Comparative research between sweden and Romania concerning the leader’s attitude

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Attitude

Concerning the definition for attitude, in the Encyclopædia Britannica we find this: attitude – “4a: a mental position with regard to a fact or state; 4b: a feeling or emotion toward a fact or state; 6: an organismic state of readiness to respond in a characteristic way to a stimulus (as an object, concept, or situation)”.
One author in this field, Hunter Mabon, has treated the attitude in one of his books. He says that attitude is the tendency to evaluate a relationship or an object. By attitude he means that property which is very difficult or impossible sometimes to measure or study.
Attitude comes from interaction between human beings. Someone’s attitude influences the others’. Channels to change someone’s attitude may be: communication, meetings, and information.
There are some factors, which lead to one specific attitude and other factors that lead to different attitude. In Sweden there are different factors to influence an attitude, which in Romania are nonexistent. Here comes the national culture to interference.
The independent variable in this research is the attitude.

Meeting

The concept of this thesis is set around “meeting”. By meeting the author means the meetings during the working hours, between the leader and his employees.
The ideal meeting is the one in which all participants can take action and be listeners as well. Also an ideal one is when the decisions to be made are “win-win” solutions (Doyle, 2002).
Meetings are a small but are an important factor in the working process. The way the leaders handle it affects the people involved, the decisions they make and the organization they are working in.
According to Briner, Geddes and Hastings (1999) the meeting should respect the 10 golden rules:
• Preparing – sending the agenda in good time for the other participants could be able to prepare themselves
• Purpose – good thinking of why it should have place the meeting Theoretical background
• Timeframe – make sure all the question to be discussed have time to be handled
• Understanding – create good communication between participants; active listening
• Discipline – keep on the agenda, don’t lose the focus
• Active participation – make sure all participants (even the most quiet ones) can express themselves
• Problem solving – try to stimulate ideas from them instead of “it’s not possible, no way…”
• Agreement (unity) – don’t make mistake and confound the silence with an agreement; try to get a consent
• Summary – when the meeting ends, get a summary of it
• Actions/measures – make sure all participants understands the following measures which have realistic timeframes
By following or not following these rules it is possible to weigh how important it is for the Swedish and Romanians leaders to respect them or not.

READ Marketing in tourism

Leadership

Usually the leadership is confounded with the hierarchical order in an organization. But in most cases they are almost the same.
According to Berne (2005) the leaders’ attributes are important for coordination and integration in the group, while the chiefs’ have a meaning in relationships with the outside.
This research paper refers to the leader as a chief/director/head. In Romania there are no leaders, there are only chiefs, probably as the result of 45 years of communism.
The chiefs usually work in a hierarchical public organization. The chief’s power is in the organization. He has to decide the goal, rules and set values as well. In Romania it is a saying: “The chief has the knife and bread” and that means that he can reward or punish the employees.
At the same time, as discussed earlier, the chief is assuming the role of the leader. He takes his attributes into the project/work groups or meetings.

1 Introduction
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.2 PROBLEM
1.3 PURPOSE AND GOA
1.4 BOUNDARIES AND LIMITATIONS
1.5 DISPOSITIO
2 Theoretical background
2.1 CULTURAL ASPECTS
2.2 NATIONAL CULTURE
2.3 ATTITUDE
2.4 MEETING
2.5 LEADERSHIP.
3 Method
3.1 DATA GATHERING
3.2 SURVEY
3.3 INQUIRING STRATEGY
3.4 STUDYING GROUNDS
3.5 OUT-CASES
3.6 SCIENTIFIC APPROACH
3.7 LITERATURE STUDIES
3.9 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY.
3.10 METHOD CRITICISM
4 Analysis.
5 Result and conclusions
6 Discussions
7 References
8 Wordlist
9 Attachments