GRANTjournal
ISSN 1805-062X, 1805-0638 (online) Vol. 10, issue 02
EUROPEAN GRANT PROJECTS I RESULTS I RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT I SCIENCE
Modern management and leadership in the environment of companies
Jaromír Tichý1
Tomáš Novotný2
Mario Slivka3
1
University of Finance and Administration; Estonská 500, 101 00 Praha 10, Czech Republic; jaromir.tichy@vsfs.cz
2
National Energy Cluster NEK; Záhradnícka 72, 821 08 Bratislava, Slovak Republic; tnovotny61@gmail.com
3
National Energy Cluster NEK; Záhradnícka 72, 821 08 Bratislava, Slovak Republic; marioslivka@gmail.com
Grant: NFP313020ANX5
Grant title: National Energy Cluster NEK with the designation: NFP313020ANX5, financed from ESIF funds by the Ministry of Economy of
the Slovak Republic under the title: "Design and development of integrated innovation infrastructure and knowledge base in the European
area of the cluster organization NEK".
Subject: AE - Management, administration and clerical work
© GRANT Journal, MAGNANIMITAS Assn.
Abstract The paper deals with the issue of leading people in an
environment where the traditional principles are no longer followed
as it was a few years ago, but completely new, modern strategies
and techniques are emerging. The aim of the research is to find out
which of the selected countries is closest to the Slovak Republic
from the corporate people management point of view. The premise
of the research was that the leadership style of people in the Slovak
Republic is closest to the leadership style in the Czech Republic and
Poland. An analysis of secondary data of research, projects and
studies of people management in 12 selected European countries in
the evaluated parameters is the content. It also contains an analysis
of the results of a questionnaire survey focused on people
management in the Slovak Republic. It was found that from the
point of view of corporate people management, Slovak managers
use participatory style of people management the most, within the
surveyed countries they are most similar to managers in
Luxembourg. As a result, it is possible to refute the assumption that
Slovak managers are most similar to Czech and Polish.
Key words leader, manager, leader, classic leadership; modern
leadership, managerial style
1. INTRODUCTION
The success of companies largely depends on the quality of their
management. If a company has good top and middle management, it
is very likely that the company will prosper and will be successful in
the market. The management system is currently perceived as
performing the right things that lead the company to efficient
performance. Management is a scientific discipline and represents a
set of techniques, procedures, principles and management methods.
Modern management differs from the classic one by technical
development, the emergence of systems theory and cybernetics, but
also by the effort to apply the methods of operational analysis in
management.
The business environment is currently characterized by rapid
technological, social and economic changes, globalization and mass
adjustment of production and consumption, which has led to hypercompetitive
market conditions and competitive advantages have
become temporary. (Wee and Taylor, 2018) Doing business in every
country is associated with a large number of challenges. Successful
companies respond to external changes very flexibly. These changes
are usually associated with technological development,
implementation of new applications and robotics. (Zheltoukhova,
2014) It should not be forgotten that people are the drivers of
changes and bring added value to the organization. Therefore, the
focus on human capital has become a strategic element in
management systems. Investing in people is the first and key
element in a sustainability strategy that involves the use of talent as
a key factor in human capital development. (Rudito, 2015)
Opinions on what makes a person a leader have changed and
evolved over the centuries. Based on this, some basic tendencies
have broken down and different leadership styles have emerged,
which can be found in various literature in the field. Based on these
differences, it is clear that the two people are not the same and they
are not always able to combine these qualities in one person. But it
must be said that although the manager and the leader have some
different characteristics, also the same can be found. Over time,
these two people become more similar because there are fewer and
fewer different characteristics between them. It is best for the
company if he/she can be a good manager and an excellent leader,
which makes him/her unique.
