Research of value orientations of managers in eu countries with the intension to improve their education

Abstract

The paper scrutinizes the problem of examining managers' value orientations in some EU countries. The globalization of economies, the appearance of new technologies and the enlargement of the European Union are some of the factors, which place increasing prominence and importance on the decisions which managers within organizations and companies are required to take. It becomes necessary for the managers of globally integrated modern organizations to adapt their value orientations to the global economy conditions. Values are the main perceptions and understandings of an organization. They define the way to success. One of the essential ways for adaptation of value orientations is the development of educational process. Seeking to develop these educational processes it is important to know prevailing valuable orientations of managers. Therefore it is necessary to investigate them. This research was carried out to investigate whether there is such a concept as a "European Manager" and to obtain a better understanding of cultural differences. The survey was completed by a total of 1, 360 middle and senior managers across five European countries: Germany, Lithuania, Malta, Spain and the UK. The data collection took place in 2006. Methodology developed by creative group of European Management Association in cooperation with the authors of this paper was applied in the research. Middle and senior managers were examined. The findings show significant common ground amongst managers, in particular in relation to their professional values and core management competences. There is greater divergence when it comes to personal values. A considerable variation regarding values that managers consider to be most important in their personal life was found among the countries. This may indicate the existence of real cultural differences reflected in the personal values held by managers in the different countries. However, it seems that in their professional lives there was much closer correlation among managers from all five countries. These findings will allow improving managers' educational process in universities and other centers of education.

Full text

RESEARCH OF VALUE ORIENTATIONS OF MANAGERS IN EU COUNTRIES WITH THE
INTENSION TO IMPROVE THEIR EDUCATION
PRANAS ZUKAUSKAS, POVILAS ZAKAREVICIUS, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania
ABSTRACT
The paper scrutinizes the problem of examining
managers’ value orientations in some EU countries.
The globalization of economies, the appearance of
new technologies and the enlargement of the European
Union are some of the factors, which place increasing
prominence and importance on the decisions which
managers within organizations and companies are
required to take.
It becomes necessary for the managers of globally
integrated modern organizations to adapt their value
orientations to the global economy conditions. Values
are the main perceptions and understandings of an
organization. They define the way to success.
One of the essential ways for adaptation of value
orientations is the development of educational process.
Seeking to develop these educational processes it is
important to know prevailing valuable orientations of
managers. Therefore it is necessary to investigate
them.
This research was carried out to investigate
whether there is such a concept as a “European
Manager” and to obtain a better understanding of
cultural differences. The survey was completed by a
total of 1,360 middle and senior managers across five
European countries: Germany, Lithuania, Malta, Spain
and the UK. The data collection took place in 2006.
Methodology developed by creative group of
European Management Association in cooperation
with the authors of this paper was applied in the
research. Middle and senior managers were examined.
The findings show significant common ground
amongst managers, in particular in relation to their
professional values and core management
competences. There is greater divergence when it
comes to personal values.
A considerable variation regarding values that
managers consider to be most important in their
personal life was found among the countries. This may
indicate the existence of real cultural differences
reflected in the personal values held by managers in
the different countries. However, it seems that in their
professional lives there was much closer correlation
among managers from all five countries.
These findings will allow improving managers’
educational process in universities and other centers of
education.
Keywords: Value Orientations, Personal Values,
Professional Values, Managers, Education.
INTRODUCTION
The importance of management efficiency for
company’s productivity in modern society, when rapid
changes in globalization and internationalization of
economic processes have a greater impact on
organization performance, is obvious. The greater part
of the success of these processes is predetermined by
the managers’ performance quality.
The aim of this article is to investigate and analyze
of managers’ value orientations in different European
countries, and to settle the similarities and differences
through comparison of investigation results. The
nature of these factors as well as their occurrence in
different countries is not given the proper attention in
the scientific literature. The survey was completed by a
total of 1360 senior and middle managers across five
countries: United Kingdom, Germany, Malta, Spain
and Lithuania.
