How do the employees of enterprises perceive the management paradigm?

Sailing on the deep waves of the ocean of business, entrepreneurs search for a luminous beacon that shows the way and sets the right direction so that the ship does not crash on the rocks but safely reaches its destination. This is how the essence of a paradigm in management sciences can be poetically expressed. Blanchard [2007, p. 142] stated: “Today, the business environment is characterized by an increasingly high level of competitiveness, and the problems that must be faced in it are increasingly complex.” The turbulence of the environment forces them to permanently ask questions about the foundations that ground the “economic organism.” It is worth noting that the perspective of the representatives of economic entities is adopted – the employees of enterprises/organizations. The reference point is the interpretation of guidelines that, based on their assumption, represent the components of management paradigms.

The aim of this study is to show how the employees of enterprises perceive the management paradigm using the example of Penc’s approach, in relation to its individual aspects/components.

This study presents various approaches to management paradigms. It also presents the results of the author’s own empirical research, which is undoubtedly an interesting approach from the practical side, for those who are not creators of the theory but function in economic reality, in the business sphere. They constitute a fragment of research carried out in relation to broader, more comprehensive issues in the field of enterprise management. The research was conducted using a survey questionnaire. This study uses empirical research conducted in the period from April to September 2023 on a group of 200 people employed in the Lubuskie voivodeship.

A leading figure in the field of management, Drucker [2010, p. 11] stated that: “Basic assumptions about reality are paradigms of social sciences, including management science.” In turn, Kuhn [2001, p. 10] defined a paradigm as “universally recognized scientific achievements that at a certain time provide the community of scientists with model problems and solutions.” According to Sułkowski [2012, p. 104]: “A paradigm means a set of concepts and theories that are universally accepted by the scientific community of specialists in a given field.” Referring to the concept of management paradigms, he believes that they constitute: “a set of cognitive assumptions concerning the method of practicing a given scientific discipline shared by the majority of representatives of a given science or at least by a significant group of researchers forming a scientific school” [Sułkowski, 2012, p. 96].

Kostera [1996, p. 33–34], referring to the concepts of G. Burrell and G. Morgan, characterized the main paradigms in social sciences, depending on the social orientation and assumptions about the role of science. According to her, it is possible to distinguish the following main paradigms: functionalist, interpretative, radical structuralism, and radical humanism. The first of them assumes that society is a concrete and real entity. Social balance is, among other things, the result of self-regulation of macrosystems, which concern social phenomena. The second is based on the instability and relativity of social reality. The perception of the world of social life takes place from the perspective of participants in this world, including researchers. The third “assumes the existence of a specific (material) social reality that can be studied and described.” “The researcher describes objectively existing mechanisms (…) He also looks for ways to free oneself from the domination of privileged groups, ways possible within the framework of the existence of social and historical mechanisms.” The fourth is oriented toward the approach that society is not a specific entity. According to the researcher, there should be an effort “to unmask the false traps of collective consciousness.”

Sułkowski [2012, p. 121], while characterizing management paradigms, distinguished, among others, the following key theoretical threads:

• In the functional–systemic paradigm, these are: strategy, structure, management functions, and organizational theories.

• In the interpretative–symbolic paradigm – language, organizational culture, and organizational behavior.

• In the critical trend in management – among others, the human in the organization and managerialism ideology.

• In postmodernism in management – organizational textualism (e.g., archetypes and metaphors) and moral problems of managerialism.

Another approach to the issue of the new management paradigm in terms of the “7 Fs” is the concept of Penc [2010, p. 86], which is based on: focus (concentration of forces and resources), first (being first), fast (being quick, smart), flexibility (easiness of adaptation), friendly (acting friendly to people and the environment), fairness (righteousness and nobility in action), and feasibility (feasibility of tasks, possibility of carrying out operations).

In addition to presenting various approaches to the management paradigm, this study also presents the results of the author’s own empirical research. They are a fragment of research carried out in relation to broader issues in the field of enterprise management. The participants were informed that the study was anonymous and that the results obtained would be used only for scientific purposes. It was carried out using a survey questionnaire. The respondents answered: seven closed-ended single-choice questions, which were directly related to the subject matter adopted in this study. They were worded as follows:

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise/organization has a developed business concept that it manages efficiently; the company’s goals are achieved through distinctive capabilities.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise/organization is guided by the motto ‘to be the first in changes and responses to environmental challenges’, it quickly introduces innovations and verifies them on the market.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise/organization quickly adapts structures, procedures, people, and relationships to the environment; quickly implements changes by using all sources of innovative ideas, emphasizes rapid learning; seeks opportunities to exceed customer expectations.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise/organization adopts a flexible approach to thinking and acting, and adapts company goals to the needs of the changing environment. The enterprise organizes activities around its strongest points.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise/organization is socially responsible – it acts for the benefit of the environment. Delegating authority is important, a focus on people is required, care for the protection of their jobs and the improvement of their working conditions. The employees should draw multifaceted benefits from the company’s success.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise demonstrates honest, fair treatment of employees, business partners, stakeholders and competitors. The company builds its image based on trust and respect. It demonstrates an authentic identity (corporate identity) and a drive to beat the competition with customer value.”

