Leadership in an Asian American Community in the South

Abstract

Despite the development of culturally sensitive practices and ethnic-specific services for non-dominant groups, Asian Americans continue to underutilize social services. The underutilization is a reminder that multiple barriers still exist in preventing the historically invisible members of the Asian American population from improving their well-being. If Asian Americans are not using formalized services, they are likely turning to their own informal supports, of which little is known, for meeting their needs. Using a grounded theory approach, this article explores the leaders and their roles in the development of an informal support network in an Asian American community in the southern region of the United States. The theory developed in this study indicates cultural influences affecting leaders and their ethnic identity, which then informs identification of needs and the helping process in the development of the informal support network. The article concludes with implications.

Keywords

barriers to services community development help-seeking social support ethnic-specific services

The subject of leadership has long been integrated in the United States military, businesses, and pubic administration. Different viewpoints exist in the literature regarding the transferability of leader behaviors and processes across cultures (Dorfman, Hibino, Lee, Tate, & Bautista, 1997). Although some research has supported leadership processes and traits having universal tendencies across cultures (Dorfman et al., 1997), much of the literature stresses the culture-specific nature of leadership in general and the distinct difference between Eastern and Western cultures specifically (Cheung & Chan, 2008). Because much of the research on leadership has been developed in the West and leadership research in the East is only recently emerging due to the economic boom in Asia, little is known about the influence of both cultures on Asian community leaders living in the United States who contribute to the development of the Asian American community.

Asian Americans, defined as people whose ancestors can be traced back to the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010a), have long been known to settle in cities like New York and San Francisco where they have built ethnic enclaves such as Chinatowns and Korea towns. These enclaves provide new immigrants a place to help them adjust to the new country (Weng, 2012). Ethnic community support has been shown to provide an important support for new immigrants (Noh & Kaspar, 2003). In recent decades, however, more and more Asian Americans are moving to the South and Midwest for employment opportunities (Schmid, 2003), to join family (Hernández-León & Zuniga, 2000), or as refugees (Zhou & Bankston, 1998). This migration is transforming the new localities. Specifically, the South includes the following states: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas (U.S. Census Bureau, n.d.). Between 1990 and 2000, the population of the South grew by 14.8 million people, a 17.3% increase (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). It grew another 14.3 million by 2010, the largest population growth by region in the country (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010b). Among the Asian American population in the South, there was an increase of 75.7% between 1990 and 2000 and another 71.5% between 2000 and 2010. The profile of the Asian American community in this study is typical of the larger cities in the South with exponential growth over the last three decades.

Prior to migration, individuals are likely to be near family and have a natural support system. When individuals move away, the natural support system tends to disintegrate due to geographical distance. As a result, Asian Americans may develop their own informal support network to meet their needs before using formal services (Hung, 2005). That network is likely made up of other Asian Americans with similar cultural values because no matter where they resettle, they are still Asian Americans and they are likely to view their world through a cultural lens. Informal support networks have been examined by researchers in general (e.g., Kaniasty, Norris, & Murrel, 1990) and among ethnic communities in particular (e.g., Delgado & Rivera, 1997), but little is known about the leaders’ roles in the contribution of the development of the networks. This study attempts to better understand these roles.

Background

Crawford (2012) states that values are central to discussions on leadership. Research has demonstrated that different cultures have varied preferences in leadership styles (Tsui, Nifadkar, & Ou, 2007). McDonald (2012) concluded from a review of the literature that Asian leadership is distinct from the West due to long-standing ideological and cultural orientations. In addition, in a multinational study of culture and leadership in 62 countries, the GLOBE project found leadership to be culturally specific with qualities of effective leaders often varying across cultures (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorman, & Gupta, 2004).

Leadership in Western Culture

According to Kellerman and Webster (2001), the field of leadership studies is dominated by American academicians. Scholars have noted leadership theories developed in the United States often have limited applicability due to the individualistic nature of Western cultures (Hofstede, 1993). Leadership typically refers to one individual who takes charge of a situation to meet a targeted goal (Steers, Sanchez-Runde, & Nardon, 2012). The high individualism supports participative management processes (Smith & Peterson, 1988). High individualism and high achievement motivation are also reflected in rewards and punishments contingent on individual performance (McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982). Leadership is generally viewed as positive with leaders being respected, admired, and revered (Steers et al., 2012). Leaders are expected to be cultivated and highly educated (Steers et al., 2012). A strong sense of self is also important in Western cultures that can contribute to the norm of self-disclosure in which people freely share themselves with others as well as self-determination in which people make decisions based on their own best interests (Weng & Nguyen, 2011). A sense of self also lends to the emphasis of self-worth to highlight each members’ contributions (Hodge, 2004). Individual responsibility and self-improvement are heightened to increase the productivity of each member (Jogulu & Ferkins, 2012). Individuals are measured by their own achievements, which contributes to competitiveness (Weng & Nguyen, 2011). Finally, Western culture lends itself to processes being challenged, and open confrontations are encouraged to air out any differences or resolve conflicts (Jogulu & Ferkins, 2012).

