<p>With 25 countries being members of the European Union, travelling and working in other countries has become significantly easier. But what happens when one culture meets another one in a work situation? More specifically, what happens when French and Swedish cultures meet? Would a Swedish manager lead his team in the same way as a French one would?</p><p>My question is: What is management philosophy like in Sweden and France? Do the two philosophies resemble? And if not, in what ways do they differ?</p><p>The purpose of this essay is to find out, by looking at the material used at management courses, what the Swedish management philosophy really is. And then look at whether there are any similarities between this philosophy and the French one. The idea is to examine how management is being taught in both countries, by looking at what management litterature is used at some of the highest ranked management schools in Sweden and France.</p><p>There have been numerous ethnological studies concerning nationality and cultural behaviour, one of the most important ones is the study done by Hofstede. According to him, Sweden and France should be on opposite ends of his scale concerning power distance and uncertainty avoidance. My essay is therefore focused on these two phenomenon, and the way they are described in management literature used in Sweden and France. With Hofstedes studies in mind, my hypothesis was that I would encounter big differences between the management literatures in the two countries.</p><p>My results imply that there are few differences between French and Swedish literature, concerning power distance and uncertainty avoidance. For instance, both countries literature brings up delegation and flat organisations, pointing out their importance in order to have a well functioning team. The litterature is also encouraging a great level of independence and good communication with in the team.</p>

With 25 countries being members of the European Union, travelling and working in other countries has become significantly easier. But what happens when one culture meets another one in a work situation? More specifically, what happens when French and Swedish cultures meet? Would a Swedish manager lead his team in the same way as a French one would? My question is: What is management philosophy like in Sweden and France? Do the two philosophies resemble? And if not, in what ways do they differ? The purpose of this essay is to find out, by looking at the material used at management courses, what the Swedish management philosophy really is. And then look at whether there are any similarities between this philosophy and the French one. The idea is to examine how management is being taught in both countries, by looking at what management litterature is used at some of the highest ranked management schools in Sweden and France. There have been numerous ethnological studies concerning nationality and cultural behaviour, one of the most important ones is the study done by Hofstede. According to him, Sweden and France should be on opposite ends of his scale concerning power distance and uncertainty avoidance. My essay is therefore focused on these two phenomenon, and the way they are described in management literature used in Sweden and France. With Hofstedes studies in mind, my hypothesis was that I would encounter big differences between the management literatures in the two countries. My results imply that there are few differences between French and Swedish literature, concerning power distance and uncertainty avoidance. For instance, both countries literature brings up delegation and flat organisations, pointing out their importance in order to have a well functioning team. The litterature is also encouraging a great level of independence and good communication with in the team.

Syftet med vår uppsats är att utveckla en förståelse för vilka förutsättningar som råder för innovation och utveckling i Försvarsmakten samt vad som kan hindra respektive främja dessa och hur dessa förutsättningar förhåller sig till varandra.Vi har gjort detta genom en kvalitativ studie där vi intervjuat Försvarsmaktens utvecklingschefer. Efter en analys, med klassisk grundad teori som metod, av våra intervjuer växte en modell fram. Modellen heter Gränsöverskridande transformering. Den syftar just på det faktum att en transformering sker och är inledd. Att Försvarsmakten som ett resultat av den säkerhetspolitiska utvecklingen och med legitim bas i demokratiskt fattade beslut åter är i en transformering, ur ett minimalistiskt insatt insatsförsvar med professionella soldater och sjömän till att återigen utgöra ett folkligt förankrat värnpliktsbaserat försvar av den territoriella integriteten. Det sker likt det som skedde efter murens fall och som då skapade ett nytt befälssystem och pausade värnplikten. Lika nytt och omvälvande igen. Nationellt fokus och tillväxt i både volym och geografisk förekomst såväl som förmågor och personalkategorier. Detta är en transformering som i grunden påverkar alla delar av Försvarsmakten och alla dess processer, men också samhället i stort och de orter där verksamhet nu återigen blir vardag. Vi upptäcker genom modellen att utveckling som begrepp är centralt och att innovation inte används i någon större omfattning, men att utveckling ändå inte varit prioriterat under åren av minimalistiskt insatsförsvar.  Det är därför gränsöverskridande att lämna en kultur och tidsepok och gå in i en annan. Att byta sätten vi leder och leds på i vardagen, att se utveckling och kreativitet som något som får förekomma och måste få kosta, både i tid och pengar. Det är ett gränsöverskridande och en transformering som dessutom ska ske i en kontext där samhället förändrats. Teknikutvecklingen leds av civila intressen och Försvarsmakten har att finna sin plats i den globala världen av leverantörer och innovationer inom snart alla områden. Det är gränsöverskridande i att Försvarsmakten återigen bryter ny mark, att Försvarsmakten måste samarbeta med omvärlden för att kunna fullfölja och få effekt av den nya inriktning som gäller i och med tagna beslut. Här får Försvarsmaktens ledarskapsfilosofi med uppdragstaktiken och den valda ledarskapsmodellen en avgörande roll för möjligheten att genomföra en lyckad gränsöverskridande transformering. Vi drar utifrån det en sammanfattande slutsats. Att med uppdragstaktik som filosofisk och metodologisk grund för ledning i kombination med det utvecklande ledarskapet i varje ledares medvetna utövande och med tillit mellan parter så främjas goda förutsättningar för ett innovativt och utvecklande klimat. Att det krävs att innovation blir en medveten och aktiv handling och process för att kunna dra nytta av klimatet. / The purpose of this thesis is to develop an understanding about which conditions for development and innovation that is current in The Swedish Armed Forces and what can hinder or encourage these, and also how these conditions relate to each other. We have done this through a qualitative study where we have interviewed Swedish Armed Forces managers of development. After analysing the content from these interviews with Classic Grounded Theory as a method a model was created. The models name is Cross-border transformation and the aim is at the fact that a transformation is started and is ongoing. As a result of the security policy and with a legitim base in democratic decisions the Swedish Armed Forces is yet again in a transformation. From a minimalistic inset defence with employed soldiers and sailors to a democratic conscript based national defence of our territorial integrity. This is happening in the same way as it did when the wall fell, a new officers system was developed and we paused the conscription, as new and revolving yet again. Now instead the focus is again to growth in both volume, geographically as well as in capabilities and categories of personnel. This is a transformation that effects all parts of the Swedish Armed Forces and all its processes, but also the society at large and the cities where new military establishments yet again are to become part of the normal day life. We see through our model that development rather than innovation as a concept is used, but has not bin prioritised in the Swedish Armed Forces during the years of a minimalistic inset defence. It is therefore cross-border to leave a culture and an era to cross into another. To change the way we lead and are led in normal day life, to see development and creativity as something that is allowed to exist and that can cost both in time and money. It is cross-border and a transformation in addition to happen in a context where the society has changed. The technology development is led by civilian interests and the Swedish Armed Forces has to find its place in the global world of suppliers and innovations in almost all areas. It is cross-border that we yet again are breaking new ground, that we have to cooperate with the world around us to be able to carry out and get effect of the decisions of a new direction for the Swedish Armed Forces that has been made. At this point the Swedish armed forces leadership philosophy, the mission tactics and the chosen leadership model plays a decisive role for the possibility of a successful cross-border transformation. Based on this we come to a summarising conclusion that with mission tactics as a philosophical and methodological foundation for leadership, combined with developing leadership in every leaders conscious practice and with mutual trust between concerned parties will good conditions for a more innovative and developing climate be encouraged. To be able to benefit from this climate it requires that innovation becomes a conscious and active action and process.