Where West Meets East: Culture and Preferred Leader Behavior in Poland A and Poland B

Abstract

Geographically and politically, Poland is a Central European country traditionally divided into two regions located to the west and east of the Vistula River. This division has come to be known as Poland A and Poland B. Despite ongoing debates over the past decade regarding the political and economic disparities between these regions, there has been a notable absence of research exploring their cultural distinctions. To address this gap, this study analyzed the cultural variances between these regions, as well as differences in preferred leadership behaviors among individuals born before and after the transition year of 1989. Through multivariate analyses of variances (MANOVA) tests conducted on a sample of 266 respondents, our research unveiled significant differences in several cultural dimensions and leadership styles, partially confirming our initial hypotheses. We discuss these findings in the context of existing research on Polish culture within cross-cultural and international business literature.

Keywords

Polish culture leadership behavior preferences cross-cultural management cross-cultural research intra-cultural difference international business

Introduction

Geographically positioned on the cusp of Western and Eastern civilizations, Poland, home to a population of 38 million people, is a place where its Slavic heritage, coupled with Western and Catholic influences, has shaped a unique blend of cultural characteristics within its society. Poland, classified as a post-transition country (Bluhm et al., 2013), underwent an economic transformation in the 1990s, transitioning from a socialist state with a centrally planned economy to a free-market liberal democracy. This transformation prompted a rise in immigration to Poland, particularly from the East (Wilczewski, 2019), accelerated by the arrival of Ukrainian-Russian war refugees. While Poland has traditionally been considered ethnically homogeneous (Pisarek, 2011), it faces an ongoing political and scholarly discourse regarding societal and economic disparities between Western Poland A and Eastern Poland B (Gajewski & Tchorek, 2017; Szafraniec, 2013).

Our research centers on two primary divides within Polish society. Firstly, we investigate cultural values and preferred leadership behaviors, contrasting Poland A and Poland B, reflecting their historical backgrounds and contemporary political choices. The second focal point is the generational gap between individuals raised in communist Poland and those brought up in the new post-socioeconomic transformation landscape. Using data from 266 respondents aged 18–63; we statistically test these hypotheses and discuss the results.

Literature Review

Understanding Polish Culture

While cross-cultural management research focusing on Polish national culture remains relatively limited, there are some important insights drawn from analyses conducted within large-scale international comparative studies such as Hofstede’s seminal work (1980, 2010) and the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project. In what follows, we synthesize findings from five significant international studies conducted over the past three decades, structuring our summary around cultural dimensions. It is essential to acknowledge that while not all studies encompassed every dimension, and cultural conceptualizations and measurement methods varied among authors, we have grouped closely related constructs to furnish a more comprehensive overview. Table S1 (see Supplement) provides the five studies summary.

Regarding Power Distance, which pertains to a society’s acceptance of authority, hierarchy, power disparities, and status privileges, the evidence indicates moderate to moderately high scores for Poland. This observation is consistent across Hofstede’s research (1980, 2010), the initial GLOBE study (House et al., 2004), and the GLOBE Student project (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011). Schwartz’s measure of hierarchy (2006) aligns with this trend, reflecting moderate scores for Poland, as corroborated by the preferred culture outlined in GLOBE (House et al., 2004; Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011).

In the realm of Individualism, there is a consensus among the studies, indicating moderately to moderately high scores for Polish culture. A more granular examination of Collectivism (the antithesis of Individualism) reveals that Poland ranks moderately high in In-Group Collectivism and moderately low in Institutional Collectivism (House et al., 2004), signifying a focus on individual and close-circle needs rather than broader societal welfare. This pattern is consistent with findings from Schwartz (2006) and Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (1997). Additionally, results from the GLOBE Student study (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011) suggest that the younger generation in Poland seeks a less individualistic culture, though it recognizes the current prevalence of high Individualism.