Leadership in Eastern Culture

The success of Asian economies has led to the growth of the nascent body of research in leadership in Asia (McDonald, 2012). Examples of these successes include rapid economic growth in China (McDonald, 2012), economic transformation in Malaysia (Jogulu & Ferkins, 2012), manufacturing in South Korea (Dorfman et al., 1997), and Japan being a large trading partner for the United States (Dorfman et al., 1997). Traditional Asian thought has been found to be relevant to leadership theory development (Meyer, 2006). Scholars note Confucian values, originated in China, as a major cultural force among leadership practices in Asian societies (Cheung & Chan, 2008). Daoist ideology, also originating in China, has also been found to influence leadership in Asia (Cheung & Chan, 2008), which recognizes the paradox and integration of contradictory forces represented by the yin and yang symbol. The core value of collectivism is derived from Confucian tradition in which leadership is more related to group endeavors (Steers et al., 2012) and translates to leaders motivating and rewarding subordinates collectively (House et al., 2004). South Korea’s influence by Confucianism lends to loyalty of leaders who take responsibility for the well-being of followers by emphasizing group harmony (Steers, Shin, & Ungson, 1989). Scholars have found Japanese people to have strong emphasis on group harmony and collective responsibility (Chen, 1995). In Asian cultures, leaders possess personal etiquette and modesty because they are viewed as role models who are morally and spiritually sound (Abdullah, 2001). Leaders in Malaysia are seen as “special” due to their role in decision making and setting directions (Jogulu & Wood, 2008), with subordinates believing in the natural goodness of leaders and that the direction set will benefit others (Abdullah, 2001).

When East Meets West in Community Development

Intercultural competence has been widely addressed across multiple disciplines from social work to nursing to international management. Broadly defined, it is the ability to function effectively in another culture (Dinges & Baldwin, 1996). This section examines factors that contribute to leadership in Asian American communities and their network development.

Ethnic identity

When individuals are settled in a new environment that is ethnically different from what they know, they may go through a period of adjustment in which they reassess their identity. Ethnic identification is a part of immigrants’ and their children’s adaptation process that involves discovering the ethnic options available to them and the importance of their ethnicity as part of their overall sense of self (Fuligni, Witkow, & Garcia, 2005). Studies have observed that higher levels of exploration and belonging are associated with better psychological well-being, self-esteem, and academic achievement (e.g., Fuligni et al., 2005). Specifically related to Asian Americans, Wu (2002) noted Asian Americans united as a racial group due to categorization posed by mainstream America as well as common experiences of discrimination and exclusion. The racial categorization of Asian Americans has also united the many ethnic subgroups for collective pride and empowerment. In a study of multiple subgroup undergraduate students, Lee and Yoo (2004) suggest Asian Americans may place a greater emphasis on ethnic identity over racial identity due to each subgroup’s differences. Dasgupta (1998) found first-generation Indian American immigrants to affirm their ethnicity, often reinventing their native culture in the host country. Sodowsky, Kwan, and Pannu (1995) suggest that even many years after immigration, Asian Americans continue to hold onto the Eastern ideal of collectivism with emphasis on the family, obedience to elders, traditional gender roles, and group interdependence. In a study of Chinese American college students categorized as born in the United States, emigrated before age 12, or emigrated after age 12, there were no differences in the categories in their orientation to Chinese culture (Tsai, Ying, & Lee, 2000). The group which emigrated after age 12, however, was found to have weaker orientation to American culture.

Involvement with group through giving back

Part of ethnically identifying as an Asian American or a member of one of its subgroups includes involvement with the group. Individuals with altruistic motives in caring for others have been found more likely to be involved in community leadership activities (Bono, Shen, & Snyder, 2010). Grillo, Teixeira, and Wilson (2010) noted well-informed individuals increase community members’ engagement due to their interactions. The level, frequency, and extensiveness of the network are based on the well-informed individuals’ network of relations (Scheufele & Shah, 2000). Leaders also prompt individual members to participate in civic actions and demonstrate their strong sense of collective efficacy through their storytelling of the community (Grillo et al., 2010). Within the Asian American context, leaders are spokespersons between the Asian American community and the mainstream community.

Network leadership

The importance of leadership in social networks has been acknowledged by some researchers (e.g., Balkundi & Kilduff, 2005). Silvia and McGuire (2010) found that network leaders are more relational and people-oriented. Empirical studies have examined types of network leadership that include a network of immigrant groups to improve quality of life (Ospina & Saz-Carranza, 2010), public and private partnerships to improve community health (Alexander, Comfort, Weiner, & Bogue, 2001), evaluation and governing mechanisms for community-based health services networks (Bazzoli, Harmata, & Cheeling, 1998), and urban renewal efforts (Rada, 1999). The primary focus of this line of research has been on social interactions with systems within the collaborations (Sun & Anderson, 2012). According to Sun and Anderson (2012), whether one is appointed or emerges as a dominant player, individuals in multiple group partnerships often have influence and hold important leadership roles. These leaders (formally or informally acknowledged) may be recognized due to their ability to facilitate needed action (Huxham & Vangen, 2000).