• Please indicate whether the following statement accurately describes the behavior of the enterprise/organization you work for. “The enterprise sees the strategy being constructed together with employees and the development of common development concepts. The employees also participate in decision-making. The company strives to strengthen partnership relations.”

The survey used a Likert scale. Respondents could choose one of five answers: yes, rather yes, difficult to say, rather no, and no.

The selection of the research sample was not probabilistic, but care was taken to ensure a large diversity of respondents, both in terms of the characteristics of the studied business entities and the respondents themselves. The study used empirical research conducted on a group of 200 people employed in the Lubuskie voivodeship in the period from April to September 2023. The vast majority of those employed are the employees of enterprises. The characteristics of the studied population have been shown in Table 1.

In terms of a job position, a greater number of responses concerned the employees employed in executive positions (73.5%), while 28.5% were people working in managerial positions. Notably, 65.5% of respondents perform mental work and 54.5% physical work. It should also be added that some people perform both types of work.

The surveyed employees were employed in business entities who did the different geographical scopes – some entities were active in more than one market. The largest group were those that had existed for over 20 years. The majority of enterprises were private.

Due to the fact that in the approach to the new management paradigm according to Penc [2010, p. 86], there are seven components/areas, an analysis of the respondents’ opinions on each of them was carried out separately. It is worth adding that for the purposes of the conducted research, in order to maintain a high level of understanding of the elements describing this paradigm, in some cases, a shortened version was used, which, however, does not cause the loss of the essence and meaning of the message, in accordance, I believe, with the intention of its author. The respondents’ answers were presented in the attached figures. The first one focuses on the distinctive capabilities. The respondents’ opinions are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Respondents’ opinions on the Penc’s paradigm element focusing on developing a business concept that is efficiently managed by the enterprise and goals achieved through distinctive capabilities.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

Based on the conducted research and the obtained results, it should be stated that 68.5% of the respondents perceive their workplace as an entity that uses their distinctive capabilities. A total of 23.0% of the respondents have no opinion on this matter, and 8.5% chose the answer “rather not” or “no.”

Table 2 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization in which the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate. In the case of people employed in executive positions, 64.4% of the respondents chose such answers. On the contrary, almost 80% of employees in managerial positions chose the answer rather yes or yes. A negative answer was given by 8.2% of respondents in executive positions and almost 9.0% of employees in managerial positions.

Distinctive capabilities form the basis for shaping the sources of competitiveness of enterprises, among which the most important ones can include according to de Wit and Meyer [2007, p. 156]: price, functional features of the product offer, combining products, quality, availability, image, and relationships with the customer.

The second component of the paradigm in question focuses on organizational changes and rapid innovations. The opinions of the respondents are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Respondents’ opinions on the element of the Penc’s paradigm focusing on introducing changes and innovations.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

Based on the conducted research and the obtained results, it should be stated that 61.5% of the respondents believe that the enterprise recognizes the need to introduce changes and is focused on innovations. A total of 23.5% of the respondents chose the answer “difficult to say.” Notably, 15.0% of the respondents chose a negative answer in the form of “rather not” or “no.”

Table 3 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the approach from the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that in relation to the approach in percentage terms, positive answers dominate. In the case of people employed in executive positions, 59.6% of the respondents selected the answers rather yes or yes, as well as almost 66.6% of employees in managerial positions. A negative answer was given by 15.7% of respondents in executive positions, including rather not by 11.6% and not by 4.1% and the answer rather not by 12.3% of employees in managerial positions.

It is worth adding that the propensity of enterprises to undertake activities in the area of innovation is determined by various factors. These include, among the others: organizational culture and climate.

The third component of the discussed paradigm found its reflection in the research results, which are illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Respondents’ opinions on the element of the Penc’s paradigm focused on the ability of the enterprise to adapt to the environment, among others, by using the rapid learning of the organization.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

Based on the conducted research and the obtained results, it should be stated that 66.5% of the respondents believe that the enterprise demonstrates the ability to adapt to the environment, is guided by the support of rapid learning, is oriented toward using sources of innovative ideas, and exceeds the expectations of the customer. A total of 20.0% of the respondents chose the answer “difficult to say.” Notably, 13.5% of the respondents decided to answer “rather not” or “no.”