Uncertainty Avoidance, which gauges a society’s reliance on social norms, rules, and procedures to mitigate unpredictability in future events, represents one of the less understood dimensions of Polish culture due to notable disparities in reported results. While Hofstede et al. (2010) suggest a culture of high Uncertainty Avoidance, the GLOBE studies (House et al., 2004; Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011) report moderate to moderately low scores. Curiously, the younger generation in Poland expresses a desire for higher levels of Uncertainty Avoidance (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011).

Concerning Masculinity, which reflects a society’s preference for achievement, heroism, assertiveness, and material rewards for success, Poland scores moderately high (64) in Hofstede’s study. Similarly, related constructs such as Assertiveness and Gender Egalitarianism yield moderate scores for Poland. Notably, the younger generation of Poles, according to the GLOBE Student project, aspires to a less competitive and more cooperative societal framework (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011).

In terms of the Long-Term Orientation dimension, Polish culture demonstrates a moderate low score of 38 (Hofstede et al., 2010). However, results from both the initial GLOBE study (House et al., 2004) and the GLOBE Student project (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011) indicate a preference for a more long-term-oriented culture.

Previous Research on Leader Behavior in Poland

Since the economic and political transformation of Poland, the participation of Polish companies in international trade and economic cooperation has increased. Multinational corporations began investing in Poland, viewing it not only as a growing market for their products but also integrating local branches and partners into their global supply chains. This growing economic collaboration has led to increased interest in understanding Polish management styles and expectations regarding leadership behaviors. The first comprehensive analysis of the preferred Polish leadership style was presented as part of the GLOBE Project (House et al., 2004). Compared to the global average, Poles exhibit a greater need for team-oriented leadership capable of implementing a common purpose or goal among team members. At the same time, they have lower expectations for participative behaviors and do not expect leaders to demonstrate compassion and generosity as is expected in other cultures. These findings were later confirmed by Mączynski and Sułkowski (2017). However, some scholars have reported that in the last decade, the preferred leadership styles in Poland (as in other Central and Eastern European countries) have been shifting towards more charismatic and participative behaviors prevalent in Western Europe (Costigan et al., 2011; Eisenberg et al., 2015; Steinmann & Pugnetti, 2021; Strużyna et al., 2021).

While international literature on Polish preferred leadership styles and behaviors is quite scarce, there are some insights in the local Polish literature. Koźminski (2013) conducted a study of leaders in the Polish context and based on this, he constructed a list of attributes that leadership should be characterized by. The specificity of Polish leadership includes: “capturing hearts and inspiring with passion; setting directions, formulating missions, and visions for the future. Polish leaders are masters and artists, possessing charisma and authority” (Koźminski, 2013, pp. 91–92). (Bajcar & Babiak, 2015) found that there is no one dominant Polish leadership style but two, depending on the organization type. The analysis revealed that business owners predominantly exhibit controlling, rewarding, and distant leadership styles, emphasizing the use of rewards, punishments, or delegation of responsibilities rather than direct involvement in daily tasks. In contrast, leaders working for foreign-owned companies stand out for their high level of participative leadership. This indicates greater employee engagement, relationship-building, and decision-making empowerment, as evidenced in empirical studies on Polish business expats (Wilczewski, 2019).

Hypotheses

Despite experiencing substantial economic growth and an enhancement in the quality of life following its accession to the European Union, Poland continues to grapple with pronounced regional disparities. Similar to other nations, these disparities are most conspicuous when comparing rural regions with major urban centers. However, it is noteworthy that within the realm of Polish public discourse, a common framework employed for characterization involves the partitioning of the country into “Poland A” and “Poland B,” often referred to as two distinct geographical areas (Gajewski & Tchorek, 2017; Szafraniec, 2013) and illustrated in Figure S1 (see Supplement). The differences between Poland A and Poland B are rooted in deep historical factors dating back to the period of partitions between 1792 and 1918. During this time, Poland was divided between Russia, Prussia, and Habsburg Austria, leading to the development of three distinct social and economic systems and policies. These historical divisions influenced factors such as the role of the agricultural sector, infrastructure, urbanization, business sector structure, and the size of the economic base, ultimately resulting in significant regional economic disparities in Poland (Gajewski & Tchorek, 2017). In economic terms, the lands of the Prussian partition were significantly better developed than those of the Austrian and Russian partitions, leading to the division between Poland A and Poland B.

