Prague University of Economics and Business

Master’s Thesis

2023 Ify Nsoha

 Prague University of Economics and Business
Faculty of Business Administration
Masters’ field: Management

Title of the master’s thesis:

Management Myths and Realities in

Contemporary Business

Author: B.A. Ify Nsoha

Supervisor: PhDr. David Anthony Procházka, Ph.D., MBA, MSc.
 Declaration of Authenticity

I hereby declare that the master’s thesis presented herein is my own work, or
fully and specifically acknowledged wherever adapted from other sources. This
work has not been published or submitted elsewhere for the requirement of a
degree program.

Prague, 15 May, 2023

 Acknowledgement

I would like to sincerely thank my thesis supervisor, PhDr. David Anthony Procházka, Ph.D.,
MBA, MSc., for his support of the vision of my thesis, helping me gain a clear direction,
focus, and passion about the topic. The task of assembling this work was complex in different
ways, yet his support made it possible. I would like to thank my friends and family for
encouraging me, as well as each person involved in making this thesis possible. You are my
heroes, and I am incredibly grateful.

4
Management Myths and Realities in Contemporary Business

Abstract:
This diploma thesis focuses on management myths and their impact on managers in across
industries around the world. The literature review analyzes the various misperceptions from
an academic perspective, seeking to form a preliminary framework within which the
qualitative research functions. Myths and realities regarding Transformational Leadership,
Hero Management, Innovation, Ethics, and more are didactically explained in the literature
review, and then form the bedrock of the qualitative research conversations. This involves a
deep exploration of the experiences of managers from diverse backgrounds and culminates in
a discussion on the bigger implications these myths have for managers today and in the future.

Key words:
Business Myths, Managerial Ethics, Leadership, Innovation

5
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 8

1.3. Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 8

2. Literature Review ................................................................................................................... 8

2.1. The Subject of Management Myths in Business Literature ............................................ 8

2.2. Defining Management ..................................................................................................... 9

2.3. The “Hero” Manager (and “conformity leads to success”) ........................................... 10

2.4. There is one right way to manage. ................................................................................ 12

2.5. What’s New is Better .................................................................................................... 13

2.6. Ethics aren’t Essential. .................................................................................................. 15

2.7. Transformational Leadership ........................................................................................ 18

2.7.1. Arguments for Transformational Leadership ......................................................... 18

2.7.2. Arguments Against Transformational Leadership ................................................. 20

2.8. Literature Review Summary ......................................................................................... 21

3. Research Methodology ......................................................................................................... 22

3.1. Preliminary Assumptions Based on Literature Review ............................................... 22

3.2. Research Problem .......................................................................................................... 22

3.2. Research Methodology .................................................................................................. 23

4. Qualitative Research Process and Findings.......................................................................... 24

4.1. Research Process – Introduction ................................................................................... 24

4.1.2. Coding Data ............................................................................................................ 26

4.1.3. Code Book .............................................................................................................. 26

4.2. Myths in Managerial Experience .................................................................................. 29

4.3. Where Myths Come from and Why They Remain ....................................................... 33

4.4. Myths in Managerial Decision-Making ........................................................................ 37

4.5. Identifying and Challenging Myths within Organizational Culture .............................. 40

4.6. Transformational Leadership and Effective Change ..................................................... 44

6
 4.7. Addressing Management Myths on the Popular Level ................................................. 48

4.8. Avoiding Myths as a Manager ...................................................................................... 52

5. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 55

5.1. The Qualitative Interviews and the Research Goal ....................................................... 55

5.2. Self-Awareness: Deeper Reflection as a means of Myth Busting ................................ 57

5.3. Ethics: Cultivating Virtue as a Means of Better Management ...................................... 57

5.4. Issues with Management Theory and Practice .............................................................. 58

6. Research Limitations ............................................................................................................ 59

6.1. Sample ........................................................................................................................... 59

6.2. Author as limitation ....................................................................................................... 59

7. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 60

7
1. Introduction
1.1. Purpose of the Research
The goal of this paper is understanding the types of myths of management that exist in
modern business contexts. It’s important to highlight how these myths affect processes and
decisions within companies, and to discover the ways in which a proper assessment of
management realities can help up and coming managers do their jobs more effectively.
1.3. Research Questions
For this research, the questions are focused on determining three things: the content, effects,
and rationale behind management myths that are employed in business today. This paper
seeks to reinforce that what can become understood as managerial “orthodoxy” will be
reflected in managerial “orthopraxy”, and so distinguishing how certain ideas influence
management processes is at the core of the questions in this research. They are as follows:
1. What types of management myths persist across various industries around the world?
2. How do these myths form, and what reinforces them?
3. How can business managers recognize these myths in their contexts and correct them?

The research is two-fold, beginning with a literature review on relevant sources relating to the
research questions, then is followed by a qualitative research portion based on one-on-one
interviews.

2. Literature Review
2.1. The Subject of Management Myths in Business Literature
Understanding the subject of management myths and their effect on business in our
contemporary context is a complex undertaking that involves many variables, aspects, and the
willingness to wade through the challenging waters of management theories. This literature
review focuses on analyzing the main myths and corporate culture that gives rise to them.
Aviva Geva (2001) states that in some ways reality reinforces myths – they do not exist by
accident (p.576). They are part of the fabric of human culture, and so arise out of the contexts
in which human beings interact. Myths function as a means of bringing a unifying meaning to
the complex realities of business (Geva, 2001, p.578). Put another way, myths are narratives
that exist to explain the way things are, and management myths are therefore narratives that
exist to explain the how and why of business.
The approach some have to business myths is to treat them as mere errors in thinking, without
fully taking time to understand the symbolic nature, social roots and ideology that undergird
them (Geva, 2001, p.575). Myths thrive or wane depending on the environment they exist in