Network development

Collaborative efforts for change are not new but they are growing in part due to the assumption that more can be done with less (Emshoff et al., 2007). Building effective partnerships is very difficult and time-consuming because it requires relationships, procedures, and structures (Lasker, Weiss, & Miller, 2001). Collaborative efforts are at risk of failure when there are power differentials, trust issues, resource dependencies, and capacity differentials among the collaborators (Fairfield & Wing, 2008). Groups with more resources are likely to yield more power (Salamon, 1995). Compared with networks of both in-group and out-of-group members, studies have shown that networks that are of only in-group members are more cohesive and function more efficiently (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). When there are threats to the group, they force the group to form stronger social networks (Grillo et al., 2010).

Informal support networks have been found to be the main source of support among diverse immigrant groups (Hernández-Plaza, Pozo, & Alonzo-Morillejo, 2004). Research suggests that these networks play a significant role in newcomers’ adjustment processes (Leslie, 1992). For example, new immigrants may have difficulty in communicating due to language differences. Cultural differences may also serve as a barrier for newcomers to participate in mainstream society. The informal support networks may also provide greater assistance during major life changes or stressors (Taylor, Chatters, Hardison, & Riley, 2001). In immigrant communities, the network often consists of other immigrants from similar backgrounds. Informal support networks have shared norms about needs and help seeking (Denner, Kirby, Coyle, & Brindis, 2001). These networks are more stable because they are based on interpersonal relationships rather than funding sources (Gottlieb, 2000). These networks are more culturally sensitive because they adapt to the individual’s needs based on knowledge obtained throughout the relationships (Delgado & Rivera, 1997). These networks are also more flexible in terms of how and when support is provided because they do not have to follow the policies and procedures of formal resources (Gottlieb, 2000). Finally, informal social networks can vary in terms of the different kinds of support each member or group can provide (Taylor et al., 2001).

According to the 2010 census, 61.6% of Asian Americans are foreign born immigrants or refugees. Studies in the migration literature have found that an informal network has the potential to provide functional and emotional exchanges for its members (Wong & Song, 2006). Weng (2012) argues that the availability of a network during resettlement is vital for sheltering immigrants from adaptation stressors. Wong and Song (2006) have also found that the perceived availability of social support enhances the mental health of migrant populations.

Method

The research design was part of a larger study focused on an informal support network in an Asian American community in the South. This article examined the leaders and their roles in the development of the network. Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) grounded theory approach was used to guide the study because existing theories do not adequately explain and predict the phenomenon of interest. Because the informal support network and its leaders function as a whole, the goal was to develop a theory that was applicable to all subgroups within the Asian American community. The study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Sampling

The population of interest for the study was comprised of leaders of one Asian American community in the same city in the Southern region of the United States. Leaders included individuals who held formal leadership roles in Asian American organizations. Two organizations represented were pan-Asian American with one focused on business and the other on culture. 23 subgroup organizations were included with two related to refugees, five religious entities, one legal, 13 cultural/social, and two ethnic schools. Leaders were also individuals who contributed to the culture of the Asian American community that embodied shared norms and values that promote mutual caring. Based on their involvement in the Asian American community, leaders may be in the best position to know about needs, service gaps, and how to develop culturally appropriate informal support. For this project, a leader had formal or informal influence in the Asian American community, was identified by more than two people as a leader, and added to the maximum variation along subgroup representation.

Participants were recruited through gatekeepers who were leaders of pan-Asian American organizations. A total of 43 leaders were contacted and 39 leaders were interviewed with 21 being male and 18 female. Ten participants came to the United States with refugee status. In respect to employment, 27 leaders were in white collar professions, five were retired from white collar, four were in blue collar industries, and three did not work. A total of 17 subgroups are represented in the Asian American community of interest. Because of the heterogeneity of the Asian American community and the goal of the theory to be applicable to the overall Asian American community, purposive sampling for maximum variation focused on subgroup variation (Flick, 2006). This purposive sampling guided participant selection based on needed data with a goal of uncovering as many potentially relevant categories as possible. Subgroup communities in which the population was higher were expected to have more leaders and more network development, whereas the smaller subgroups were expected to have fewer leaders and less network development. Therefore, three to four leaders were interviewed representing the larger subgroups (Chinese, Filipino, Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese) and one or two leaders were interviewed among the smaller subgroups (Bangladeshi, Bhutanese, Burmese, Cambodian, Indonesian, Laotian, Malaysian, Pakistani, Singaporean, Sri Lankan, and Thai).