While the designations Poland A and Poland B lack formal categorization, they conventionally represent, respectively, regions characterized by higher development and those marked by lesser development. The inequities between the two regions manifest across diverse domains such as the economy, infrastructure, and service sectors, lower unemployment in general, and higher levels of investment) and social domain (Gajewski & Tchorek, 2017).

Contemporary concepts for dividing the country into Poland A and Poland B vary. The most classical division was approved during the Second Polish Republic. According to this division, Poland A comprises the territories west of the Vistula River, while Poland B encompasses the areas east of the Vistula. Importantly, Poland A and B division is also politically grounded as Poland A (the western part of the country) supports a liberal-conservative and Christian Democratic Party, “Civic Platform,” while Poland B (the eastern part of the country) is represented by a national-conservative and Christian Democratic Party “Law and Justice” (Gorbaniuk et al., 2021). This division has been consistently reflected in presidential elections over the last decade when candidates from each party won support exactly in the respective Poland A and Poland B regions (Rosiński, 2020).

In recent years, numerous efforts have been made to mitigate the disparities between Poland A and Poland B. This trend is linked to investments directed towards infrastructural enhancement and economic growth in less-developed regions. Despite progress in narrowing economic gaps, significant political differences persist, leading to the attribution of political choices to cultural differences. It is possible that the cultural influences of the partitioning powers have left a lasting imprint on the local culture of Poland “A” and “B,” resulting in significant differences in values and preferences regarding leadership behavior that continue to exist today. Therefore, we hypothesize the following:

Hypothesis 1a

There is a statistically significant difference in cultural value dimensions between Poland A and Poland B.

Hypothesis 1b

There is a statistically significant difference in (employee) preference for explicit leader behaviors in Poland A and Poland B.

Hypothesis 1c

Patterns of relationships between cultural dimensions and preferences for leader behaviors are different for Poland A and Poland B.

The accession of Poland to the European Union in 2004 resulted in a profound change in the Polish education system (Szymanski, 2023). This accession mandated the harmonization of Polish educational legislation with that of the European Union, necessitating, among other measures, an augmentation of the instructional hours dedicated to the acquisition of foreign languages. Concurrently, it facilitated the allocation of substantial financial resources towards the renovation of educational facilities, the expansion of capacities in preschools and schools, and the introduction of novel pedagogical curricula. Notwithstanding the importance of fiscal investments and programmatic reforms, a transformation of equivalent magnitude pertained to the sociocultural interactions of Polish youth, encompassing children, adolescents, and university students, with their counterparts hailing from other European Union member states.

A noteworthy enhancement manifested in the realm of international mobility for students. Following Poland’s accession to the EU, students were given an unprecedented opportunity to pursue higher education within other member nations, thereby engendering the acquisition of international experiential insights and a nuanced familiarity with diverse cultural milieus. At the same time, numerous international collaborative ventures emerged, with Polish educational institutions forging partnerships with counterparts in fellow EU member countries. Consequently, pupils and university students found themselves actively engaged in international projects and student exchange programs.

It should be explicitly stated that, to date, there is a dearth of research on the changes within the Polish culture post-2004. The absence of unequivocal attributions regarding the role of accession in this transformative process remains a salient lacuna. Nevertheless, previous research (Koźminski, 2008) has linked post-transition cultural change in Poland with macro-economic and management transitions. Additionally, empirical studies indicate that societal values and beliefs have shaped entrepreneurial behavior in Poland (Osowska, 2016). Consequently, it is reasonable to posit that the cohort of youth maturing within the milieu of a free-market Poland, particularly one integrated into the European Union framework, may share distinct sociocultural values and leadership preferences when compared to generations born and raised in a socialist regime characterized by restricted democratic freedoms. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2a

There is a statistically significant difference in cultural value dimensions between the Poles born before and after 1989.

