This study sets out to test the assumption that concepts of leadership differ as a function of cultural differences in Europe and to identify dimensions which describe differences in leadership concepts across European countries. Middle‐level managers (N = 6052) from 22 European countries rated 112 questionnaire items containing descriptions of leadership traits and behaviours. For each attribute respondents rated how well it fits their concept of an outstanding business leader. The findings support the assumption that leadership concepts are culturally endorsed. Specifically, clusters of European countries which share similar cultural values according to prior cross‐cultural research (Ronen & Shenkar, 1985), also share similar leadership concepts. The leadership prototypicality dimensions found are highly correlated with cultural dimensions reported in a comprehensive cross‐cultural study of contemporary Europe (Smith, Dugan, & Trompenaars, 1996). The ordering of countries on the leadership dimensions is considered a useful tool with which to model differences between leadership concepts of different cultural origin in Europe. Practical implications for cross‐cultural management, both in European and non‐European settings, are discussed.
In order for students to effectively transfer oral communication skills from academic to professional settings, they must have high oral communication self-efficacy. We significantly increased oral communication self-efficacy in a sample of 97 undergraduate business majors by incorporating enactive mastery, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and physiological arousal into a business communication course. Self-efficacy was positively and significantly correlated with course performance, and increases in self-efficacy were positively and significantly correlated with changes in overall grade point average. By targeting self-efficacy, instructors can improve students’ oral communication skills and help them transfer these skills from academic to professional settings.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore how consumers view sponsorship tattoos. This study specifically addresses three research questions: first, how consumers view the idea of sponsorship tattooing; second, how the brand of the tattoo alters acceptance of the tattoo; and third, how the placement on the body of the athlete affects acceptance of the tattoo.
Design/methodology/approach
To address these research questions, focus groups were conducted.
Findings
Findings highlighted three important themes related to tattoos, sponsorships and brand perceptions: meaning of the tattoo itself, meaning related to the brand and the tattoo and meaning related to the tattoo and athlete.
Practical implications
For practitioners, this research highlights the complexity between consumers’ interaction with brands through sponsorship tattoos, which is a complicated, multi-dimensional process during which meaning can be assigned to multiple facets of the sponsorship relationship.
Originality/value
For scholars, this research offers a glimpse into an emerging trend that ties together the multi-billion dollar sports and tattoo industries. In sum, this research identifies ways in which consumers interpret meaning related to the tattoo itself, the brand and the athlete based on placement, sport and brand perceptions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.