This research was threefold by using special
criteria or values for every aspect. The first aspect
dealt with the most important managers’ personal
values. To analyze them, the following criteria were
applied: friendship, democratic spirit, professional
success, happiness, fairness, peace, social and
professional recognition, tolerance, comfortable and
exciting life, environmentalism and corporate social
responsibility. The second and the third aspect were
assigned to analyze the major values in playing
manager’s role and the values that the managers expect
from their subordinates. For the analysis of these
values the following criteria were set: ambition,
helpfulness, professional capability, cooperation,
courage, creativity, honesty, rationality, responsibility,
loyalty, and corporate social responsibility.
The findings of the research can be significant to:
managers of organizations who are responsible for
creating and implementing companies’ strategies;
human resource management divisions in
organizations, planning the career of managers;
management consulting companies, drafting projects
of personnel development for organizations; business
and management faculties of universities, developing
curriculums and study plans.
1. THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF MANAGERS’
VALUE ORIENTATION
A modern manager has to perform an important
mission and needs to create ethical, moral and positive
environment for employees to work effectively and to
avoid ethical and unethical behavior ambiguities. The
manager must know the factors that make an impact on

personal human behavior and organization
performance. These factors are values, attitudes,
personality, skills, motivation, perception, and learning.
M.Rokeach (1973), one of the value research main
pioneers, described the value as a long-term conviction
when “specific behavior or a way of existence is more
personally and socially acceptable than the opposite
behavior or the way of existence”. Values define the
criteria for moral judgments, intercourse with people,
devotion to personal and organization aims, and ensure
management continuity and consistency. Values are the
main organization ideas and statements that are
formulated by leaders, who reflect such values as
swiftness and ambition, desire to lead and influence
honesty and integrity, self-confidence, intellect and
thorough knowledge of the sphere of responsibility
(Robbins, 2003).
Values are the main perception and understanding
of an organization. They define the way to success.
Values are the basis of entrepreneurial organization;
they define employees’ performance direction. Values,
which are acknowledged by employees, motivate
them. Prospering organizations rely upon a powerful
tool – a system of values and beliefs (Kouzes, Posner,
Barry 2003). The development of a value system
depends on managers’ initiative, their value orientation
and perception of values as an important element of
employees’ integration. According to Caldwell (2003),
such managers have to comply with ten major leader’s
traits: creation of a vision, entrepreneurship, integrity
and honesty, learning from others, openness to new
ideas, inclination to risk, adaptability and flexibility,
creativity, experimentation and power exercise.
Managers become the main people in organizations
when changes are initiated, new possibilities and
innovative processes are disclosed. Such leaders are
usually distinguished by the qualities of courage and
„gift of eloquence“, belief in people, lifelong learning
and improvement, ability to manage in uncertain and
indefinite situations and clear organization vision.
Modern leaders are able to ensure their followers’ trust
in them by high level of involvement and delegation.
According to P.Smith (2002), delegating managers
have got the following groups of characteristics:
1. Management style, supports open dialogue,
encourages subordinates involvement in
decision-making process, builds a team with
common goals, and motivates employees to
gain knowledge and to cooperate.
2. Delegation and involvement aims to develop
processes that enable sharing of power with
subordinates and assigning tasks, greater self-
involvement and encouraging team members
to work independently.
3. Recognition and feedback, encourages trust of
team members, develops team members
feeling of exclusivity, acknowledges and
motivates change followers in informal ways.
4. Interpersonal empathy, keeps friendly
relations with other people, uses humor and
symbols, and develops personal and emotional
competence.
5. Communication, ensures skills to manage
interdependence, sets broad contact network,
develops reliable communication network
encompassing manager, peers and
subordinates.
6. Vision, aims to have a vision, fosters values,
and defines inspiring and significant goals.
This model is designated to managers who aim at
subordinates development and involvement into
decision-making. In his analysis, P.Smith (2002)
demonstrates that the weak managers’ point is
recognition of subordinates, feedback and interpersonal
sensitiveness. It discloses the truth that managers’
involvement in the development of the value system is
not limited by initiation and formulation of the main
value statements. The greatest manager’s job is to
ensure the transfer and transformation of the values
from individual to organizational level. Only then, one
can hope that intermediate (instrumental) values
singled out by M.Rokeach (1973) will become terminal
and will build a basis for long-term aspirations and
decisions.
Management competences are directly linked with
managers’ attitude to values. Competences like values
are quite easily formulated at a personal level.