Hypothesis 2b

There is a statistically significant difference in (employee) preference for explicit leader behaviors between Poles born before and after 1989.

Hypothesis 2c

Patterns of relationships between cultural dimensions and preferences for leader behaviors are different for Poles born before and after 1989.

Method

The comprehensive methodology for this study, covering instruments, their development, validation, translation, data analyses procedures, and sample selection details, is outlined in the Editorial of this Special Issue. The dataset comprises 266 observations gathered in Poland between February and June 2023. The respondents, on average, were 27.96 years old (SD = 9.76), with ages ranging from 18 to 63 years. Among them, 72 respondents were born before 1989, and 194 were born after the transformation. The sample predominantly comprised females, constituting 67.3%. Most respondents either completed or were about to complete their bachelor’s degree (38.3%) and had spent their whole professional career in Poland (78.5%). Moreover, a significant portion of the respondents identified themselves as Christians (57.9%), while a notable proportion identified as non-religious, agnostic, or atheist (39.8%). Geographically, 129 respondents were born and raised in Poland A, and 137 in Poland B (with 44 from Warsaw). As Poland A, we counted the regions historically occupied by the Prussian Empire (voivodships: zachodnio-pomorskie, pomorskie, warminsko-mazurskie, kujawsko-pomorskie, wielkopolskie, lubuskie, dolnoslaskie, opolskie, slaskie, lodzkie), and as Poland B the regions historically occupied by the Russian and Austrian Empires (mazowieckie, podlaskie, lubelskie, swietokrzyskie, malopolskie, podkarpackie). Table S2 (see Supplement) shows the structure of the Polish sample across selected demographic characteristics.

Table S3 (see Supplement) shows a negative correlation between age and Long-Term Orientation (r = −0.21; p ≤ .01) and a positive correlation between being a female and Uncertainty Avoidance (r = 0.21; p ≤ .001).

Results and Discussion

Tables S4 and S5 (see Supplement) present the MANOVA results for the subsamples of Poland A and Poland B, using Hofstede’s Value Survey Module 2008 (VSM08) uncentered means of cultural values and Leader Behavior description Questionnaire (LBDQXII), respectively. Surprisingly, our analysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences between Poland A and B, prompting a reassessment of our assumption about regional classification. It is noteworthy that, upon excluding the capital city of Warsaw, technically located in the Poland B region but a genuinely cosmopolitan city, the differences between the two historical regions became significant in terms of Power Distance and Long-Term Orientation. These results are consistent with the cultural differences between the Russian and Prussian Empires, empirically confirming the historical roots of this regional division (Gajewski & Tchorek, 2017). Nevertheless, these results should be interpreted cautiously as we did not a priori hypothesize the effect of Warsaw and did not consider similar effects of other big cities. Furthermore, no significant differences were found between Poland A and Poland B in terms of preferences for explicit leader behavior. Consequently, both Hypotheses 1a and 1b were rejected.

Tables S6 and S7 (see Supplement) show the correlations between Hofstede’s VSM08 Cultural Value Dimensions and the LBDQXII Preferred Leader Behavior Dimensions for Poland A and Poland B, respectively. Notably, we identified significant differences in the correlations between Masculinity and preferred leader behaviors in Poland A and Poland B. Similar patterns were observed for Monumentalism. These findings provide empirical confirmation of earlier suggestions that cultural dimensions are intertwined with managerial and entrepreneurial behaviors (Koźminski, 2008). As a result, Hypothesis 1c was partially accepted.