2. THE INFLUENCE OF CULTURE ON PEOPLE
MANAGEMENT
Mahbub (2010) deals with people management in his publication,
which is understood as dominance over group activities in order to
achieve goals. By performing leadership roles, managers seek to
influence people under their supervision, motivate them, and direct
them toward achieving the organization's goals. Kets de Vries
(2001) also deals with the issue of people leadership, which
provides an interesting view on leadership, in which the character of
a nation that has its roots in culture is also important. This trait
presupposes deep-rooted and relatively enduring patterns of
behavior and the usual ways in which people in a given nation deal
with external and internal reality. Cultural values are learned and
56
GRANTjournal
ISSN 1805-062X, 1805-0638 (online) Vol. 10, issue 02
EUROPEAN GRANT PROJECTS I RESULTS I RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT I SCIENCE
passed down from generation to generation and play an important
role in shaping the cognitive, affective and behavioral patterns that
people demonstrate in different cultures. These different
"languages", different aspects of verbal and nonverbal
communication that reflect national culture - have significant
implications for leadership practices. For example, the form of the
organization reflects the country's feelings about power.
The cultural dimensions are visible in everyday life, as well as in
organizations and their management. In other words, in everything
that is considered as a part of national culture. (Kets de Vries 2001)
Leadership also includes key tools that are important for effective
people management. It is specifically about motivation, stimulation
and evaluation of work performance. (Hofstede, 2001) Armstrong
states that leaders are people who set the direction and can lead
people to use all their strengths and abilities to achieve goals, while
the leader gains their commitment and motivates them to achieve
results. (Armstrong, 2008) With the emerging trends in the
operation of multinational companies, the theory of human resource
management comes to the fore in companies that operate
internationally. Mura (2012) deals with this topic, whose knowledge
in the field is also used in the work, because he deals in more detail
with the management of international companies. It is the method of
human resources management that is the most common issue that
must be addressed by the management of an internationally
operating company, because it is one of the most important factors
of production. The key factors determining business management in
an international multicultural environment are increasing managerial
skills, systematic and purposeful planning, strategic use of
appropriate foreign intermediaries and partners, increasing technical
skills and abilities, as well as increasing the company's ability to
quickly identify and respond to change. (Mura, 2012) International
companies prefer the so-called "Japanese" leadership style, which is
specific in that it emphasizes corporate cohesion, quality
management system, just-in-time supply system and "American"
rationality.
3. CURRENT STATE OF THE SOLVED PROBLEM
A special leadership style suitable for the cultures of individualism
can lead to defeat in the culture of collectivism. The study in this
area was conducted by Smith and Vien (1992), who conducted
research in Australia, Japan, England and Taiwan, emphasizing the
behavior of the dominant person. One of the problems that often
occurs in comparative studies is the comparison of Japanese culture
with other cultures, specifically the American one. An example of
this type of research is that of Teiba et al. (1999), focused on the
surveillance of styles and cultural areas from a comparative
perspective. In this research, two types of leadership are studied, i.e.
task-oriented leadership and people-centered leadership in four
countries such as Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom and
Hong Kong. In task-oriented management, the performance of the
task is emphasized, and in people-oriented management, the
implementation of objective strengthening of morale and ensuring
the well-being of employees is of great importance.
Andre Loran also conducted management research in different
cultures, asking: "Is it important for a manager to know the exact
answers to his employees' questions that may be related to their
work?" The answer varies from person to person, mainly due to the
differences in the cultures already mentioned. From the point of
view of the Swedish management, this requirement is not available,
while the Japanese management has emphasized this necessity.
Most American managers believe that the manager's job is to help to
solve problems, which means that the manager should help
employees figure out how they can solve problems with them. When
employees do not have the help and support of a manager to solve
work problems, they lose their own motivation for innovation and
creativity, which in turn significantly reduces their productivity. On
the other hand, most French managers believe that the manager
should provide his or her employees precise and clear answers so
that he or she can maintain his or her credibility. (Ubreziova, 2008)
Executives from Finland and Sweden typically use consensus to
manage and lead their workforce. Consensus is based on central
group work and team spirit. These managers emphasize people who
move forward together through effective communication and
stability, open discussion at team meetings, and decision-making by
consensus. It can be said that the greater the consensus, the greater
the job satisfaction. Also, thefindingsof Avery (2005), who focused
on leading people in European countries, were used in the paper.