8
(Geva, 2001, p.579). The symbolic nature of myths helps them take on a storied, narrative
perception within communities that imbibe and articulate them.
Ishwar Dayal (1971) gives four examples of common myths that form administrative policy
in organizations: “time is a great healer”, “no tool is more potent than example”, “people live
to cooperate”, and “employees resist change” (p.2). These may not seem like necessarily
expansive, complex ideas, but that is often the reality of business myths. The contexts from
which they arise, the presuppositions that form them, and the impact they have on business
practices are complex, and understanding what sort of ideas and why they are adopted can
help business managers be shrewder about their approach.
2.2. Defining Management
Before the nature, content, and expression of management and business myths can be
understood the concept of management itself must be defined. Julian Birkenshaw (2010)
defines it simply: “Management is the act of getting people together to accomplish desired
goals and objectives” (p.38).
An interesting aspect that must be addressed at the outset is that within the literature there are
differences and disputes on how to define and categorize management in the first place.
Cunningham (1979) states that the definition of management is debated, with some focusing
on the process of management and others on the function of management. Matthew Stewart
(2009) in his book The Management Myth, reflects on his prior thought process regarding the
subject, stating the following “Gradually it dawned on me that Management is indeed a
neglected branch of the humanities, and that the study of management belongs, if anywhere,
to the history of philosophy” (p.19). Stewart (2009) bucks the trend on supporting business
education, arguing that studying history, engaging philosophical literature, and reading novels
would better suit people who seek to learn about management (p.19). He argues that
management is understood conventionally as a sort of technology - a set of techniques that
have been grasped by experts and are being handed down to their students (Stewart, 2009,
p.20). The concept of management as a technical discipline, Stewart (2009) notes, is a flawed,
Americanized perception that leads us to seek scientific answers to unscientific questions
(p.20).
In Reinventing Management, Birkenshaw (2010) points out that for some, “leadership” and
“management” are treated like two completely distinct categories, which he argues is a
confused position (p.28). The sharp distinction that had been created between leadership and
management, Julian Birkenshaw (2010) states, was the idea that managers were passive by-
standers and leaders were active visionary agents of change (p.27). He critiques the views of
9
John Kotter and Warren Bennis, articulated in their works Force for Change and On
Becoming a Leader, which seek to bifurcate leadership from management, arguing that, rather
than management and leadership being two entirely separate concepts, they are “two horses
pulling the same cart” (2010, p.29). For Birkenshaw there seems to be a distinction yet a
direct complementarity between leadership and management. His definition even seems to
reflect that not only are they similar, but that management is a type of leadership.
Considering the various aspects involved in management today, Peetz (2019) argues, is
necessary to understand the future of management (p.114). If the impact and effects of
management myths can be mitigated in the future, deducing the factors that precipitate them
today is where the discussion must start.
2.3. The “Hero” Manager (and “conformity leads to success”)
The concept of the “hero” manager relates to the narrative that is often propagated in relation
to the discussion of business success. It’s the idea that one figure, one charismatic,
transformational leader, was the superstar that brought a company success.
Birkenshaw relates this hero manager concept to innovation: “One of the great myths of
innovation is the idea that it takes place through the work of the lone creative genius who toils
away in his or her laboratory or garage for years before eventually making a breakthrough”
(p.228). It is inaccurate, in his view, to attribute the concepts of innovation to
leaders/managers. It is a common narrative that is spun within business and creative industries
but misrepresents reality.
Within this concept lie assumptions about authoritative that managers should be the smartest
person in the room, they must know everything that’s going on, and that they should try to
control information within the organization. Stern and Cooper (2018) state that this view
holds that it is those at the top that pass on the best ideas, thus creating pressure for managers
to be a source of inspiration (p.46).
According to Stern and Cooper (2018) the wisest leaders are those with an acute awareness of
the fact that they are not the smartest person in the room, and instead seek to draw upon the
abilities of those around them (p.46). It’s important for managers to be aware that it is
improbable if not impossible for them to know everything, and that that’s OK. Stern and
Cooper (2018) state that management is not about the supreme skill and gifts of an individual
leader, but about knowing how to coordinate and cooperate with others in such a way that
everyone’s input brings about mutual benefit (p.48).
It is possible, in Birkenshaw’s mind, to utilize the collective intelligence of a company while
maintaining the need for hierarchy (p.119). Hierarchy, in some sense, is still necessary and

10
part of management. Birkenshaw says that “Managers will always be required to exercise
judgment and to make difficult choices” (p.119). If decision making was always left up to
group decisions it would take a lot more time and businesses would be much less effective in
reaching their goals. However, taking into account the opinions of the group when making
those decisions is indeed important. Birkenshaw states that, in combining collective wisdom
with hierarchy, managers can make wise decisions that involve subordinates in a meaningful
way (p.120). By contrast the hero manager mindset leads to “low trust” approaches within
organizations (Peetz, 2019, p.115).
For Peetz (2019) this involves a rigid form of managing workers, giving them less freedom
and treating them “as a commodity” (p.115). In some contexts, this goes as far as intense
progress monitoring, digital armbands, and rating systems that punish you for bathroom
breaks. In contrast, high trust management is based on cooperation and workers are treated as
a resource rather than a commodity (Peetz, 2019, p.116). Employees are given space to use
the range of their talents and skills.
Peetz (2019) notes that in some business literature it seems that companies often don’t adapt a
particular style but are often inconsistent, mixing and adjusting styles based on the situation
(p.116). Managers may sometimes try to present themselves as high trust while functioning in
low trust, often using strategies of “cultural control” where they try to influence employees
into thinking with a certain mindset that would make them more open and eager to the whims
of their managers (Peetz, 2019, p.119).
Dayal states that “the co-operation that is essential for organizational effectiveness occurs
when the individual consciously takes into account the implications of his actions or behavior
on other people's work, on interpersonal relationships in an organization” (1971, p.3). Patterns
of cooperative or uncooperative behavior are the result of how those in charge have set up the
system for the employees. Here we see that Dayal is trying to place the responsibility for the
level of participation that employees display in a company on the managers who oversee their
work. The heroic manager can find himself creating unnecessary friction in the company
simply through not considering those subordinate to them.
One way that this can happen is through progressively diminishing and replacing the need for
middle managers. Dayal (1971) shares an example in which in one company the top manager
encouraged workers to go to him, thinking it would build more trust and unity in the
company. What it proceeded to do, however, is cause a lot of friction between him and the
other managers, who felt that they didn’t have as much influence, were not given as much
attention, and their input wasn’t desired or acknowledged (p.3) These examples demonstrate