Table S8 (see Supplement) presents the MANOVA results for the subsamples of Poles born before and after 1989, using Hofstede’s VSM08 means of cultural values. Younger Poles exhibit significantly lower levels of Power Distance and higher levels of Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation compared to their older compatriots. They show a preference for leaders who are persuasive and tolerant of freedom within their teams but are also more superior-oriented. Once again, these findings substantiate previous suggestions that Poles were characterized by high Power Dominance pre-transition, as communism led to high Power Distance in society (Koźminski, 2008).

Table S9 (see Supplement) shows the differences between the two subsamples for Preferred Leader Behavior Dimensions means. Tables S10 and S11 illustrate correlations among Hofstede’s VSM08 Cultural Value Dimensions and the LBDQXII Preferred Leader Behavior Dimensions for Poles born after 1989 and before 1989, respectively. The results revealed significant differences in the correlations of Masculinity and Long-Term Orientation, thereby supporting Hypotheses 2a–c. These findings consistently affirm prior assumptions linking post-transition cultural change with management and entrepreneurial behavior (Koźminski, 2008; Osowska, 2016).

Conclusion

Our findings reveal significant cross-generational differences among Poles born and raised before and after the political and economic transformation. These results are consistent with previous research on Polish students (Krzykała-Schaefer, 2011) and broader global trends reported by Beugelsdijk et al. (2015). Testing the cultural effects of the historical partition of Poland yielded mixed results: while there might be some effect, the overall results are skewed by the capital city of Warsaw. However, a notable limitation lies in our data collection method, preventing a precise assessment of the contribution of the cultural shift versus the potential intergenerational convergence.

The relatively small sample size further complicates broad generalization, although our statistical analysis provides partial support for our hypotheses. To advance the generalizability and deepen the exploration of cross-generational differences and cultural effects, future research should prioritize expanding the participant pool to a more diverse and extensive sample, encompassing various demographic factors, socio-economic backgrounds, and geographic locations within Poland.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Where West Meets East: Culture and Preferred Leader Behavior in Poland A and Poland B

Supplemental Material for Where West Meets East: Culture and Preferred Leader Behavior in Poland A and Poland B in Mike Szymanski, and Michał Wilczewski in Journal of Applied Gerontology

Footnotes

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.

ORCID iD

Mike Szymanski

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Mike Szymanski (Ph.D.) is an Associate Professor of Business Administration at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. He holds a Ph.D. in International Management and Organizations, completed at the Gustavson School of Business, the University of Victoria (Canada). His research has been published in numerous international outlets (International Business Review, European Journal of International Management, Thunderbird International Business Review, Critical Perspectives on International Business) and presented at major conferences (Academy of Management, Academy of International Business, Strategic Management Society). Mike is a Senior Editor at the European Journal of International Management.

Michał Wilczewski (PhD.) is a University Professor at the University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw, Poland. His research interests encompass language, communication, and the experiences of business expats, international students, and missionaries. He has led two research grants, one at Copenhagen Business School (2016–2017), which focused on the experiences of expats in China, and another at the University of Bologna (2020–2021), exploring the experiences of international students. His work has been published in Higher Education, Culture & Psychology, Theory & Psychology, Multilingua, Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, Journal of Global Mobility, and Journal of Strategic Marketing, among others. He has received the 2017 EFMD and CARLSBERG Foundation Best Paper Award from the Research Group on Management & Language (GEM&L), The 2022 Global Forum Best Paper Award from the Academy of Management, and The 2022 Polish Prime Minister’s Prize for his book “Intercultural Experience in Narrative: Expatriate stories from a multicultural workplace” (2019, John Benjamins).

References

Bajcar

Babiak

(2015). Style kierowania polskich menedżerów-uwarunkowania organizacyjne. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie/Politechnika Śląska, 79, 21–40.

Beugelsdijk

Maseland

Van Hoorn

(2015). Are scores on Hofstede’s dimensions of national culture stable over time? A cohort analysis. Global Strategy Journal, 5(3), 223–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/gsj.1098

Bluhm

Martens

Trappmann

(2013). Business leaders and new varieties of capitalism in post-communist Europe. Routledge.