Another difference, according to him, is that the traditional AngloAmerican
view of leaders, special people who set the direction,
make key decisions and are the creators of initiatives, is based on a
deep-rooted individualistic worldview. Traditional Anglo-American
and European leadership concepts differ in many ways. The first
difference is that an individual European leader does not tend to
have superstar status. The top European leadership is usually less
well known than the Anglo-American. The position of European
leader is shared and rarely focuses on a single individual. Part of the
leader's role is to obtain the approval of the supervisory board, trade
unions, work councils and other parties, which often have a
decision-making position. One way to minimize the role of the
leader is to use substitutes. For example, companies can use closely
linked teams of highly qualified individuals, professionally trained
and skilled workers who do not have to be told how to work.
(Avery, 2005)
4. OBJECTIVES AND METHOD OF WORK
The aim of the research is to find out which of the selected countries
is closest to the Slovak Republic from the corporate people
management point of view. The premise of the research was that the
leadership style of the people in the Slovak Republic is closest to the
leadership style in the Czech Republic and Poland, because the
cultures of these countries are very similar.
The task of the paper is the realization of an empirical research and
also to determine the level of application and knowledge of
management concepts, tools and methods in the management
practice of selected European countries and Slovakia. An analysis of
secondary data of research, projects and studies of people
management in 12 selected European countries in the evaluated
parameters: interpersonal relationships, focus on performance,
teamwork, respect for authorities and hierarchy is the content of the
paper. The research covers countries such as: Finland, Sweden, the
Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, the Czech
Republic, Poland, Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands
and, of course, Slovakia. In order to make the results of the
characteristics of individual countries clearer, this section also
includes a work table, which shows not only the leadership style of
people, but also the basic characteristics typical of a given country.
These country characteristics are evaluated on the basis of points
according to the set criteria and a graph of results is created.
professionally trained and skilled workers who do not have to be
told how to work. (Avery, 2005).
57
GRANTjournal
ISSN 1805-062X, 1805-0638 (online) Vol. 10, issue 02
EUROPEAN GRANT PROJECTS I RESULTS I RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT I SCIENCE
5. RESEARCH RESULTS
Based on an analysis of people's leadership in different European
countries, it is clear that a positive leadership attribute in one culture
may not necessarily be positive in other cultures. Several
dimensions of culture and several different typologies of social
cultural-value orientations or cultural dimensions have been
developed. The paper found that autocratic leadership is more
acceptable and efficient in high-energy companies, and that power
distance also plays a role in employees' willingness to accept the
direction of supervision and in their emphasis on gaining support
from those in authority positions. Collectivism positively influences
the role of participatory leadership and supports transformational
leaders. The analysis found that male and female cultures create
different types of leader heroes and that the heroic manager in
masculine cultures is decisive, assertive and aggressive. On the
contrary, in women's cultures, the "hero" is less visible, seeks
consensus and is more intuitive and cooperative than tough and
determined, see e.g. Hofstede (2001).
Based on the research, it can be stated that people are looking for
nine key qualities in a successful leader, namely passion,
determination, integrity, conviction, adaptability, emotional
resilience, emotional resonance, self-knowledge, humility and
emotionality. Determination is a common feature of effective
managers in all countries of the world. In this respect, European
executives are mostly consensus-oriented. Integrity is a complex
trait that is highly determined by national cultures. Adaptability is
less common and less valued in Europe. Managers strive to perform
the roles of a manager outside the company so that they act on the
employees for whom they have responsibility, orienting their efforts
in the direction of predetermined goals of the organization.
Administrators should motivate their employees in such a way that
they voluntarily seek to achieve the goals of the organization.
In order to make the results of the characteristics of individual
countries clearer, the following tables were created (Tab. 1), which
show not only the style of leadership of people, but also the basic
characteristics typical for the country.