11
that hostility festers in a context without adequate feedback and cooperation (p.3) In Dayal’s
example, the fact that the top manager kept direct, personal contact with workers meant that
the other managers below him couldn’t really do their jobs and were ignored by the
employees they were supposed to be managing. They felt that, because the workers were
doing this, their jobs were moot, and that, in some way, the workers were helping to make
their roles obsolete.
So, what does this have to do with setting examples? Managers can learn from those they trust
to set an example. Where there is a breakdown of trust there cannot be a positive influence.
Dayal (1971) argues that, in response to the myth of cooperation, people don’t inherently live
to cooperate or compete, but that this is all the result of the external context within which they
find themselves in (p.3). Whatever is more advantageous and will benefit them in their
present environment will determine the posture with which they approach the work that they
do.
2.4. There is one right way to manage.
The idea that there are definite, “right” ways to manage is prevalent within the world of
business. The appeal of leadership and business literature that is sold to companies,
management, and entrepreneurs is that there is some secret ingredient that, when applied, will
take any organization to levels of business success that they would not be able to reach
without it. According to Abrahamson (1991), organizations that are imitated have a “fashion
setting” quality: they don’t have the ability to force others to copy what they are doing, but
they have the means and resources and track-record necessary to be a strong influence and
inspiration for other organizations (p.596). Abrahamson (1991) notes that imitating other
organizations’ managerial processes is, in some theories, is a move that is motivated by the
desire to appear as “legitimate” (p.597). Standing out can be advantageous and promote the
idea of a company’s innovative, revolutionary culture, or it could be how an organization
becomes an example of what moves not to make when striving for success. Copying what the
successful do, then, seems like a safe bet with much less risk and a higher potential for
reward.
Stern and Cooper (2018) take a hard stance there is no right way to lead or manage because
people are different and circumstances change (p.21). This perspective, however, is sort of very
prevalent in some areas of business (p.21). While starting on a task you may use “telling” (one
way communication). Once it’s clearer there’s a lesser need for giving direction and a greater
need for mutual support (p.21). The third thing sometimes needed, when work is truly underway,
is for the decision making to be shared amongst the group, where each

12
member contributes and participates. And in the end of the tasks, which have been
communicated, understood, and corroborated, can now be delegated to members of the team
(Stern & Cooper, 2018, p.21) Situation sensing skills are necessary for management, because
your approach must adjust and accommodate the circumstances (Stern & Cooper, 2018, p.22)
Short term success often leads people to think that their model is foolproof and does not need
to change, only for reality to prove this notion to be inaccurate (Stern and Cooper, 2018, p.23)
Stern and Cooper state the following: “you have to try to understand the situation you find
yourself in now, and operate in the way that the situation demands” (p.24).
The mindset that “there is one way to lead” is largely what drives the sales and popularity of
business strategy books and biographies, which have a “be more like me” mentality, trying to
make it seem that the one “right” way that the author is promoting is the silver bullet of
business. Birkenshaw (2010), in dismissing the concept that there is one necessary form of
management, posits that the right management model for a company is the one that suits a
company the best in their context (p.34). What is in the best interest of any organization is not
necessarily carving out a niche or copying the same exact approach of another, but adapting
their practices to the context in which they find themselves.
2.5. What’s New is Better
Flowing from the perspective of “one right way to lead” comes the idea that new, innovative
practices are the new “Business Bible”, the new necessary revelation of how managers can
take their businesses to new heights of success. Interests in fads, new movements, and novel
approaches are something that affects our fast changing digitally savvy society on many
levels, not just business. But in the management world it takes on a new nature, as innovation
and being the next big thing becomes gospel.
Stern and Cooper (2018) note that organizations often formulate narratives about how they
have achieved their success that can lead outsiders to believe myths about how to emulate the
same result (p.22). This is particularly evident in the process of innovation. Stern and Cooper
make the argument that, while it is good to be concerned and aware of what the competitors
are doing, it is very important to stick to the first principles (p.195). The idea that new, simple
formulas can fix highly complex business problems is essentially a “faith-based” position that
hardly measures up to reality (Stern and Cooper, 2018, p. 197)
Abrahamson (1991) posits that, in the post-World War 2 context, high rates of innovation
propelled economic growth, creating a biased notion that innovation always benefited
adopters, as did their diffusion (p. 587). However, an aspect that is often overlooked,
Abrahamson (1991) says, is the fact that effective innovations are sometimes rejected while

13
ineffective ones are diffused (p.587). Why does this happen? Likely because the adoption of
innovations is motivated by the desire to emulate successful companies, a move smaller
companies do to legitimize themselves (Abrahamson, 1991, p.597). Many managers,
particularly less experienced ones, are very vulnerable to fads, wanting to feel up to date and
current in their approach to management (Stern and Cooper, 2018, p.196). In Stern and
Cooper’s (2018) view it is the desire for improvement that often gets one into the ditch of
chasing what is currently fashionable (p.196)
This notion is also conveyed by Birkenshaw, who argues it is apparent that the dominance of
large industrial firms has communicated that their forms of management are inherently
superior to others that may exist (p.25-26). This creates a mythic perception of management,
with smaller firms seeking to emulate the bigger ones, assuming that their form of
management is superior.
This, however, has a counter-balancing effect. Bigger organizations who are heavily emulated
by many organizations of lower reputation will eventually be motivated to distinguish
themselves to not take on a lower reputation image (Abrahamson, 1991, p. 599).
Another aspect involved in this is the underlying assumption organizations have that,
eventually, whatever new system or process they implement will just be accepted by their
employees (Dayal, 1971, p.2). Dayal (1971) highlights that in some instances what proceeds
to happen isn’t an outright rebellion against new systems, but a slow and steady breakdown in
the relationship between employees and management (p.2).
In organizations that revise their salary scheme employees may never directly protest but
subtly and passively react in negative ways, seeking to find ways to manipulate the scheme,
resulting in greater problems for the organization down the line (Dayal, 1971, p.3). Ignoring
the needs, concerns, and failing to acknowledge how employees feel in being left out of key
decisions creates resentment and animosity that negatively impacts a company.
Performance is particularly hampered in a situation where the worker feels like they cannot
articulate their frustrations to management (Dayal, 1971, p.4). There are conditions, Dayal
states, that cause resistance and conflict considering change, and conditions in which change
is accepted. Changes regarding values and deeper-seated aspects will be treated with a lot
more resistance.
Employers should be mindful of the reality that employee resistance to change may be a result
of the way the changes come about, how the employers communicate the change, and the
processes that follow that change, not necessarily the change itself (p.4) Dayal puts forward
the idea that management is responsible for how they implement the changes, and sometimes