However, it is very difficult to move them to
organizational level where they become the object of
transfer and division. R.Thorpe (2001) proposes to
divide the competences into three groups:
▪ Basic competences are formulated from
organization vision, strategy, and values.
▪ Functional competences are defined for exact
employee position under relevant functions and
spheres of responsibility.
▪ Management competences are related to and
formulated under organizational values and
vision. Based on these competences, managers
choose an appropriate management style.
The analysis of managers’ competence models and
typologies discloses quite a few points of view of
different authors. D.Goleman, R.Boyatzis and
A.McKee (2001) emphasize 10 important manager’s
competences. These competences are grouped into
three groups or competence clusters: leadership
competences, competences to achieve goals, and
people management competences. M.Pedler,
J.Burgoyne and T.Boydell (2003) offer to classify
managers’ competences according to management
level.
Manager’s career success depends on value and
competence background, which, one can say,
comprises the manager’s intellectual capital. In
modern literature analyzing leadership problems much
attention is paid to the development of manager’s
emotional intellect. Emotional intellect (emotional
competence) is an ability to recognize and understand
people, recognize the shades of their emotional

behavior and use this information as a source of
adaptation to environment and influence on other
people. Emotional intellect helps managers to improve
themselves as personalities and experts: the easier the
recognition and comprehension of other people’s
feelings, expressed and hidden emotions, the faster and
simpler understanding of how other people feel.
After the research of 300 top managers
representing fifteen international companies it was
found out that in six emotional ability areas, the best
findings were higher than moderate. Those areas were
influence, team leadership, organization knowledge,
positive approach to oneself, and the focus on
achievements and leadership. (Spencer, 1997).
In present rapidly changing business context, more
and more authors focus their attention on the value of
transformational leadership as a basis for successful
organization change management. D.Warrick (2002)
when summarizing the competences of
transformational leadership highlights the following
groups: skills in leading competences, skills in
championing change competences, and skills in
transforming organizations competences. The main
focus of such managers is put on clear vision,
readiness to change and be changed, and ability to
improve and develop organization performance and
achievements.
2. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, SURVEY
DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION PROCESS
2.1 Sampling frame
The project used the database of the sampling
frame for the selection of a panel of respondents -
representative samples of middle and senior managers
across five European countries. The research used the
membership and client databases of the European
Management Association’s organizations in
participating countries as the basis for the
representative sampling frame of respondents. The
samples were stratified in order to ensure that, as far as
possible, respondents were drawn from:
▪ Middle and senior managers; those with
significant financial and/or employee
responsibility;
▪ All sectors including public and private;
▪ All sizes of organization;
▪ All management functions;
▪ All regions across each country.
The sample size was different for each country
and depended on number of managers and survey
format. 363 managers were examined in UK, 201 – in
Germany, 324 – in Lithuania, 165 – in Malta and 292 –
in Spain.
2.2 Data collection
In order to define the main factors that effect
European are managers’ career a quantitative research
was executed. A self-completion questionnaire was
developed. Consistent with the majority of perception
of management studies, we have used survey method
on the questionnaire to measure various beliefs
dimensions of our structured questions. Our survey
design for dimension and belief statements was
adapted from the measures developed by the initiative
of European Management Association. There were 18
core multiple-choice questions to be completed. The
questionnaire was issued in email and hard copy
format.
3. MANAGERS’ VALUE ORIENTATIONS:
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
3.1 Personal values
Respondents were asked to select the three
personal values (from twelve options), which were
most important in their life. The personal values which
were most shared across the countries were:
Professional success (e.g. professional satisfaction,
achievement of important objectives, satisfaction with
tasks well done) – the only one of the personal values
to be a top five choice for respondents from all the
countries, and Fairness (e.g. striking a balance
between own values and external pressures, being
recognized for convictions and principles relating to
human rights) – a top five choice for four of the
countries.
In other areas there appears to be considerable
divergence between the countries. For example,
Happiness (e.g. freedom, internal harmony, self
esteem) was the top response from three countries:
UK, Malta and Spain, but it was not in the top five
choices for either Germany or Lithuania.
The top choices in Germany placed particular
emphasis on factors relating to social responsibility
(Environmentalism and Corporate social
responsibility, Democratic spirit and Tolerance). The
other four countries did not share this emphasis.
