating the empowerment process working from the top down. According to this point of view, the question that must be investigated is the variables leaders consider when thinking about empowerment and how these aspects are considered within the framework of various cultures.

Because of the misunderstandings that people have about minorities, those who belong to certain groups are frequently the victims of discrimination and treatment that is unfair. Because the business employees come from diverse cultural backgrounds, there is a chance that some employees would treat other employees unfairly or misunderstand one another, undermining the firm’s internal harmony. As a consequence of this, the primary focus of this essay is on the empowerment of leaders within the context of cross-cultural engagement. This article aims to determine the significance of empowerment within the context of cross-cultural interaction and to find a solution to the problem.

The combination of subjectivity and objectivity gives leaders the authority they need to accomplish their tasks successfully. The ability of a leader to transmit authority to subordinates in a manner that is subject to interpretation is impacted not just by the leader’s personal history but also by the leader’s level of personal intellect and level of personal emotion. The personal aptitude and character of employees can have an effect, from a purely objective point of view, on the amount of authority a leader assigns to subordinates. This is because these factors can influence how well an organisation functions. When there is only one cultural background to consider, leaders are less likely to be impacted by that culture than in instances with multiple cultural backgrounds. In contrast, the complexity of the employees is mostly reflected in the many different cultures from which they originate within the context of the work being done across cultures.

When it comes to delegation in a setting that involves multiple cultures, the situation that takes place the majority of the time is that leaders delegate work to subordinates who are similar to themselves in terms of their cultural background, such as having the same skin colour and coming from the same locality. This is the scenario that occurs the most frequently. Trust is the most prevalent basis for a leader’s power, and those from the same cultural background are more likely to develop a sense of familiarity and trust among their followers. Under the impact of this subjective tone, a corporation with a history encompassing more than one culture will have a propensity to become more and more monocultural, and it will lose the advantages it initially had. Because of this, those who are in positions of authority need to have the ability to rise beyond the influence of preconceptions and their own history. This is important from a personal standpoint. For instance, the organisation’s executives ought to concentrate on the full job talents of their employees and ignore their personal histories in DOA. This is so that the firm can be successful.

When things are viewed from an objective aspect, those who hold leadership positions in flat structures are primarily driven, in large part, by the fundamental norms, fundamental principles, and general purpose of the organisation. There are three distinct ways to implement safeguards to ensure that the delegation of authority is maintained [7]. The successful execution of DOA, on the other hand, is contingent on the authorised objects having a comprehensive understanding of the goals and principles defended by the organisation. This is the central point of contention. Because of this, the leaders of organisations need to pay attention to integrating their organization’s culture, values, and the personal histories of their employees. This is necessary so that the three different ways of generating frames may be properly adapted to the context of cross-cultural interactions. To be more specific, this indicates that leaders should pay attention to the integration of the personal histories of employees with the culture of the organisation, the values of the organisation, and the organisational culture.

4. Discussion

In this case, the main story is about China Europe International Business School in Shanghai, Due to conflicts within the board of directors with different cultures, authorization can be divided into vertical DOA and horizontal DOA. In this case, the direction of DOA mainly comes from horizontal [8]. In this case, the conflict of DOA mainly came from the difference in values between the Chinese and German directors, which resulted in the conflict, and the company’s next plan could not be authorized to use [9-10]. Culture, regional policies, and laws mainly influence the difference in values. Although, in this case, the Chinese board member and the German board member knew the values expressed by each other, the problem was that they could not understand each other. The DOAs’ dilemma is that they have different values of profit and moral importance. But as in this case, as Almond China’s president, Liu should build a bridge of trust and achieve mutual understanding between the two sides. So one of the key points of DOA is trust and understanding. In this case, what appears most is not the mutual understanding’s national circumstances but the endless finger-pointing. In this case, both parties could not reach an agreement, and the person who should be responsible for coordination in this case also lacked cross-cultural management ability. Ying chose someone with life experience in China and Germany as the intermediary. George Ho, a financial controller from Hong Kong who was not good at Chinese but only spoke English, was responsible for reporting to both the general manager of the joint venture company and the financial controller of the Shanghai headquarters. His background does not provide a good empathic bridge for a Sino-European partnership. As previously stated, however, leaders must overcome both their subjective and objective mistrust of DOA. In this instance, the leader must overcome the DOA limitation resulting from his subjective inability to embrace the values of the other party. Alternately, third Culture can be used to describe this situation. Although, in a global perspective, third culture does not apply, and third culture is typically associated with cross-culturally developing children, third culture is still a term that is commonly used. However, if only the characteristics of the third culture, such as the ability to convey oneself in multiple languages and a high tolerance for other cultures, are considered [10]. These can be trained the following day. The ability to communicate in multiple languages, for instance, can be developed by organizations with a clear mission. The second component of cross-cultural tolerance is emotional intelligence, which can be developed through organizational training, personal experience, and spontaneity.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, this research investigates the various strategies that international and cross-cultural leaders utilize to preserve their influence in the workplace. In conjunction with the findings from the Pew Research Center's report titled "Race in America in 2019," these studies from Thouth highlight the fact that the ability of leaders to make subjective decisions and the ability of leaders to make impartial subjective decisions while setting aside bias are the keys to preserving credibility and authority. The example of China Europe International Business School demonstrates that the most common problem in managing a cross-cultural organization is not ignorance of the national environment of the other side, but rather the constant pointing of the finger due to the ignorance of employees from different cultural backgrounds. This is demonstrated by the fact that the most common problem in managing a cross-cultural organization is not ignorance of the national environment of the other side, but rather the constant pointing of the finger. The offered solutions alleviate the predicament that will be faced by future workplace leaders who will be tasked with managing multinational or cross-cultural organizations and simplify the original complexity of multicultural company management. This course also provides a great deal of versatility and choice for clinical work in the years to come.