Costigan

R. D.

Insinga

R. C.

Berman

J. J.

Kranas

Kureshov

V. A.

(2011). Revisiting the relationship of supervisor trust and CEO trust to turnover intentions: A three-country comparative study. Journal of World Business, 46(1), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2010.05.019

Eisenberg

Pieczonka

Eisenring

Mironski

(2015). Poland, a workforce in transition: Exploring leadership styles and effectiveness of Polish vs. Western expatriate managers. Journal for East European Management Studies, 20(4), 435–451. https://doi.org/10.5771/0949-6181-2015-4-435, https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/24573641

Gajewski

Tchorek

(2017). What drives export performance of firms in Eastern and Western Poland? European Planning Studies, 25(12), 2250–2271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1355890

Gorbaniuk

Wilczewski

Ivanova

Bevz

Gorbaniuk

(2021). The measurement, structure, and cross-cultural equivalence of political party perception. Evidence from Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine. Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski, 12(1), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.31648/pw.6471

Hofstede

(1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage.

Hofstede

& G. J.

Minkov

(2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

10.

House

R. J.

Hanges

P. J.

Javidan

Dorfman

P. W.

Gupta

(Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage.

11.

Koźminski

A. K.

(2008). Anatomy of systemic change Polish management in transition. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 41(3), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POSTCOMSTUD.2008.06.006

12.

Koźminski

A. K.

(2013). Ograniczone przywództwo. Studium empiryczne. Warszawa: Poltext.

13.

Krzykała-Schaefer

(2011). Preferred leadership styles and attributes of future managers. Results of GLOBE student research project in Poland. Journal of Intercultural Management, 3(1), 81–97.

14.

Mączyński

Sułkowski

Ł.

(2017). A seven nations study of leadership attributes. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 48(2), 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1515/ppb-2017-0035

15.

Osowska

(2016). The development of entrepreneurial culture in a transition economy: An empirical model discussion. In Bögenhold

Bonnet

Dejardin

Garcia Pe rez de Lema

(Eds.), Contemporary entrepreneurship (pp. 259–273). Springer.

16.

Pisarek

(2011). The relationship between official and minority languages in Poland. In Stickel

(Ed.), National, regional and minority languages in Europe (pp. 117–122). Peter Lang.

17.

Rosiński

(2020, July 14). Wyniki wyborów 2020. Zachód wskazał na Rafała Trzaskowskiego, wschód wybrał Andrzeja Dudę [’Election results 2020. The West pointed to Rafał Trzaskowski, the East chose Andrzej Duda’]. Money.Pl. https://www.money.pl/gospodarka/wyniki-wyborow-2020-zachod-wskazal-na-rafala-trzaskowskiego-wschod-wybral-andrzeja-dude-6531988168063105a.html

18.

Schwartz

(2006). A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology, 5(2-3), 137–182. https://doi.org/10.1163/156913306778667357

19.

Steinmann

Pugnetti

(2021). Leading in Switzerland and Poland: A case study of leadership practices in financial services. International Journal of Financial Studies, 9(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs9010006

20.

Strużyna

Marzec

Bozionelos

(2021). Competency management in bureaucratic organizations: Evidence from the Polish public administration. European Management Review, 18(2), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/emre.12437

21.

Szafraniec

(2013). Looking for a specificity of rural youth. The Polish case. Eastern European Countryside, 19(2013), 29–56. https://doi.org/10.2478/EEC-2013-0003

22.

Szymanski

(2023). The state of Polish Elite Quality in 2022 – time of consolidation or stagnation? In Casas

Cozzi

(Eds.), Elite quality report 2023: Country scores and global rankings (p. 84). Seismo. https://doi.org/10.33058/seismo.30882.8622

23.

Trompenaars

Hampden-Turner

(1997). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. Nicholas Brealey.

24.

Wilczewski

(2019). Intercultural experience in narrative. John Benjamins.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.33 MB