14
what is met with resistance is an indicator that there is a problem in the managerial process
and not necessarily with the workers (1971, p.4).
The idea that “time is a great healer” is, according to Dayal (1971) a myth that seems to
suggest that open communication and dialogue between management and their employees is
unnecessary, which almost always leads to negative outcomes that bring further problems for
the company (p.2).
On top of that, what may accentuate these negative outcomes is neglecting the proper place of
business ethics.
2.6. Ethics aren’t Essential.
Another myth believed within the business world that is addressed in the literature is the idea
that having consistent ethical values is not so important. Thomas et al (2004) argues that there
are two things that are true of business: firstly, that it is essential to the fabric of society, and
secondly that, when a business fails ethically, it affects everyone (p.57). How ethics is
communicated can be positive, neutral, or negative, depending on various factors (Thomas et
al, 2004, p.56).

Business ethics have become an important topic within Western society as justice reform and
corporate social responsibility have dominated the cultural conversation. Thomas et al (2004)
cites that in some studies, such as a Cone Roper poll conducted in 2002, the public is eager to
punish unethical firms in even harsher ways (p.60):

 91% would consider switching to another company's products or services.

 85% would speak out against that company among family and friends.
 83% would refuse to invest in that company's stock.

In the much more polarized, digitally interconnected cultural climate of today it is to be

expected that backlash against unethical management of businesses results in a greater loss of
social currency. It also has an evident impact on the companies internally. Unethical behavior
has many different consequences for businesses, and a particular one is in the costs that come
as a result (Thomas et al, 2004, p.58). Enron’s ethical failure was obfuscating company
transactions during a company audit, then using employees to cover up what they had done,
which resulted in a $500,000 fine (Thomas et al, 2004, p.58). The Enron bankruptcy fiasco
happened due to unethical behavior involved in their business processes, and not merely bad
strategy or mismanagement of resources (Thomas et al, 2004, p.57). Ethical complacency and
inaccurate perspectives on ethics have a long-lasting impact.

15
Geva states that business ethics literature is replete with myths on the general level,
organizational level, and individual level (p.576). These include ideas such as “kill or be
killed”, “business is a game”, “management knows what they are doing”. Trevino and Brown
that corporate ethics are hard to manage and often even hard to discern (p.69). For them, it is a
process to understand and approach the various issues.
Moral awareness, according to Trevino and Brown (1999), is necessary to be able to make
ethical decisions, and the assumption that everyone has the same or an equal level of moral
awareness is deeply flawed (p.70) Moral complacency sets in when ethics are assumed rather
than an important focal point. According to Thomas et al (2004), Consistency in ethical
behavior can never be left to chance and cannot be externally regulated, and addressing
complacency requires leaders to create a sense of urgency, act, and seek to shift the
momentum of their companies forward (p.56).
Trevino and Brown (1999) point out that research regarding ethical decisions shows that
moral judgment processes do not begin until decision makers recognize the ethical nature of
an issue (p.70). There is a distinction between moral judgment in deciding what’s right and
moral action in doing what is right, and this is often due to the pressures of the surrounding
environment (Trevino and Brown, 1999, p.71)
What is the right thing to do, however, is not always very straightforward in business
contexts. For example, cutting staff may help save a company but may also put struggling
people out of a job – what is the right call? A company may be put into a position where they
realize their product has some sort of environmental risk but may struggle to do a recall due to
the financial costs of production and the potential hit to their reputation. What about diversity,
when gender/racial quotas may be introduced to improve company image, but qualified
people are being overlooked due to not being as diverse as the ones the company is seeking?
These issues are complex, and require a lot of deliberation.
Trevino and Brown challenge the notion that unethical business behavior is the result of bad
apples (1999, p.72). For them it is often context and environment that produces the behaviors
that manifest themselves. This “bad apple” view also seems to suggest that ethics cannot be
taught and or changed, which doesn’t accord with research on the subject (Trevino and
Brown, 1999, p.73).
Thomas et al (2004) argue that ethical leadership is supposed to function in such a way that an
“ethics mindfulness” is formed within the organization (p.60). This is to become so ingrained
in the culture of the company that there is a “reflective conduct”, a recognition and reality
that ethical thinking leads to ethical action (p.61)

16
When an ethical consciousness is formed there is a self-regulating effect through which
people involved in said company are pushed by internal factors to act more ethically (p.61).
Leaders need to take the responsibility of forming, shaping, and stewarding an ethical culture
within their organizations as it is, in fact, the culture that most directly shapes how people will
determine right from wrong (Thomas et al, 2004, p.62)
Thomas et al (2004) outline the distinction between compliance programs and integrity
programs - the former focuses on rules and regulations, the latter on excellence and
cooperation (p.63). The evidence has demonstrated that companies who utilize these integrity
programs are more effective in developing an ethical work culture was established in a report
done by Trevino et al (1999).
It is interesting that human behavior often makes it that those who call out unethical behavior
are recognized as both ethical and unlikeable, due to social dynamics (Trevino and Brown,
1999, p.71). These social dynamics stem from how the environment of work has perceived
what is or isn’t ethical, which support the following idea: people are not fully formed in their
ethics nor entirely autonomous in their thinking – ethics are largely influenced by
surroundings. Put in a healthy context, Trevino and Brown argue (1999), they can develop a
more consistent ethic (p.73).
Even with the notion that context can influence ethics, however, Trevino and Brown also state
that it is important to recognize that ethics codes and official policies by themselves are not
enough.
Being a moral person does not necessarily lead one to be a moral manager.
Unethical leadership is connected to managers with a lack of moral sense, while morally
silent leadership is leadership that refuses to engage in ethical dilemmas/moral situations
(p.76). Leadership on quality, competitiveness, and other behaviors must be alongside that of
ethics, according to Trevino and Brown (1999, p.77)
Trevino and Brown state that effective ethics is contingent upon understanding the moral
landscape of the organization, communicating the ethical standards, and finding consistent
ways to reward ethical behavior (p.78-79). This requires cooperation on all fronts from
multiple levels of a company and isn’t in any sense an individual effort.
Being an effective manager, then, is largely about knowing how to manage the pressures and
complexities of the business environment without compromising ethical values. Thomas et al
(2004) complete their argument by positing the notion that ethical behavior is necessary to
long term success, and defend the idea that ethics should be embraced out of the desire for
success and positive outcomes, rather than out of fear of negative outcomes (p.64).