Data Collection

Although grounded theory approach makes no assumptions of categories for analysis, an interview protocol was developed per IRB oversight along several dimensions with probes that changed throughout the process depending on the responses from participants. Even though there were fixed dimensions that were interrogated, some were dropped as not important to the perspectives of participants and other areas were enriched, given the additional probes based on participant responses. Thus, the shape of the data collection process and the findings were grounded in the perspectives of the participants much like that suggested by Strauss and Corbin (1990). Initial questions were developed based on the gaps identified in the literature that related to informal support networks, how the network is structured, how help is provided, network challenges, and network changes over time. Interviews were all conducted in English as leaders were all proficient and lasted an average of two hours. Interview data were collected by one researcher as field notes during face-to-face (37 leaders) and telephone (two leaders) interviews based on convenience and comfort level of the leaders. Spradley (1979) argues interviews recorded as field notes can be organized as clear accountings that can serve for further analysis. According to Punch (1986), field notes are an “in the moment” accounting of the events, interactions, thoughts, and feelings of those participating in the interviews as they occur in context. The interview field notes were immediately lengthened as extended field notes following each interview. Extending field notes involved completing sentences, including full thoughts, and addressing gaps expressed by the participants but not recorded during the interview while it was fresh in the researcher’s memory.

Data Analysis

Strauss and Corbin’s (1990) text provided guidance on data analysis. ATLAS.ti, a qualitative software package, was used to analyze the data to manage the constant comparison nature of a grounded theory data analysis process. Constant comparison, where data are compared with emerging categories, occurred throughout data collection (Creswell, 2007). Data analysis involved three levels of what Strauss and Corbin (1990) termed open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. Open coding is taking units and assigning descriptive categories while constantly comparing units of data for similarities and differences. The researcher used the constant comparison of these units to develop categories through linking and the identification of emerging categories. In axial coding, categories were related to their subcategories and to each other and the relationships were tested against the data. Selective coding is the process by which categories were related around a core category, which represents the central phenomenon of the study and is identified through existing categories. Once the theory was developed, selective coding continued to determine whether the theory applied to each subgroup. Data were categorized by subgroup and compared with the theory for each of the 17 subgroups.

Rigor

To avoid possible researcher bias, strategies to assure rigor of the research process were incorporated. Creswell (2007) recommended utilizing two strategies in a research study. This study used four strategies that included prior ethnography, prolonged engagement, clarifying researcher bias through memoing, and member checking. Prior ethnography (Spradley, 1979) consisted of the researcher attending community events, participating in community organizations, and getting to know community members before the start of the study. For prolonged engagement, the researcher continued to be involved with community activities during the study as recommended by Padgett (1998). Clarifying researcher bias, which started prior to the interviews and ended at the final writing of the research products, allowed the researcher to outline her biases and assumptions (Creswell, 2007). When necessary, memos were added to help the researcher clarify the differences between preexisting biases and what was found in the data. The researcher also used memos for reflections during the data collection process. Last, according to Lincoln and Guba (1985), member checking is “the most crucial technique for establishing credibility” (p. 314). Member checking allows participants to review analysis of data and offer feedback. The process is a testing of information with the participants for validation. Ten member checkings were conducted for this study.

Results

This study examined the leaders and their roles in the development of an Asian American community informal support network in the South. Figure 1 shows the theory developed in this study. The theory indicates that cultural influence impacts leaders and their ethnic identity, which then informs identification of needs, the helping process, and the development of the informal support network.

Figure 1.

Leadership in the development of informal support network.

Ethnic Identity and Cultural Influences

Leaders’ ethnic identity contributes to the development of an Asian American community. Participants report being more explicitly aware of their identity while living in the United States than when they were in their native countries. The reminders of their identity are imposed by society every time they are asked where they are from because they look physically different, have an accent, or struggle when filling out forms. Another type of reminder is being treated differently. One leader who is a physician provided an example of patients who requested another physician because they did not want to be touched by an Asian American. In addition to their subgroup membership, participants also stressed their membership among the Asian American population as a whole because they saw the need to have a united voice and Asian American representation in the mainstream. Participants also discussed differences in their identity by living here longer than in their native country or being born in the United States. This has resulted in identifying more with mainstream society and feeling more “Americanized.” For other participants, length of time in the United States has not made them feel more American, but they do feel more connected and comfortable with their ethnic counterparts because of their commonalities. For others, their identity has gone back and forth in their lives as to whether they feel more like an American or like a member of their subgroup but all seemed able to manage between Asian and American cultures.

Participants described the development of the community as natural due to cultural influences. One leader stated it this way: “Being connected to the [subgroup] community didn’t take any effort. We automatically came together because we had so much in common.” In addition, according to another participant, the formation of the community is cultural in that people grew up influenced by their native cultures and wanted to be part of a community where people share similar backgrounds. One leader explained that people from the subgroups came together because there is a cultural benefit, that when they see other subgroup families, they “understand the culture and language.” A participant stated his subgroup is “very family-focused” because of its cultural background. Finally, one participant talked about respect for older adults and being in the United States, “If there’s a problem, we’re all very respectful and help the older people. That’s part of our culture.”