Table 4 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate (rather yes or yes). In the case of people employed in executive positions, this was 65.1% of the respondents and 70.2% of employees in managerial positions. A negative answer was given by 13.7% of employees in executive positions and 12.3% of employees in managerial positions.

Modern organizations are the organizations that are constantly learning, and knowledge capital is one of the most valuable assets that the company has. In today’s world, enterprises that want to be recognized as leaders in their field should react quickly to what is happening in the environment and quickly introduce changes. This is confirmed by Drucker [2010, p. 49] who stated that: “(…) both business and any other form of organization must be oriented toward change today, it must be one of the norms of their activities.” This is associated with the ability to think and act proactively. Therefore, it is necessary to properly shape managerial competences. In the hierarchical approach to the model of these competences among various groups proposed by Viitala [2005, p. 439], we can find, among the others, social and knowledge management.

The fourth component of the discussed paradigm focuses on flexibility, which according to Penc should be understood as an organizational value. The respondents expressed their opinions as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Respondents’ opinions on the element of the Penc’s paradigm focused on the flexibility of thinking and acting in the enterprise.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

As results from the conducted research, 69.5% of respondents are of the opinion that the enterprise is guided by a flexible approach in its functioning. A total of 18.5% of respondents chose the answer “difficult to say.” Notably, 12.0% of respondents indicated a negative answer in the form of “rather not” or “no.”

Table 5 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate. This was the decision of 67.8% of people employed in executive positions and 75.4% of employees in managerial positions. A negative answer was given by 12.3% of employees in executive positions and 10.6% of employees in managerial positions.

According to Osbert-Pociecha [2011, p. 151], the flexibility of an enterprise is its “ability to cope with uncertainty,” which is associated with “the ability to respond to predictable and unpredictable changes.”

The fifth component of the discussed paradigm focuses on the social responsibility of the enterprise in a broad sense and the focus on people and their well-being in the workplace. The opinions of the respondents are presented in Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Respondents’ opinions on the Penc’s paradigm element focused on employee well-being and corporate social responsibility.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

As it results from the conducted research, 67.5% of respondents positively described the enterprise’s position in this respect. A total of 22.0% of the respondents chose the answer “difficult to say.” Notably, 10.5% of the respondents chose a negative answer in the form of “rather not” or “no.”

Table 6 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate. This was the decision of 64.4% of people employed in executive positions and 77.2% of employees in managerial positions.

A negative answer was given by 12.3% of employees in executive positions and 5.3% of employees in managerial positions.

An essential element of this component of the paradigm is employee well-being. According to Jaworek [2021, p. 36], it should be referred to “two mutually intertwining areas – physical and mental health, closely related to work, and satisfaction and contentment with its performance.”

According to [Staszkiewicz et al., 2023, p. 170], the group of practices aimed at improving employee well-being can include, for example: offering programs supporting employees’ mental health or digital training, taking care of the working atmosphere, and shaping the organizational culture.

Another element emphasized in this component of the paradigm is corporate social responsibility. One of the definitions of this concept is presented by Trocki [2020, p. 473], who stated that: it means “an integrated approach to management, including responsibility for the overall functioning of the company, its relations with the environment and key stakeholders, as well as impact on the environment, both external and internal.”

The sixth component of the paradigm is focused on building the company’s image both toward employees and its stakeholders as well as competitors. The creator of this approach to the new management paradigm also emphasizes identity (corporate identity). The opinions of respondents are shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Respondents’ opinion on the element of the Penc’s paradigm focused on the aspect of corporate identity in a broader context.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

Based on the analysis of the conducted research, it should be stated that 69.5% of the respondents selected an affirmative answer – “yes” or “rather yes.” A total of 20.5% of the respondents have no opinion on this matter. Notably, 10.0% of the respondents selected the answer “rather no” or “no.”

Table 7 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate. This was the decision of 67.8% of people employed in executive positions and 75.5% of employees in managerial positions. A negative answer was given by 11.7% of employees in executive positions and 5.2% of employees in managerial positions.

Balmer [2017, p. 1478] reported that: “Typically, key corporate identity traits encompass (but are most certainly no limited to): (1) an institution’s organizational type, (2) its purpose(s), (3) activities, (4) ethos and values, (5) market position, (6) markets and customers served, (7) product and service quality, (8) management and employee behaviors, (9) geographic scope, etc.”

The last component of the paradigm is focused on cocreating the company’s strategy with employees, participation in management. The respondents’ opinions are presented in Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Respondents’ opinions on the element of the Penc’s paradigm focused on cocreating the enterprise’s strategy with employees and their participation in decision-making.

Source: own study based on empirical research.

As it results from the conducted empirical research, 55.5% of the respondents had a positive attitude to the issues raised in this area. A total of 21.5% of the employees have no opinion. Notably, 23.0% of the respondents chose the answer “rather not” or “no.”