It is interesting to note that only two personal
values were not in the top five for any of the countries
and these were both about recognition: Social
recognition (e.g. feeling recognized and appreciated
by family, friends, colleagues, society) and
Professional recognition (e.g. feeling recognized for
success and appreciated in a professional capacity).
The top five ranking responses for each country,
together with the percentage of respondents from each
country selecting the responses are shown in Table 1.
3.2 Professional values for managers and employees
Respondents were asked to select the three values
(from eleven options), which were most important in
their management role. There was greater convergence
between the countries regarding their professional
values than was the case for their personal values –
Table 2.
Professional capacity (e.g. competence,
efficiency) was clearly identified as the most important
professional value – the majority of respondents from

Table 1
Personal values: the top five ranking responses for each country (and percentage of respondents from each country
who selected these values)
UK
Ger
Lith
Malta
Spain
Friendship (capacity for close relationships, to accompany and
feel accompanied, to help without looking for anything in
return)
3 (42%)
2 (65%)
= 1 (57%)
Democratic spirit (feeling of equality, treatment with respect)
2 (38%)
4 (28%)
Professional success (professional satisfaction, achievement of
important objectives, satisfaction with tasks well done)
4 (38%)
4 (31%)
1 (48%)
5 (46%)
3 (25%)
Happiness (freedom, internal harmony, self esteem)
1 (49%)
1 (76%)
= 1 (59%)
Fairness (striking a balance between own values and external
pressures, being recognized for convictions and principles
relating to human rights)
5 (26%)
5 (30%)
2 (38%)
3 (63%)
Peace (world peace, living in a world without conflict)
4 (57%)
= 5 (21%)
Tolerance (benevolent attitude towards all that is different to
oneself, comprehension of the necessity for diversity)
3 (37%)
= 5 (27%)
4 (23%)
Social recognition (feeling recognized and appreciated by
family, friends colleagues, society)
Professional recognition (feeling recognized for success and
appreciated in a professional capacity)
Comfortable life (family, health, security, prosperity)
2 (46%)
3 (31%)
Exciting life (full of activity variety and stimulus)
= 5 (27%)
Environmentalism and Corporate social responsibility
(acting and thinking ecologically, awareness of society around
you, concern for world future)
1(42%)
= 5 (21%)
all of the countries selected it as the most important
professional value. Other values to score highly in
nearly all countries were: Honesty (sincere, truthful),
Responsibility (stable, trustworthy, and reliable).
The main exception was in Malta, where
responsibility was given a low ranking (selected by
only 11.5 per cent of respondents), whereas
Helpfulness (open to helping others, welcoming) was
ranked more highly than in the other countries.
Again, the respondents from Germany ranked
Corporate social responsibility in third place, higher
than any other country.
Respondents were then asked to select the three
values (from the same eleven options), which were
most important for employees to exemplify. Again,
there is some consistency across all the countries:
Professional capacity (competence, efficiency) was
identified as most important by respondents from four
of the five countries (and also scored highly in the fifth
country). The other values to score consistently highly
across all the countries were: Co-operation (team
work, generosity, and constructive attitude),
Responsibility (stable, trustworthy, reliable) and
Honesty (sincere, truthful) – Table 3.
This appears to show that many of the values
managers expect of themselves, they also expect of
their employees e.g. professional capacity,
responsibility and honesty.