The reasons leaders are involved in the development of the informal support network are also culturally influenced. For example, the reason for having a home away from home and getting together with people who share the same language and background suggests the development of a community that is culturally based. Another reason for education and preservation of culture suggests the attempt to sustain native cultures. Establishing an ethnic identity helped in having a united community with a collective voice. Building the network was based on getting together socially and in doing so, building a more developed network. One challenge noted by many leaders is the lack of a community center at which gatherings can take place.

Whereas the Asian culture helps bring the Asian American community together, leaders are aware that Asian culture also influences the stigma of asking for help in general, and sensitive issues in particular. Therefore, individuals are connected to leaders through knowing leaders directly or through others who know the leaders with an understanding that they can be trusted. In addition, any help provided must be discrete or they risk losing face or embarrassing the individuals seeking assistance. According to one leader, helpers “need to know how to be tactful.” One leader stated, “I’m very careful, especially in [subgroup] community with word of mouth, things spread like wild fire so I need to protect the identity of people getting help.” In the process of soliciting help from the ethnic community, leaders do not share names or details of individuals who are in need. They ask general questions about who can help with what. Once individuals are identified to be able to help, the leaders then connect them to those in need. Leaders expressed that they carry the cultural baggage themselves, and some experience difficulty in helping others in relation to problems such as domestic violence. For one group that is providing help to abused women, the help is anonymous with only the psychiatrist knowing those who she helps while the ethnic organization only makes the connection does not keep any records. The leader further stated, “We want to keep this resource low key because the community has issues of accepting it as a problem. Many women who want the help don’t want to be identified.”

Leadership

Participants described what constitutes a leader in the informal support network. To help others, leaders need to be “unselfish enough to help.” Another aspect of being a leader is someone “who has been here for a while” with the assumption of being knowledgeable about how to help and gather resources. A leader is also described as someone who “knows everybody” so that for “anything that comes up, she lets the community know what is needed.” Essentially, the leaders, then, are the connectors between the individual in need and the people who can help. After connecting to the network, “when you come to know one person, you know the whole community” because “everyone knows everyone else.” According to one leader, “the chain of helping started because more people moved into the area . . . [W]ithout the networks, we wouldn’t be able to help as much.”

In reflecting about leadership, participants placed the hope of the Asian American community on future generations who were either born or raised in the United States to take over. Participants were particularly hopeful the community may not be as concerned about losing face in sharing about problems in the future. Leaders expressed concerns about future generations wanting to be involved in the community and feared that they may become too “Americanized.”

In the process of networking, leaders tried to form the informal support network as a further extension of the extended family. Leaders noted many community members are in the city without their extended family that they are used to in their native country. As such, many leaders take on the role of hosting and connecting people through social gatherings. This was modeled after their own experiences in which leaders connected with others with similar backgrounds who then became friends and were later viewed as extended family in the United States. For one leader, “I got involved with my community because of the need to link to my own country and the familiarity: people who share the same culture, values, same ways of being brought up.” Another participant stated, “People in the [subgroup] community gathered as a necessity to find a support system due to the language barrier and we look different so they looked for help from people who shared their own experience.” Finally, one leader stated that among some groups, “the church is the extended family concept.” For him and his wife, they host a weekly gathering just like they would with family where they speak the native language and eat native food.

When individuals treat the informal support network as an extended family, the helping process is then also treated as “a family concept of helping each other.” As a result of the developed relationships, people treat and help one another like they would help family and the informal support network becomes very strong. One leader noted the naturalness of the helping process:

The help was very natural as if family members needed something like your brother or sister needing help so without thinking I’m losing my 5 hours on this. You just help. You think, it’s my people, as if they’re family. People have no problems with helping others like they are family.

Identifying Needs

Leaders noted that it was important to learn about needs to provide help in the informal support network. Many of the needs of the Asian American community are identified through informal means. The top ways leaders reported learning about needs were through socializing and going through their formal activities as leaders, asking directly, being approached, and referrals from contacts. Other ways leaders hear about needs include through their work as interpreters, hearing announcements at gatherings, and by accident.

According to some leaders, when they learn about needs, those needs either become a community need immediately or over time and the conversation turns into how “we” can help instead of “I.” A need becoming an immediate need at the community level is when leaders must pull many resources together and the community responds. An example is when a breadwinner of a family is arrested for immigration issues and the wife does not speak English and is not employed. Leaders involve the ethnic community in collecting money to help the family pay bills, identify an immigration attorney, and provide whatever else the family needs to get over the hurdle. Needs reach the community level over time when leaders learn about the need time after time. According to one leader, when an issue first reaches the community level, “there was not a prior discussion or goal to help.” If leaders keep hearing about the same issues, they may start to recognize the need to address the issue is beyond the individual and that it is a community issue. One example is the health hazards of a particular type of business that affects many Asian American workers in the community. When leaders heard about the concern expressed by many individuals, they warned the community about the issue, as well as got state health inspectors and Better Business Bureaus involved in addressing the issue.