Table 8 shows how the surveyed respondents perceive the implementation of assumptions concerning the discussed area of paradigms, divided into persons employed in executive and managerial positions.

Taking into account the perspective of the type of job position in the enterprise/organization where the respondents are employed, it should be stated that positive answers dominate. This was the decision of 53.4% of people employed in executive positions and 59.6% of employees in managerial positions. A negative answer was given by 22.6% of executive positions and slightly more by 22.8% of employees in managerial positions.

Cocreating strategy with employees is a manifestation of the employee participation and indicates their subjective treatment by management. Partnership relationships with employees and participation are the two main links in the given component of the discussed paradigm.

As a result of the conducted empirical research, it was found that the employees of the surveyed enterprises in the vast majority noticed that the theoretical premises of the analyzed paradigm find their reference in practice. Due to the fact that the presented study is unique and one of a kind, it is not possible to find a direct reference to the empirical research conducted in this way, which was based on the management paradigm by Penc [2010]. It can be a starting point for further considerations constituting a bridge between theory and practice.

The considerations undertaken in this study are focused, among other things, on issues concerning the problem of learning organizations and knowledge management. These are aspects important not only from the point of view of specific economic entities but also on a macroscale because quoting after Próchniak and Witkowski, who, as a result of very thorough research, believe that [2016, p. 70]: “(…) the future belongs to knowledge-based economies. Already in the medium term, faster economic growth is achieved by economies that allocate greater resources to research and development. This is consistent with many theoretical and empirical approaches, including endogenous models of economic growth, which imply that technical progress as a product of the R&D sector is of significant importance in accelerating economic growth.”

A contribution to the discussion may be made by the work of Motyka [2018], who in his publication also addresses the very important issue of employee engagement and its impact on the results of an organization, which concerns the aspects of business entity management discussed in this publication in the context of strategy and innovation.

Śliwicki et al. [2024] explored job satisfaction determinants among employees, offering insights that align with the study’s findings on employee perceptions of flexibility and corporate social responsibility.

Kociemska et al. [2024] examined public-private partnerships, providing a broader context for the role of management paradigms in enhancing organizational responsibility.

An interesting opinion in the context of the considerations undertaken is the one given by Vermaelen [2011, p. 28]: “Instead of using the term ‘social responsibility’ – which implies that firms without a CSR program are irresponsible – why not talk about ‘social investment vehicles’? That would signal that the company was giving shareholders a choice, rather than imposing an obligation they could not reject without appearing uncaring and greedy.”

The research results may provide valuable guidance for managers in terms of approximating their level of perception in relation to identification with the work environment. Taking into account the individual elements/areas of Penc’s paradigm, it should be stated that:

• In the group of employees in executive positions, the largest group of respondents stated that the workplace is oriented toward flexibility of thinking and action (4th element/area of the paradigm) and (with the same number of respondents indicating) focused on the aspect of corporate identity in a broader context.

• The element/area of the paradigm that received the least favorable responses in both groups of surveyed employees was the last one, focused on cocreating the enterprise’s strategy with employees and their participation in decision-making. It is worth adding that in this case the most negative opinions were collected.

• Another element/area of the paradigm that did not receive a sufficiently satisfactory reflection in the opinion of respondents – executive employees was the one focused on introducing changes and innovations.

• In the group of employees in managerial positions, the first element/area of the paradigm was perceived best, focused on developing a business concept that is efficiently managed by the enterprise and on goals achieved using distinctive capabilities.

• Moreover, it is worth adding that some respondents chose the answer “difficult to say” for each of the elements/areas of the paradigm, which can be explained, among other things, by the fact that their period of employment was less than 1 year.

Based on the empirical research conducted, the following postulates can be formulated for management staff:

• There is a need to systematically analyze the perception of the workplace by executive employees in the context of cocreating the enterprise strategy and their participation in decision-making.

• The enterprise/organization should attach greater importance to taking actions oriented toward the motto “being the first in changes and responding to environmental challenges,” quickly introducing innovations and verifying them on the market.

• Taking active steps together with executive employees to increase adaptability in the organization, also by creating a friendly organizational climate and organizational culture oriented toward cooperation of all employees of the enterprise for the common good.

Learning and systematically obtaining information on how the “company image is drawn” in the opinion of employees may influence the awareness of the role of the company’s/organization’s employees in shaping its competitive advantage, on which, among other things, the discussed management paradigm is based.

“Despite numerous works, management sciences are still looking for an interdisciplinary paradigm that would constitute a basis for constructing theoretical models, empirical research strategies and application schemes, a holistic paradigm that encompasses the human being in an integral way, as both the subject and the object of management processes” [Grochmal, 2016, p. 86]. An attempt to find such a paradigm may be the approach presented by Penc.