Tab. 1: Management characteristics of selected European countries
Characteristics of people leadership and managers
they appreciate women's values and interpersonal relationships
they are considerate and more employee-oriented
less active in remuneration
they issue direct orders and discuss very little with subordinates
they issue orders very often, they are direct and very reliable
are strong authorities, able to make big decisions on their own
are willing to take risks and use untested approaches
emphasize gender equality
they try to avoid conflicts, the agreement and its observance is
important for them
management is not focused on people, but on functionality
they are a very hardworking and strenuous nation, they don't like
criticism
they are very unique and innovative, friendly, informal
remuneration is based on equality
they put a lot of emphasis on the organizational structure and often
use orders
hardworking, consistent, almost workaholics
they lack caution and a sense of humor
they experience a lot of stress and can handle it
they are goal-oriented and have clear rules
they like quality, time accuracy and punctuality
everything in detail must be reworked and we can compare them to
machines and robots
they like open discussion, exchange of views and respect for their
superiors
51
& 2
I I
are open, carefree, less critical, risk more, joke and are not afraid to
accept new ideas
focus on personal development of employees and are not
technically proficient
place great emphasis on career mobility
they perceive employees as human beings and they like salary and
career
very similar to the leadership style of Germany
respect the hierarchy and are more conservative
formal authority and autocratic decision-making are important
the evaluation of employees is objective and fair
employees have very low competencies, lack autonomy and
initiative
communicate with subordinates only irregularly and treat them as
family members
they lack efficiency and teamwork
cooperate with subordinates on a regular basis
they avoid risk, they are based on formality, hierarchy and meeting
deadlines
perfection, detail and logic are second to them
workplace relationships are strong and positive
they prefer wisdom, sharpness and strict control in companies
the manager wants to be the center of events
know how to solve complex problems and questions
respect and a strong entrepreneurial spirit are a matter of course
are very formal and pay attention to the hierarchy
they lack teamwork and are great individualists
they are very active in remuneration
they are poorly coordinated, which causes chaos in businesses
innovation is a threat to them and a negative attitude towards
change prevails
have a problem inspiring and motivating employees
family businesses are typical for them
strict adherence to hierarchy and social contacts
are team players, communication is direct and collegial
the manager is an absolute authority
the manager knows how to react well to changes, constantly
monitors the work of employees
demonstrate an interest in the personal life of employees
formal and courteous and strictly adhering to the rules
respect for authority and a sense of loyalty to the organization
communication and cooperation in the team is very collegial, friendly
and direct
clearly define who has what tasks
they not only deal with the goals, but also with the appearance and
appearance of employees
they do not meet deadlines, are inefficient and mismanaged
have great respect for authority and loyalty to the organization
they are willing to compromise and the needs of the organization are
more important than their own
they know how to control their emotions well, they are calm and
objective
they can handle stress and negotiate very well
the most independent in terms of decision-making powers
they do not make things and decisions themselves
they have a lot of energy and the ability to transfer it to others
they are very poorly organized and structured
employees keep a natural distance
people management is formal and the rules are followed
disputes are resolved by joint consultation
employee participation in the running of the company is important
managers are focused on achieving results and know the value of
employees
Source: Own construction
According to the presented research, the relationship between
cultures and leadership styles is confirmed, so managers are advised
to pay more attention to cultural differences in organizations in
order to gain more effective and efficient leadership and to correctly
identify existing cultures in their scope of work. At present, there is
no doubt that human resources are the company's most important
capital and therefore need to be addressed by business managers.
None of the cultures can be described as good or bad, because each
is specific and requires some respect. As an example, I can cite the
Nordic countries, where a low level of enforcement is typical, as
well as lower accessibility to the collective. If we look at the British
and Germans, they are known around the world for their focus on
performance, high level of inaccessibility, and low level of
sensitivity in understanding other people. Southerners such as the
58
GRANTjournal
ISSN 1805-062X, 1805-0638 (online) Vol. 10, issue 02
EUROPEAN GRANT PROJECTS I RESULTS I RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT I SCIENCE
Italians, the French and the Spanish, who have a high degree of
enforcement and also accessibility, are completely different. Leaders
from the former ruling colonies, including the United Kingdom,
know how to respect cultural differences very well. Based on the
findings, it is not possible to claim that the specifics of individual
cultures are the basis for a successful manager, but to a certain
extent they can be taken into account in the field of people
management and leadership.
In the following Table 2, the characteristics of selected European
countries are divided into 4 criteria, namely interpersonal
relationships, focus on performance, teamwork and respect for
authorities and hierarchy. We awarded all of these criteria points on
a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the lowest rating and 10 being the
highest. In addition, the table shows the sum of points and their
average. Based on these results, a graph is created, which makes the
results of individual selected countries clearer.