Helping Process

When individuals cannot manage a problem themselves, and their close family and friends are not able to help, they or their contacts may look to the leaders in the community for assistance. According to one leader, “The request for help is usually a chain that eventually gets to us who are the leaders of the community.” Reasons why leaders were sought out include word of mouth that they can help or know who can help, their role in the community, referral from friends or family, or professional expertise.

In general, when leaders hear about a need, the first step is often to learn more. The second step is to determine the resources needed and the level of confidentiality necessary. After understanding needs, leaders try to help themselves. If unable, they reach out to their own networks of family and friends, ethnic entities, and finally maybe mainstream services. This final step tends to be the last step when all other informal resources have been exhausted and individuals are still in need of help. This is particularly the case when the informal network lacks the resources or expertise. Leaders are viewed as knowledgeable and refer people to mainstream services if they are aware or know someone who knows about the available resources. Several leaders expressed concerns about their lack of knowledge about mainstream services and saw it as a barrier in helping the Asian American community. Other participants noted that because of the stigma of going outside of people who you know, there are some people who will not utilize mainstream services. The helping pattern is exemplified by a participant who said,

First of all, if you hear somebody is in trouble, maybe you can initiate the help yourself. If you can’t help by yourself, then ask friends and family to help. If not, then go further out the circle, place of worship, or [ethnic] association.

One leader explained the helping process as a “chain” and the need to tap into the “network” because “one person can’t do it all.” The leader contacted is usually the person who coordinates the help. The helping process starts “when people report to us or ask us for help.” The leader continued by stating that “ . . . we call people, we come together to eat and make a plan to solve problems.” Similarly, according to another participant, “the way we help is totally like a network . . . We have contact information for all of our people. If someone is busy, we refer them to someone else . . .”

One leader stated that the existence of a temple was the start of the help for his subgroup: “When we built the temple, slowly, we were moving towards helping community members.” Another leader stated that when help is needed, the leader would assign people specific tasks to provide the help. Similarly, within ethnic associations, the helping process is often divided among the leaders based on availability, expertise, and experience. For another leader, solicitation for help is sent by email on a weekly basis through her ethnic association and whoever has the time and ability to help responds. If the ethnic association is not able to help, they refer it to another group, often an ethnic religious entity. Because most of the leaders have been or are currently involved in the two pan-Asian American organizations in the community, they all know each other, and so if subgroups cannot address an issue, they go to the larger Asian American community.

No matter the source, participants stated that help is provided by people known to individuals through people they know in the informal support network. For example, one leader stated, “I think it’s the same for all Asians. We’re ashamed to come out and ask for help. If I know you well enough, I will tell you I’m in trouble and you will connect me to people you know who can help.” Even when going to the informal support network for help, an important point noted is that individuals will “go to people who they trust and already have a relationship.” Similarly, the help provided is dependent on people’s network and their relationships to one another. According to one participant “someone who they don’t know well may not help or convey the same information in the same way. If I don’t know you well enough, I may not help you.” In other words, one’s help depends on the individual’s connections in the network because “if you are sociable, you know a lot of people; you have friends; you have more people to help you.” For those who are not part of the informal support network, leaders expressed concerns that they may not be getting the help they need.

Implications

As indicated in the leadership literature related to Western and Eastern cultures (Steers et al., 2012), leaders in this study are also respected for their knowledge and status in the community. Leaders’ attempts to involve the community in response to needs is reflective of Eastern leadership influences (Chen, 1995). The ability for leaders to move between mainstream and Asian American community indicates that they are gatekeepers who can help in improving Asian Americans’ well-being.

The current means of identifying needs seem adequate for leaders to learn about them. But for Asian Americans who are not part of the informal support network, their needs may not be known. As the Asian American community continues to grow, it may become harder for leaders to learn about needs. To better address the needs of the whole community, particularly those who are outside of the informal network, the Asian American community can consider implementing formal needs assessments.

Leaders acknowledge stigma to be an inhibiting factor on help seeking, which is commonly mentioned in the literature (Weng & Nguyen, 2011). The Asian American community can develop an educational program to overcome the cultural issues. In general, education components should target beliefs and attitudes, awareness of the existence of stigmatized problems in the community, and specific ways that can reassure how services can be provided in a discreet manner. In addition to the education program, culturally appropriate resources must be identified and/or developed within the Asian American community and mainstream organizations.

Participants expressed the need for some problems to be addressed beyond the informal support network but some families are not referred to mainstream services due to leaders’ lack of service awareness. This study also found that leaders seem to serve as gatekeepers to mainstream services. Incorporating Asian Americans into the service provision may help some community members in overcoming the cultural stigma of sharing problems with outsiders. Service providers can educate leaders about mainstream services so that leaders can increase their impact of assistance and refer community members to appropriate services. Mainstream organizations can also hire leaders to be paraprofessionals to serve as cultural brokers and/or educate mainstream organizations on serving Asian Americans and educate the Asian American community about resources. Yet another strategy to increase culturally appropriate services is for mainstream organizations to hire bicultural and bilingual service providers.