17
For some, it also consists of approaching the vision and mission of a company in a way that is
deemed “transformational”.
2.7. Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership is a style of leadership dedicated to influencing and impacting an
organization for change (Sayeed and Shanker, 2009, p.595). Sayeed and Shanker (2009)
argues that effective leadership within organizations requires a relationship between managers
and employees which involves a mutual connection and emotional understanding from the
side of the leader (p.596)
Two factors that are key in facilitating effective cooperation, according to Dayal (1971), are a
suitable organizational structure and interpersonal relationships (p.3). The conduciveness of
the structure to the tasks at hand will, in Dayal’s mind, determine how workers engage with
one another.
Is it possible that transformational leadership is the future and one of the most important
things business managers need to incorporate into their practice, or is the necessity of such a
model overblown and potentially another fabled, mythic form of business wisdom? The
arguments for and against are analyzed in the following sections.
2.7.1. Arguments for Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership (or TL) is cited in several studies as being a source of improved
staff attitudes, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and as decreasing turnover
intentions and burnout (Farahnak et al, 2019, p.99). Farahnak et al (2019) note that in their
study on evidence-based practice (EBP), employees under transformational leaders were
significantly influenced regarding intra-organizational change, and the relationship between
positive employee attitudes and successful implementation of EBP was highly positive
(p.105). Rahman and Hadi state that “transformational leadership style shows a style of leader
who is able to embrace the aspirations of followers and is able to inspire followers who will
form a work system” (p.354). Transformational leadership, in Rahman and Hadi’s (2019)
view, emphasizes communication between leaders and followers through which leaders
energize their subordinates to accomplish their goals (p.355)
Jiatong et al (2022) state the following: “Transformational leadership represents a leadership
style that converts subordinates to see beyond self-interest by changing their confidence and
interest to perform beyond expectations” (p.1). Transformational leaders can help individuals
to work collectively and transcend their self-interests through working above their normal
level. research has shown the advantages of involving others in the process. Oreg and Berson
(2019) cite studies by Heck & Hallinger (2010), Bate, Khan, & Pye (2000), and Denis,

18
Lamothe, & Langley, (2001) as evidence of the benefits of collaboration in distributed,
shared, and collective leadership (p.283).They point to these findings as evidence of the need
for shared decision-making and collaboration in achieving successful change implementation
(Oreg and Berson, 2019, p.283).
Strong commitment to the company and its vision are associated with the use of TL (Jiatong
et al, 2022, p.2). Transformational Leadership advocates want to emphasize that its function is
developing a culture of hospitality within the organization, seeking to unite employees
through helping them internalize the aims of the company (Jiatong et al, 2022, p.3).
Negative emotions, brought on through uncertainty, change, and cynicism among employees,
can undermine the accomplishment of company goals. So transformational leadership, as
Rahman and Hadi (2019) state, exists as a means of curtailing this effect (p.357-58).
How this is done in the framework of transformational leadership is through an emphasis on
emotionally intelligent leaders. Sayeed and Shanker define emotional intelligence (or EQ) as
the ability to manage one’s emotions and appraise the emotions of others (p.593). Self-
awareness, self-regulation, motivation, and empathy are the key ingredients of EQ that help us
manage our emotions and relate better to others (Sayeed and Shanker, 2009, p. 594)
When the culture of a company is built around emotional intelligence then relationship
building, empathy, and corporate social responsibility are much more prominent and
emphasized. The inverse is that emotional incompetence can harm and hinder one’s potential
in the workplace (Sayeed and Shanker, 2009, p.594).
Transformational leadership is viewed as transformative because it is most relevant in the
process of change management, of implementing innovative practices (Farahnak et al, 2020,
p.99). Oreg and Berson (2019) posit that organizational change relates to leadership
behaviors, which are adjusted and influenced by change content (what is changing) and
change context (where the change is occurring) (p.274). This idea, for some, seems to be
consistent with the idea of transformational leadership.
For any process of change to effectively begin, leaders need to gauge where their subordinates
are in terms of understanding the state of the firm (Hartge et al, 2019, p.102-103).
Transformational leaders can gain the trust of their followers by engaging them in the change
effort. Farahnak et al (2020) posit that staff receptivity of leader attitudes is what often
influences the success of an implementation (p.102). Inclusion and trust seem to foster an
engaged environment among employees in the context of transformational leadership
(Farahnak et al, 2020, p.106; Rahman and Hadi, 2019, p.360). Jiatong et al (2022) cite
encouragement as a component of TL that works to bolster both commitment and job

19
performance (p.2). Transformation leadership establishes an emotional connection between
the company and the individual.
2.7.2. Arguments Against Transformational Leadership
For those opposed, transformational leadership is seen as a radical departure from traditional
management (Lee, 2014, p.18). It is also derided for being unclear and vague, as its quality
and effectiveness is hard to analyze. Yukl (1999) argues that traditional leadership theories
emphasized rational processes, while transformational and charismatic leadership emphasize
emotions and values (p.285), saying “The underlying influence processes for transformational
and transactional leadership are still vague, and they have not been studied in a systematic
way” (p.287).

Transformational leadership is characterized by zeroing in on a particular vision for the

organization, but one that is based on the collective interests of those within the company,
rather than their own. The job of transformational leaders, according to Lee (2014), is to
change the structure within the system to achieve the vision, rather than adapt the vision to the
company (p.19). Lee (2014) argues that, based on critical scholarship, there may be a heroic
leadership bias prevalent within the concept and practice of transformational leadership
(p.20). If the system is being adapted to the vision rather than the reverse, a leader who
successfully adapts to the organization may be likely to view themselves as a sort of savior of
their colleagues, which feeds into the narrative.