Tab. 2: Criteria and evaluation of selected European countries
Evaluation criteria / Points
Country
»ersonal
anships
uson
rmance
iwork
ectfor
itiesand
archy
Sum Average
.9 H
foe
perfo
resp
author
hier
Finland 10 7 5 9 31 7.75
Sweden 9 10 7 9 35 8.75
Germany 7 10 7 10 34 8.5
Great Britain 9 7 7 7 30 7.5
Czech Republic 6 6 6 9 27 6.75
France 9 7 8 7 31 7.75
Poland 7 6 6 8 27 6.75
Italy 8 8 9 9 34 8.5
Luxembourg 8 6 9 9 32 8
Belgium 8 7 8 9 32 8
Netherlands 7 7 6 6 26 6.5
Slovak republic 7 7 6 7 27 6.75
Source: Own construction
Fig. 1: Criteria and evaluation of selected European countries
Finland
Poland
Source: Own construction
Based on the research, it was found that managers from European
countries prefer such leadership styles that result from their
functional positions, authority, or objective reception and
distribution of information. One of the important determinants of the
growth and career advancement of managers is the possibility of
exchanging experiences between them at the international level. The
most productive response in the field of people management with
respect to other cultures is considered to be their mutual
harmonization. There is not a single guide on how to manage human
resources anywhere in the world, but it is essential to rely not only
on global trends that are constantly changing, but also on the local
conditions of the countries concerned. It is the local conditions that
reflect the local culture with which people are associated.
Based on an analysis of people's leadership in different European
countries, it is clear that the attribute of leadership in one culture
may not necessarily be available in other cultures. Western Europe
is part of leading people with different teams, emphasizing
performance and productivity, providing more room for delegation
in the organizational structure, examining modern management and
decision-making methods, and managing systems to communicate
people at different organizational levels. European managers
emphasize strategic planning, the decision-making process, the
creation of organizational structures and functional positions. Most
top European managers use a participatory leadership style in their
work. An analysis of the characteristics of individual types of
management and managerial approaches is performed. The output of
the analysis is the table: Characteristics of selected European
countries, where the analyzed countries, the prevailing four
principles of people management and the individual characteristics
of people management and managers of these styles are processed.
Several researches were used in the analysis, based on which it is
stated that in countries such as the Czech Republic, Poland,
Germany, Italy and Lithuania, managers use an authoritative style of
leading people. As a result, for these managers, job tasks represent a
responsible mission, which they place great emphasis on. It is also
typical for these countries that managers have power and decisionmaking
in their hands, resulting in excellent results and
performance.
The United Kingdom differs from European countries because it
uses the most widely the liberal leadership style, which is the cause
of great staff turnover between organizations. It is interesting that
the manager decides on very little things and sometimes does not
even decide on things that are primarily within his competence.
Subordinates often perform the tasks of the leader himself, which
causes poor performance of the whole team. A typical feature of the
leadership of the people in Great Britain is the mutual power
struggle, which is fought by managers and subordinates.
A completely different situation is, for example, in Luxembourg,
where a participatory leadership style prevails. Organizations realize
that cooperation and very good communication between employees
and leaders is important, through which they can achieve better
results not only as individuals but as a whole team.
Equally participatory leadership style is typical for Slovak
managers, because they can very positively support the development
of people's personality and care about their satisfaction. Managers
assign tasks to employees based on their experience and knowledge,
which greatly facilitates work and brings results for the company.
6. CONCLUSION
If the managers of multinational companies are to be successful,
they must adapt to changing conditions and follow new trends,
which are mainly influenced by culture and technology. The
solution is to create a new or specific style of management of
multinational companies operating in Slovakia, which managers
would follow. The term leadership is very often used as a synonym
for management and manager - it is very often understood in the
same way as a leader. But it is very important to know that not every
manager can lead people to follow him, and therefore not every
manager can be a leader at the same time. The difference can also be
59
GRANTjournal
ISSN 1805-062X, 1805-0638 (online) Vol. 10, issue 02
EUROPEAN GRANT PROJECTS I RESULTS I RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT I SCIENCE
seen in the fact that management is about doing things right, but
leadership is about doing the right things.
The conclusion of the analysis is that Slovak managers using in
most cases participatory leadership style are most similar to
managers in Luxembourg. They share several common features,
such as the fact that when allocating tasks in a team, everyone
knows what to do, because employees have clearly defined tasks.