The theory developed for this study relates to leaders’ role in the development of an informal support network and will require testing for generalizability. Because the theory is developed for an Asian American community with multiple subgroups in the South, sample sizes for subgroups will need to be adequate and testing will need to be in multiple Southern communities. Apart from Asian Americans, another possibility of testing the theory is among Latino Americans due to some similarities with the Asian American population, including population heterogeneity, migration experience, and collectivism culture. Because of the shift in settlement patterns of Latino and Asian Americans moving to the South and Midwest, research on immigrants needs to look at the transformation of new communities. Although it is clear that social support exists within the informal support network, future studies could examine the types of support (e.g., emotional, instrumental, informational, and/or appraisal) provided in the Asian American support network and how support is provided. Future studies could also compare the differences between centralized networks of ethnic leaders similar to those of this study and the more traditional multilateral extended family networks in Asian countries. Last, Asian American communities in the South will continue to change as community members become more familiar with the helping process, and as the population grows with more United States-born members, it would be interesting to follow the progress and examine leaders’ roles as the communities transform.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful for the support and guidance of Dr. Mary Katherine O’Connor. The author is also thankful for the reviewers’ helpful feedback.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biography

Suzie S. Weng, PhD, MSW, is an assistant professor of Social Work at the University of North Florida. Her area of research is access to services, informal support networks, and ethnic-specific services for immigrant and refugee populations.

References

Abdullah

(2001). Understanding the Malaysian workforce: Guidelines for managers. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Institute of Management.

Alexander

Comfort

Weiner

Bogue

(2001). Leadership in collaborative community health partnerships. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 12, 159-175.

Balkundi

Kilduff

(2005). The ties that lead: A social network approach to leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 941-961.

Bazzoli

Harmata

Cheeling

(1998). Community-based trauma systems in the United States: An examination of structural development. Social Science & Medicine, 46, 1137-1149.

Bono

Shen

Snyder

(2010). Fostering integrative community leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 324-335.

Chen

(1995). Asian management systems: Chinese, Japanese, and Korean styles of business. London, England: Routledge.

Cheung

Chan

(2008). Benefits of Hong Kong Chinese CEOs’ Confucian and Daoist leadership styles. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29, 474-503.

Crawford

(2012). Solo and distributed leadership: Definitions and dilemmas. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40, 610-620.

Creswell

(2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

10.

Dasgupta

(1998). Gender roles and cultural continuity in the Asian-Indian immigrant community in the U.S. Sex Roles, 38, 953-973.

11.

Delgado

Rivera

(1997). Puerto Rican natural support systems: Impact on families, communities, and schools. Urban Education, 32, 81-97.

12.

Denner

Kirby

Coyle

Brindis

(2001). The protective role of social capital and cultural norms in Latino communities: A study of adolescent births. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 23, 3-21.

13.

Dinges

Baldwin

(1996). Intercultural competence: A research perspective. In Landis

Bhagat

(Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 106-123). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

14.

Dorfman

Hibino

Lee

Tate

Bautista

(1997). Leadership in western and Asian countries: Commonalities and differences in effective leadership process across cultures. The Leadership Quarterly, 8, 233-274.

15.

Emshoff

Darnell

Erickson

Schneider

Hudgins

(2007). Systems change as an outcome and a process in the work of community collaborative for health. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 255-267.

16.

Fairfield

Wing

(2008). Collaboration in foundation grantor-grantee relationships. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 19, 27-44.

17.

Flick

(2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

18.

Fuligni

Witkow

Garcia

(2005). Ethnic identity and the academic adjustment of adolescents from Mexican, Chinese, and European backgrounds. Developmental Psychology, 41, 799-811.

19.

Gottlieb

(2000). Selecting and planning support interventions. In Cohen

Underwood

Gottlieb

(Eds.), Social support measurement and intervention: A guide for health and social scientists (pp. 195-220). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

20.

Grillo

Teixeira

Wilson

(2010). Residential satisfaction and civic engagement: Understanding causes of community participation. Social Indicators Research, 97, 451-466.

21.

Hernández-León

Zuniga

(2000). “Making carpet by the mile”: The emergence of Mexican-immigrant community in industrial region of the U.S. historic South. Social Science Quarterly, 81, 49-66.

22.

Hernández-Plaza

Pozo

Alonzo-Morillejo

(2004). The role of informal social support in needs assessment: Proposal and application of a model to assess immigrants’ needs in the south of Spain. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 14, 284-298.

23.

Hodge

(2004). Working with Hindu clients in a spiritually sensitive manner. Social Work, 49, 27-38.

24.

Hofstede

(1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive, 7, 81-94.

25.

