<p>Much is assumed about the professionalisation of managers, but the subject has been little studied within the social sciences. Did it take place and if so, how did it happen? Previous studies suggest that the managers in Swedish industries were professionalised after the Second World War, without, however, thoroughly investigating this claim. To be able to study the professionalisation process of managers, this thesis argues that it is necessary to look at both the ideals and the practice of management. This thesis constructs two different management ideals: the patriarchal ideal and the professional ideal, which are then joined together in a model. The model is then used to interpret the management behaviour of Swedish managers in 1910-1945.</p><p>The results of this thesis show that the professionalisation process of managers was not a strict process forward. The ideals were relatively easy to change from a patriarchal ideal to a professional ideal. But the practice of management could be patriarchal as well as professional, depending on the situation and the context. One explanation for this is that the managers could not always live up to the professional ideal. Instead they reverted to the system of personal trust and its loyalties in line with the patriarchal ideal. Therefore the professionalisation process of managers was not as successful as it might have been.</p>

Much is assumed about the professionalisation of managers, but the subject has been little studied within the social sciences. Did it take place and if so, how did it happen? Previous studies suggest that the managers in Swedish industries were professionalised after the Second World War, without, however, thoroughly investigating this claim. To be able to study the professionalisation process of managers, this thesis argues that it is necessary to look at both the ideals and the practice of management. This thesis constructs two different management ideals: the patriarchal ideal and the professional ideal, which are then joined together in a model. The model is then used to interpret the management behaviour of Swedish managers in 1910-1945. The results of this thesis show that the professionalisation process of managers was not a strict process forward. The ideals were relatively easy to change from a patriarchal ideal to a professional ideal. But the practice of management could be patriarchal as well as professional, depending on the situation and the context. One explanation for this is that the managers could not always live up to the professional ideal. Instead they reverted to the system of personal trust and its loyalties in line with the patriarchal ideal. Therefore the professionalisation process of managers was not as successful as it might have been.

This thesis investigates leadership in Swedish business during the period of 1900-1950. The main aim is to explore the relationship between entrepreneurship and leadership and how the leader uses his social competence, both inside and outside the company, to enhance economic and organisational change. The study focuses on two main characters: Axel Ax:son Johnson (1876-1958), manager and owner of Johnsonkoncernen (The Johnson group), and J. Sigfrid Edström (1870-1964), professional manager of ASEA (today ABB). They represented Swedish capitalism in its golden years. The study uses archives previously never opened to researchers. To understand how and why leadership have changed during the 20th century, the theoretical framework is based on the concepts of entrepreneurship, paternalism, network and charisma. Leadership involves communication. The corporate leader in the early 20th century had to build networks both of stronger and looser types, each of these two types with a different aim, but with the ambition to care for the company’s best interest. Johnson and Edström used their personality to attain more power inside the company as well as to attract attention from the outside. This thesis shows that if the leaders took advantage of their social communication skills they could create new combinations, which could benefit their companies. Therefore, the leader had to bring out the best in his co-workers, in order to attract new ideas, competence and entrepreneurial skills around him. The leader did not only involve himself in networks with fellow industrialists, but also with Social Democrats and journalists. Johnson and Edström had to be leaders not only within the company but also in the surrounding society. They involved themselves in many other areas; in the local community and as opinion builders. The patriarchal strategies still proved fruitful during the period. Yet, modern strategies connected to large organizations and bureaucratic methods were also introduced. It was hard for the employees to accept these changes. If the companies would expand, the leader could attract admirers and followers who fully accepted the leadership and strategies. The leader had to become an entrepreneur with a will to encourage others.