Stern and Cooper suggest that transformational leadership may be influenced, in some
respects, by the desire for notoriety, as “incremental change gets bad press” (p.133). They
argue that the appeal of this form of leadership is motivated by ego, as a way of managers at
the center of a company’s story – and these narratives are often inaccurate or don’t tell the full
story (p.133). In Lee’s mind, followers of transformational leaders are being coaxed and
influenced into exerting more into the company, rather than the leaders investing more into
them, as followers may be following a vision that isn’t completely clear or consistent and
carries with it a heroic leadership bias (p.20)
Another point is that, according to Yukl (1999), aspects of transformational leadership such as
intellectual stimulation are unclear, and so understanding how the leader can transform a
subordinate's actual thinking, what he says or does, is not easily apparent (p.289). Farahnak et
al (2020) state that in their research they struggled to find a significant of a correlation
between positive leader attitudes towards a project and that of their employees, and that it’s

20
possible that the employees were already disposed to have agreeable attitudes toward
innovative projects (p.106). Also, it appears that some behavioral aspects of TLs overlap with
each other (like intellectual stimulation and inspirational motivation), which makes it even
more complicated to ascertain their influence. Surveys on different component behaviors in
transformational leadership have, according to Yukl, not been effective in establishing an
understanding of their effects (p.291).
Yukl (1999), along with Lee, attributes a heroic leadership bias to transformational
leadership, stating the following: “Effective performance by an individual, group, or
organization is assumed to depend on leadership by an individual with the skills to find the
right path and motivate others to take it.” (p.292).
In both Yukl and Lee their skepticism relating to the effectiveness of transformational
leadership seems to be because they perceive it to be rooted in the rejection of an
individualistic perspective on organization success. While Yukl wrote at the turn of the
century and Lee wrote just under a decade ago, it seems apparent that similar criticisms have
maintained their place within business leadership across a long period of time.
2.8. Literature Review Summary
In surveying literature on management, management myths, and their various interwoven
aspects, it is apparent that the conversation that mythic narratives of management, while false,
are ingrained into the very fabric of business cultures. This doesn’t mean, however, that there
is no truth to these myths, or else they wouldn’t be so influential (Geva, 2001, p.576). This is
largely in part because of the polarization that management myths require one to embrace –
black and white perspectives on business issues that are much too complex to distill to a
soundbite or a singular perspective.
For instance, Birkenshaw (2010) rejects both the idea that management will never change
(that there is one right way to manage) and that management is due for a “revolutionary
change” (that management process must adhere to a new status quo), calling these ideas
“extreme positions” (p.33). Adjustments will happen and will be important at certain stages,
yet retaining what has made the business function so far is also necessary for the future of
management.
In conclusion, this literature review addressed the topic of management myths, defined
management and addressed the debate over leadership and management and the necessity of
both in effective business practice.
The myths of the "hero manager", "one right way to manage", "what's new is better", "ethics
aren't essential" were addressed and the discussion on the necessity of transformational

21
leadership was had, showing the landscape of business literature on the realities of
management in contemporary business.
The research problem which the research of this thesis must address, therefore, is both to
understand how these myths have impacted managers personally in their contexts and their
solution to the impact of these myths based on their business experience.

3. Research Methodology
3.1. Preliminary Assumptions Based on Literature Review
The literature demonstrates that many management myths are often unquestioned
assumptions within organizational cultures. It is assumed by some managers that employees
will just eventually accept whatever new system or process is implemented by their leaders
(Dayal, 1971, p.2). It is assumed by some managers that the need for ethics in business can be
left to chance or externally regulated, when compliance programs and intentionality about
instilling an ethical culture are more likely to work (Thomas et al., 2004, p.62). It is assumed,
within the very discussion of management myths, that myths in business are mental blocks to
be removed, rather than narratives and ideologies that thrive due to their sociological roots
(Geva, 2001, p.575). It seems apparent that myths in management are ideas about
management that are assumed and often promoted without a concrete epistemic basis.
Based on the literature review, this paper is approached with the assumption that management
myths function as a sort of social contagion. They are as Richard Dawkins would put it,
memes – units of cultural transmission or imitation (Dawkins, 1976, p.192) – that, once
established within the mindsets of managers, replicate themselves through the collective
assumptions of individuals within the immediate organizational culture and, by extension, the
business world. The goal of the research methodology, therefore, is to determine whether said
assumption is valid.
3.2. Research Problem
While the literature overwhelmingly addresses the “what” (content) and the “how” (effect) of
management myths in business environments, there seems to be a lack of research addressing
why the myths become influential and entrenched in business management. Gehmann (2015)
and Geva (2001) attempt to locate these influences in corporate narrative, which Stern and
Cooper (2018) argue is effective in bolstering the image of managers as heroes when
connected to the usage of transformational leadership (p.133). This seems, however, to
misunderstand the fact that myths themselves are narratives. They are stories that, though
lacking absolute truth, form a considerable amount of the basis of how humans understand
themselves and their surrounding context. It is in understanding what influences the adoption

22
of these myths in the context of business management there can be progress made in both
dismantling potentially harmful ideas and promoting healthier ones in their place, bringing
greater clarity to the conversation about managerial processes.
3.2. Research Methodology
The expansiveness of the topic and the reality that managerial processes are largely contextual
established the need for a qualitative study on the subject of management myths. The scope of
the practical part focuses on managers that have expertise in their fields for five years or more
and are conversant on issues regarding the myths and realities of management. The eight
questions sought to touch on ideas found in the literature while connecting the discussion to
the personal experience of the managers being interviewed.
The qualitative research involved 5 interviews going in-depth into the subject of management
myths and their own experiences with being managers in modern business contexts. This
gives ample space for adequate analysis and discussion of their responses in conjunction with,
and as a foil to, the literature review. The quotations from the transcribed interviews are
mostly unaltered in this thesis.
The goal is to move beyond questions that may reinforce conclusions that arise from the
content in the literature review and to get into the practical ways that management myths
affect business managers in their endeavors.
The questions asked in the interview process are like so:
1. Based on your experience, what do you believe are the most common myths about
business management and which ones have you believed, at one time or another?
2. What gives rise to/what causes myths about management, and how do they gain an
influence in modern business practices?
3. Why do you believe some myths remain influential in business management?
4. How do these myths affect decisions made by managers in organizations, such as in
new business strategies?
5. How can managers identify and challenge myths in their own organizations?
6. Is transformational leadership effective in change management, or is its influence
overblown? Why?
7. Why do you think there isn’t as much attention given to understanding and refuting
these myths in literature and international business culture?
8. How can managers avoid falling prey to these myths, and is that even possible?