House

Hanges

Javidan

Dorfman

Gupta

(2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

26.

Hung

(2005). Asian-American nonprofit organizations in US metropolitan areas. AAPI Nexus Policy, Practice, and Community, 3(1), 67-97.

27.

Huxham

Vangen

(2000). Leadership in shaping and implementation of collaboration agendas: How things happen in a (not quite) joined-up world. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 1159-1175.

28.

Jogulu

Ferkins

(2012). Leadership and culture in Asia: The case of Malaysia. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18, 531-549.

29.

Jogulu

Wood

(2008). A cross-cultural study into peer evaluations of women’s leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29, 600-616.

30.

Kaniasty

Norris

Murrel

(1990). Received and perceived support following natural disaster. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 85-114.

31.

Kellerman

Webster

(2001). The recent literature on public leadership: Reviewed and considered. The Leadership Quarterly, 12, 485-514.

32.

Lasker

Weiss

Miller

(2001). Partnership synergy: A practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. Milbank Quarterly, 79, 179-205.

33.

Lee

Yoo

(2004). Structure and measurement of ethnic identity for Asian-American college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 263-269.

34.

Leslie

(1992). The role of informal support networks in adjustment of Central-American immigrant families. Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 243-256.

35.

Lincoln

Guba

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

36.

McClelland

Boyatzis

(1982). Leadership motive pattern and long-term success in management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 737-743.

37.

McDonald

(2012). Confucian foundations to leadership: A study of Chinese business leaders across Greater China and South-East Asia. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18, 465-487.

38.

Meyer

(2006). Asian management research needs more self-confidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23, 119-137.

39.

Noh

Kaspar

(2003). Perceived discrimination and depression: Moderating effects of coping, acculturation, and ethnic support. Racial/Ethnic Bias and Health, 93, 232-238.

40.

Ospina

Saz-Carranza

(2010). Paradox and collaboration in network management. Administration & Society, 42, 404-440.

41.

Padgett

(1998). Qualitative methods in social work research: Challenges and rewards. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

42.

Punch

(1986). The politics and ethics of fieldwork. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

43.

Rada

(1999). Transformational leadership and urban renewal. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 6, 18-33.

44.

Salamon

(1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in modern welfare state. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.

45.

Scheufele

Shah

(2000). Personality strength and social capital: The role of dispositional and informational variables in production of civic participation. Communication Research, 27, 107-131.

46.

Schmid

(2003). Immigration and Asian and Hispanic minorities in the new South: An exploration of history, attitudes, and demographic trends. Sociological Spectrum, 23, 129-157.

47.

Silvia

McGuire

(2010). Leading public sector networks: An empirical examination of integrative leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 264-277.

48.

Smith

Peterson

(1988). Leadership, organizations and culture: An event management model. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

49.

Sodowsky

Kwan

Pannu

(1995). Ethnic identity of Asians in United States. In Ponterotto

(Ed.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 110-130). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

50.

Spradley

(1979). The ethnographic interviews. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

51.

Steers

Sanchez-Runde

Nardon

(2012). Leadership in global context: New directions in research and theory development. Journal of World Business, 47, 479-482.

52.

Steers

Shin

Ungson

(1989). The Chaebol: Korea’s new industrial might. New York, NY: Harper.

53.

Strauss

Corbin

(1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

54.

Sun

Anderson

(2012). Civic capacity: Building on transformation leadership to explain successful integrative public leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 309-323.

55.

Tajfel

Turner

(1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin

W. g.

Worchel

(Eds.). The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

56.

Taylor

Chatters

Hardison

Riley

(2001). Informal social support networks and subjective well-being among African Americans. Journal of Black Psychology, 27, 439-463.

57.

Tsai

Ying

Lee

(2000). The meaning of “being Chinese” and “being American”: Variation among Chinese-American young adults. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 302-332.

58.

Tsui

Nifadkar

(2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research. Journal of Management, 33, 462-468.

59.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Asian. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/atlas/pdf/censr01-108.pdf

60.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010a). State & county QuickFacts. Retrieved from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125213.htm

61.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010b). Populationdistribution and change: 2000 to 2010. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-01.pdf

62.

U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Census bureau regions and divisions with state FIPS codes. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf

63.

Weng

S. S.

(2012). Book review: Social services and the ethnic community: History and analysis and the new Chinese America: Class, economy, and social hierarchy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 41, 344-348.

64.

Weng

S. S.

Nguyen

(2011). Factors affecting elder caregiving in multigenerational Asian American families. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 92, 329-335.

65.

Wong

Song

(2006). Dynamics of social support: A longitudinal qualitative study on mainland-Chinese-immigrant women’s first year of resettlement in Hong Kong. Social Work in Mental Health, 4(3), 83-101.

66.

(2002). Yellow: Race in America beyond black and white. New York, NY: Basic Books.

67.

Zhou

Bankston

C. L.

(1998). Growing up American: How Vietnamese children adapt to life in the United States. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.