Table 2
Values important in a management role; the top five ranking responses for each country (and percentage of
respondents from each country who selected these values)
UK
Ger
Lith
Malta
Spain
Ambition (high goals, hard work, seeking new challenges)
Helpfulness (open to helping others, welcoming)
3 (45%)
Professional capacity (competence, efficiency)
1 (67%)
1 (61%)
1 (78%)
1 (70%)
1 (67%)
Co-operation (team work, generosity, constructive attitude)
2 (43%)
3 (47%)
5 (34%)
Courage (strength, firmness, valiant)
Creativity (imagination, resourcefulness, audacity)
5 (26%)
5 (27%)
4 (34%)
4 (36%)
Honesty (sincere, truthful)
3 (42%)
4 (35%)
5 (32%)
2 (61%)
= 2 (48%)
Rationality (reflective, thinker, intellectual)
4 (42%)
Responsibility (stable, trustworthy, reliable)
4 (37%)
2 (59%)
2 (65%)
= 2 (48%)
Loyalty (spirit of friendship, mutual respect, unbiased)
Corporate social responsibility (awareness of external factors
affecting the organization for which you work)
3 (38%)
5 (41%)

Table 3
Values which employees are expected to exemplify; the top five responses for each country (and percentage
of respondents from each country who selected these values)
UK
Ger
Lith
Malta
Spain
Ambition (high goals, hard work, seeking new challenges)
5 (22%)
Helpfulness (open to helping others, welcoming)
5 (32%)
Professional capacity (competence, efficiency)
1 (65%)
1 (73%)
1 (62%)
3 (69%)
1 (60%)
Co-operation (team work, generosity, constructive attitude)
2 (59%)
5 (29%)
3 (38%)
4 (65%)
3 (48%)
Courage (strength, firmness, valiant)
Creativity (imagination, resourcefulness, audacity)
4 (37%)
Honesty (sincere, truthful)
3 (44%)
) 3 (44%)
1 (82%)
4 (44%)
Rationality (reflective, thinker, intellectual)
5 (34%)
Responsibility (stable, trustworthy, reliable)
4 (41%)
2 (55%)
2 (44%)
2 (81%)
2 (49%)
Loyalty (spirit of friendship, mutual respect, unbiased)
4 (32%)
4 (65%)
Corporate social responsibility (awareness of external factors
affecting the organization for which you work)
The main distinction is that Co-operation (team work,
generosity, constructive attitude) was considered a
significantly more important value for employees than
it is for managers themselves. Conversely, Corporate
social responsibility is not emphasized as an important
value for employees in any of the countries (whereas
this was a top five choice for managers in Germany
and Malta).
3.3 Culture and philosophy of the
company/organization
Respondents were asked the extent to which their
personal behavior is affected by the culture and
philosophy of the company/organization within which
they work (on a scale where 1 = totally and 5 = not at
all). The percentage of respondents for each country is
shown in Figure 1.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
UK Ger Lith Malta Spain
5
4
3
2
1
Figure 1. The extent to which personal behavior is
affected by the culture and philosophy of the
organization in which managers work (on a scale
where 1 = totally and 5 = not at all)
This suggests that, in all countries, the majority of
respondents do feel that their personal behavior is
affected by the culture and philosophy of the
company/organization within which they work. Malta
was the country, which had the most respondents
indicating that their values, and personal behavior was
totally affected by the culture and philosophy of the
company/organization within which they work (17.5
per cent of respondents). Overall, the impact of culture
and philosophy of the company/organization appears
to be strongest in Germany (where over 89 per cent of
responses were between 1 and 3).
CONCLUSIONS
There is considerable variation between the
countries with regard to values that managers consider
to be most important in their personal life. For
example: Happiness was the value most frequently
selected by respondents from the UK, Malta and
Spain. Respondents from these countries also
emphasized the importance of Friendship. In contrast,
respondents from Germany and Lithuania less
frequently selected Happiness and Friendship.
Respondents from Germany placed particular
emphasis on the importance of Environmentalism and
Corporate social responsibility. This may indicate the
existence of real cultural differences reflected in the
personal values held by managers in the different
countries.
However, it seems that in their professional lives
there was much closer correlation between managers
from all five countries. In particular, Professional
capacity (e.g. competence, efficiency) was selected as
the most important value for managers in all the
countries, with other values such as honesty and
responsibility also emphasized. Similarly there was
some consistency across all the countries regarding the
most important values for employees to exemplify
(e.g. Professional capacity, co-operation, and
responsibility). This may suggest that, although
managers from the different countries will have
cultural differences, this manifests itself most strongly
in their personal lives. However, in their professional
roles as managers, their values may be closely aligned.

It was also interesting to note that, in all countries,
the majority of respondents do feel that their values
and personal behavior is affected by the culture and
philosophy of the company/organization within which
they work. This suggests that, as the culture and
philosophy of organizations change, this may impact
on the personal behavior of managers within those
organizations. For example, this could apply to the
growing emphasis on Environmentalism and
Corporate social responsibility, which in this survey
was already significant for the personal and
professional values of respondents from Germany.