23
Each on-on-one interview was intended to give abundant time and space to the participants to
consider, reflect on, and approach each question from a place of authentic experience, giving
ample time for them to respond and express their views.
The structure of the interview questions was meant to directly connect to the research
problem and research questions, offering personal insights on aspects that present themselves
in the analysis of the literature.
After the interview process was completed, the data was analyzed in MAXQDA for the
purpose of systematically presenting the results and gaining a wider view and comprehensive
perspective on the answers from the interviewees.

4. Qualitative Research Process and Findings

4.1. Research Process – Introduction
The research process began with the motivation to understand the myths and realities of
modern business management in various cultures and industries. This was done by conducting
five individual one-on-one interviews with subjects of diverse cultural backgrounds (Indian,
Irish, English, Czech, and American) who have worked as managers in several diverse
cultural contexts and in distinct roles. Each interview lasted between 40 minutes to an hour,
depending on the depth that each participant wanted to take.
Each portion of the conversation directly utilized the questions represented in the research
methodology, while helpful back-and-forth dialogue and follow-up questions supplemented
each of the discussions. Each respondent had as much time as they wanted to respond to each
question from whichever angle they pleased, resulting in both common themes (due to each
being asked the same questions) as well as diverse opinions and responses included in each
portion of the dialogue.
Care was taken to ensure that each participant had a clear understanding of the subjects and
sufficient experience to articulate their perspective with useful knowledge. Each participant
had between 8-23 years of managerial experience, Kieron with the least (being the youngest)
and Duroň with the most.
Each participant has worked in multiple companies as managers with some level of
international workplace experience, and each hails from a different industry with different
managerial roles and responsibilities – Management Consulting, Marketing and Sales,
Logistics/Supply Chain, Tax & Accounting, and Wealth Management.

24
This decision was deliberate, as analyzing the managerial experience across a diverse field of
industries and cultures creates a space for understanding what myths are influential in the
modern world of business.

Name Length of Cultural Industry & Diversity of Work

Managerial Background Experience Experience
Experience

Kanishka 20 years India Management UK, India

Sinha Consulting & Sales

David 23 years Czech Marketing and Media Czech Republic,

Duroň Republic Management Ghana

Lydia 19 years England Logistics/Supply UK, Czech

Warren Chain Management Republic

Kieron 8 years Ireland Legal Tax and UK, Saudi Arabia,

Gaffney Accounting Cambodia, Czech
Management Republic

Daniel 22 years United States Wealth Management United States,

Catone Switzerland

Table 1.0: Participant Background

Kanishka Sinha is a managing partner at Stillwater Consulting (his own company) since 2011,
a leadership coach, and a former professor of communication and ethics at the Indian School
of Business. He has worked in a few different fields, including at being an Area Sales
Manager at Unilever in India from 2003 to 2007. Notably, he has also spoken on the very
subject of management myths in various contexts, including a Ted Talk given at Ahmedabad
International School in Ahmedabad, India.
David Duroň has worked in several managerial roles in telecommunication companies in the
Czech Republic, particularly in marketing and sales. He was the chief marketing officer for
Czech Telecom (O2) from 2003 to 2004, worked as a marketing and sales director at
Vodafone for nearly six years, was both a marketing manager and then O2 TV director for
four years, and then transitioned to visiting professor roles at VSE as well as other projects in
consultancy and managing a resort in Elmina, Ghana.

25
Lydia Warren has nineteen years of experience in logistics management in both the UK and
the Czech Republic, ranging from demand planning at Proctor and Gamble, Collaborative
Supply Management at PepsiCo, several management roles at Anheuser Busch InBev, to
Senior Planning Director for EU Packing at The LEGO Group. She has extensive practical
knowledge of the field of supply chain management is well versed in both theoretical and
practical matters relating to leadership in the modern workforce.
Kieron Gaffney’s work has been primarily in the tax and accounting fields, often in the
context of legal firms, in the UK, Saudi Arabia, Cambodia, and the Czech Republic. He has
experience as a property tax consultant for Smith & Williamson and BDO, in International
Tax Management with EY, managing Transfer Pricing and Integrated International Tax for
KPMG in Cambodia, VDB Loi, and DFDL, and being the Executive Director and Founder of
Hybrid Tax Global since 2022.
Daniel Catone has experience in financial advising and wealth management, being the
president and wealth manager of Redwood Investments and Golden State Wealth
Management in California. He also has experience working with Edward Jones and Wells
Fargo in the 2000s, Raymond James Financial from 2009 to 2012.
4.1.2. Coding Data
The research was conducted using a deductive coding process. Subjects that were relevant to
the readings found in the literature review were applied to the decision about which terms to
use as a means of methodological analysis of each one-on-one interview. The process was
largely based on the need to represent both themes and categories associated with the subject
that would pinpoint the ways in which the ideas of the respondents may overlap or contrast,
given the distinct industries, cultures, and experiences of each of the participants.
The following code table represents the concepts and ideas conveyed by each of the
interviewees in the transcript of the discussion.
4.1.3. Code Book

