Reframing the spaces between us: Culture, power and the labour-leadership disconnect in a post-colonial Global South society
Andrew Innes et al.
Abstract
The most unequal societies in the world are in the Global South – many of these are former colonies where legacy hegemonic systems define socio-economic inclusion. The least equal of these is South Africa, where low trust and incompatible cultural logics inform a persistent labour-leadership disconnect. South Africa exhibits cultural crossvergence: leadership elites adopt Western normative and behavioural schemas, while relational and belief-based indigenous cultural orientations remain salient in blue-collar labour classes. These divergent positions align with historical power asymmetries and contribute to this disconnect. Despite growing attention to culture in organisational research, dominant frameworks overlook how structural inequality, colonial legacies, and spiritual beliefs shape inclusion. This review addresses this theoretical gap with the Divergent Ecocultural Effects conceptual framework, linking overdetermined ecocultural positioning and asymmetrical power effects to cultural legitimacy and organisational cohesion. We theorise a generative mechanism in which individuals’ access to dominant organisational schemas is mediated by cultural orientation, socioeconomic position, and ecocultural change imperatives. Our work advances theory by repositioning culture as a dynamic, power-embedded construct in postcolonial contexts. We contribute to critical cross-cultural management theory by offering a power-conscious lens that moves beyond national culture and values-based frameworks to explain trust, legitimacy, and inclusion in organisations nested in socio-economically stratified Global South societies.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.