The findings of the research can be significant to:
managers of organizations who are responsible for
creating and implementing companies’ strategies;
human resource management divisions in
organizations, planning the career of managers;
management consulting companies, drafting projects
of personnel development for organizations; business
and management faculties of universities, developing
curriculums and study plans.
REFERENCES
1. Abraham, D.E. (1999). Facets of Personal Values: A
Structural Analysis of Life and Work Values.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol.
48, Issue 1, pp. 73-87.
2. Argandoña, A. (2003). Fostering Values in
Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, Part 2,
Vol. 45, Issue 1/2, pp. 15-28.
3. Bates, R. and Chen, H. (2004). Human Resource
Development Value Orientations: A Construct
Validation Study. Human Resource Development
International, Vol. 7 Issue 3, pp. 351-370.
4. Caldwell, R. (2003). Change Leaders and Change
Managers: Different or Complementary? Leadership
and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 24,
Issue 5, pp. 285-293.
5. Cutting, B. and Kouzmin, A. (2002). Evaluating
Corporate Board Cultures and Decision Making. The
International Journal of Effective Board
Performance, Vol. 2, Issue 2, pp. 27-45.
6. Friedman, S.D. and Lobel, Sh. (2003). The Happy
Workaholic: A Role Model for Employees. Academy
of Management Executive, Vol. 17, Issue 3, pp. 87-
98.
7. Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. & McKee, A. (2001).
Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of
Emotional Intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business
School Publishing.
8. Gooderham, P., Nordhaug, O., Ringdal, K. and
Birkelund, G.E. (2004). Job Values among Future
Business Leaders: The Impact of Gender and Social
Background. Scandinavian Journal of Management,
Vol. 20, Issue 3, pp. 277-295.
9. Hemingway, Ch.A. and Maclagan, P.W. (2004).
Managers' Personal Values as Drivers of Corporate
Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,
Part 1, Vol. 50, Issue 1, pp. 33-44.
10. Kankanhalli, A., Tana, B.C., Wei, K. and Holmes,
M.C. (2004). Cross-Cultural Differences and
Information Systems Developer Values. Decision
Support Systems, Vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 183-195.
11. Kropp, F. (2003). Changing Values: A 2020 Vision.
Journal of Euromarketing, Vol. 12, Issue 3/4, pp. 79-
97.
12. McCarty, J.A. and Shrum, L.J. (2000). The
Measurement of Personal Values in Survey
Research. Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 64, Issue
3, pp. 271-298.
13. Miron, E., Erez, M. and Naveh, E. (2004). Do
Personal Characteristics and Cultural Values that
Promote Innovation, Quality, and Efficiency
Compete or Complement Each Other? Journal of
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25, Issue 2, pp. 175-
199.
14. Olian, J.D., Durham, C.C., Kristof, A.L., Brown,
K.G., Pierce, R.M. and Kunder, L. (1998). Designing
Management Training and Development for
Competitive Advantage: Lessons from the Best.
Human Resource Planning, Vol. 21, Issue 1, pp. 20-
31.
15. Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J.G. and Boydell, T. (2003). A
Managers Guide to Leadership. Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill.
16. Rallapalli, K.C., Vitell, S.J. and Szeinbach, S.
(2000). Marketers' Norms and Personal Values: An
Empirical Study of Marketing Professionals. Journal
of Business Ethics, Part 1, Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 65-
75.
17. Robbins, S. P. (2003). Organizational Behavior.
Upper Saddle River. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
18. Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values.
New York: Free Press.
19. Schnebel, E. (2000). Values in Decision-Making
Processes: Systematic Structures of J. Habermas and
N. Luhmann for the Appreciation of Responsibility
in Leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 27,
Issue 1/2, pp. 79-88.
20. Smith, P. (2002). A Performance-Based Approach to
Knowledge Management. Journal of Knowledge
Management Practice. March.
21. Sosik, J.J. (2005). The Role of Personal Values in the
Charismatic Leadership of Corporate Managers: A
Model and Preliminary Field Study. Leadership
Quarterly, Vol. 16, Issue 2, pp. 221-244.
22. Spencer, L.M. & Spencer, S.M. (1993). Competence
at Work. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
23. Thorpe, R. (1990). An Alternative Theory of
Management Education. Journal of European
Industrial Training. Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 3-15.
24. Warrick, D. (2002). What Makes a Good Leader? The
Denver Business Journal, November.