Every employee is responsible for their results and can show respect
to people in more important positions, such as managers. The
management deals not only with the goals and results of the
company, but also with the performance and appearance of
employees, which they care about a lot. Employees in Slovakia and
Luxembourg like to work in a team, they often communicate with
each other, they are friendly, direct and collegial.
Despite the fact that there are many differences between Slovakia
and Luxembourg, such as consistency in meeting deadlines and
economy, they are very similar in terms of leadership style. In
connection with the result of the survey, it is possible to refute the
assumption that the leadership style of people in the Slovak
Republic is closest to the leadership style in the Czech Republic and
Poland, because the cultures of these countries are very similar. It
was found that despite a very similar culture, there are big
differences in leadership style. It is our neighbors, with whom we
have once formed one state, who are closest to Germany in terms of
leadership style. They are quite conservative, which is a big
difference in comparison with Slovak employees. Czech employees
are also known for their very low competencies, they lack
independence and initiative, which again makes them significantly
different from Slovak employees. They are used to communicate
with their subordinates only irregularly and only if necessary, which
is the opposite to Slovak employees. A characteristic feature of
Czech employees is also inefficiency and the absence of teamwork.
Polish managers, in turn, prefer an authoritative leadership style,
which is also different from Slovak ones. Similarly as the Czechs,
they lack teamwork and are great individualists. They are poorly
coordinated, which causes chaos in companies. Innovation is a big
threat for them and they have a negative attitude towards changes,
which makes them significantly different from Slovak employees.
The main problem for managers is that they do not know how to
inspire and motivate employees. On the contrary, in Slovak
companies, motivation is an important part of the functioning of the
entire organization, as leaders know that the company will achieve
better results. A similar feature of Slovak leaders is the fact that they
know how to solve complex problems and issues and know how to
show respect for each other. The achieved level of management of
both countries is different, the Czech Republic has a historical
advantage within the EU structures, which is reflected in the
evolution of management development in both countries.
Slovakia, like any other country, is specific in its culture and
different mentality from our immediate neighbors, such as the Czech
Republic, Poland and Hungary. The key to success (especially in
expatriate management) is to accept these differences and respect
them, which unfortunately does not happen in many cases. It is
underestimated that despite a small market like Slovakia, its
competitive environment is advanced in many industries and can
successfully resist, for example, larger companies and budgets,
thanks to its capable management, professionalism, structure,
performance and efficiency, which in my experience, is achieved
mainly through successful human resource management.
Sources
1. ARMSTRONG, Michael a Tina STEPHENS., 2008.
Management a leadership. Praha: Grada. Expert (Grada). ISBN
978-80-247-2177-4.
2. AVERY, G. C , 2005. Leadership for sustainable futures:
achieving success in a competitive world. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar Publishing Limited.
3. HOFSTEDE, G , 2001. Cultures consequences. Comparing
values behaviours, institutions and organizations across
nations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
4. KETS DE VRIES, M., 2001. The leadership mystique. A user's
manual for the human enterprise. London: Pearson Education
Limited.
5. MAHBUB, A., 2010. Survey of leadership styles in different
cultures. Iran: Iranian Journal of Management Studies. Vol. 3.
No. 3. I l l s .
6. MURA, L., 2012. Performance of Human Resource
Management in an Internationally Operating Company. In:
Serbian Journal of Management, 1/2012, pp. 115-129. ISSN
1452- 4864.
7. RUDITO, P., 2015. Leveraging Global Talent: Strategic
Leverage to Achieve Excellent Business Performance. Advanced
Science Letters 21: 1064-69.
8. SMITH, P.B., DUGAN, S., TROMPENAARS, F., 1996.
National Culture and the Values of Organisational Employees.
A Dimensional Analysis Across 43 Nations. Journal of CrossCultural
Psychology 27, 231-264.
9. WEE, E. X., TAYLOR, M. S., 2018. Attention to change: A
multilevel theory on the process of emergent continuous
organizational change. In: Journal of Applied Psychology 103:
1.
10. ZHELTOUKHOVA, K., 2014. HR: Getting Smart about Agile
Working. CIPD Research Paper. London: Chartered Institute of
Personnel and Development.
BO