Category Subcategory Code

Influences Media Media

Experience Experience

Organizational Culture Organizational Culture

Training Training

26
 Role Models Role Models

Society Society

Self-Perception Personality Personality

Ability Ability

Intelligence Intelligence

Collaboration Conflict Conflict

Communication Communication

Participation Participation

Trust Trust

Coordination Coordination

Mindset Heroic Heroic

Insecure Insecure

Explorative Explorative

Conservative Conservative

Exclusive Exclusive

Inclusive Inclusive

Methods Authoritarianism Authoritarianism

Democratic Democratic

Transformational Transformational

Reactionary Reactionary

Imitation Imitation

Ethics Relevance of Ethics Relevance of Ethics

Governance Governance

Social Responsibility Social Responsibility

27
 Employee Treatment Employee Treatment

Financial Ethic Financial Ethic

Repercussions Repercussions

Corruption Corruption

Outcomes Innovation Innovation

Stagnation Stagnation

Development Development

Unity Unity

Disorder Disorder

Success Success

Failure Failure

Table 2.0: Categorization of Topical Codes

Each category builds on the last. The code table begins with the influence category.
Influences on managers - media, experience, organizational culture, training, and role models
- directly impact each other category. The influence a manager has regarding what they think
a manager should do will impact their self-perception of themselves as a manager - whether
their personality, ability, and intelligence matches what is necessary to fulfill their managerial
duties. The influences a manager also impact their mindset about management - whether they
take a heroic perspective (I am the hero and will get the job done), an insecure perspective (I
need to do X or I will fail), an innovative perspective (I will do new things and we will
achieve things that have not been done before), a conservative perspective (we should do
things as they have already been done and that way we will be successful), an exclusive
perspective (there is only one way), or an inclusive perspective (there are many ways). This
will then impact the methods that they use, whether they will be authoritarian (my way and
only my way), democratic (figuring it out together) or transformational (inspiring others to
accomplish the vision in their own way). Finally, we have the Ethics category - the influences
a manager has will then directly impact how they approach ethics, whether they find ethics
relevant, how they apply ethics in governance, Sustainability, Social Responsibility,
Employee Treatment, and Financial Ethics. The most common trending words/topics/concepts
across all five qualitative interviews are in the word cloud below.
28
 Figure 1: Word Cloud (source: author)

4.2. Myths in Managerial Experience

The interviews began by discussing the common myths and misconceptions that had affected
the participants in the process of their managerial experience. The “Hero Manager myth”, a
common theme in literature (Birkenshaw, 2012; PEETZ, 2019; Stern & Cooper, 2018) and the
authoritarian style of management repeatedly showed up early in the discussion.

Respondent Coded Segment

Kanishka I think the first one is the idea of a right answer: If I prepare enough, if I do
Sinha my homework, then the decision I make will be the right one and it'll give me
the outcome I wanted. And if I didn't get the outcome that I wanted, then in
some way I made the wrong decision. Cause I didn't prepare enough.
(Kanishka Interview, Pos. 4)

Lydia “[It is a myth] that a manager knows everything. Course the manager doesn't
Warren know everything. Anyone who believes that yeah, probably should reevaluate
the level of ability that a human has. (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 2)”

“You may not have that strategy right. You need their input to make sure
where you want to go, they can get behind and align to.”
(Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 10)

29
Kieron “This is the kinda myth that you can make people do some, do anything, right?

Gaffney If you're a manager, like because you are in charge, theoretically in the
hierarchical chain, you can make people do something. You can't. I can tell you
now, people have tried to make me do things and they haven't been able to do it.
People have tried to make me work harder. Their version is harder, and they
haven't been able to make me do it. (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 6)

Table 3.0: Hero Management Myth Responses

Sinha stressed that it is flawed to think great and successful leaders are always smarter, harder
working, more ethical or better with people than others. In his mind this often not the case
with successful managers.

“Some people who are very successful have completely broken marriages. You'll [sometimes] see
very successful people, but they're very unhealthy. They are like 40 kilograms overweight, et
cetera. And so, in my mind, you know, we all always have these morality tales that if you treat
your customers well, then you'll become successful. If you are honest in your dealings, then
people will respect you, et cetera. But I found some people are honest in their dealings and they
earn a lot of money, while some people are dishonest, and they earn a lot of money. Some people
are fit and they are very successful professionally. Some people who are very unfit and some
people who are nice to you as managers (very nurturing and coaching) - they get promoted, while
some people are complete bastards and who will exploit you” (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 4)”

Daniel Catone, while not discussing the hero manager mentality directly, did begin by
speaking about the authoritarian method of management, which the others associated with the
hero mentality.
“I would think that the first myth that I hear a lot, and I am not sure how widely it's held, is that a
manager is authoritarian or directive. And that can be true, but it's not always true for everyone
everywhere. I think the best managers that I know are collaborative and cooperative and are
there to help the team (Daniel Catone, Pos. 15)”
Warren and Catone agreed in saying that collaboration is more important than top-down
dominant management, and emphasized authentic leadership, the idea that to be a good,
understanding leader one must operate in a consistent manner in all areas of life.

Lydia “The most common myth is that you cannot bring your home self to work. So

30
Warren recently there's been a push, I think, for people to be more authentic. And that I
think dates to the fact that, if I think back 20 years ago, there was a work self and
there was a home self, and then they were very disconnected at work. You had to
be hard, you had to be firm, didn't discuss your home life. And there's a big
disconnect between the two. And I think recently there's been more of a push to
become more authentic, which is great. But that still needs to be continued and
pushed.”(Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 2)

Daniel “There is no distinction between private and professional life. There isn't. It's a
Catone myth. That's a myth. That's a management myth or just a general life myth. That
we think, oh at home I have this at work, I have this with my friends. I'm this. No.
You are the common denominator in all those equations. And who you are at home
is who you are at work, is who you are in your friendships and your recreation and
all these types of things, faith and all of that. There's no I'm putting this hat on for
this thing and his hat on thing. No, I'm the same exact guy every time.” (Daniel
Catone, Pos. 51)

Table 4.0: Authentic Leadership (Warren and Catone)

The two used this idea to lean into similar modes of thinking regarding ethics and cooperation
with employees. For Catone, who is a devout Catholic with an interest in Aristotelian ethics,
the need for authentic leadership is drawn from his perspective on virtue ethics – in his
mindset, to be a consistently virtuous person in all spheres of your life is what will help a
person be a better manager, because the better you are as a person, the better you will work
with others.
For Warren this is grounded in honesty. Being an honest person is key in the pursuit of being
a good manager because it develops trust with your employees. She says the following:
“I'm gonna tell my team every time I do something wrong or notice one of my failings or fall
into a bad trap (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 38).”
Cultivating virtue and being honest about shortcomings are two themes that permeated the
interviews, and all interviewees tied it to being able to collaborate well with people, as these
are ways in which you cultivate trust. In their eyes, hero managers think that their own
wisdom, expertise, and methods are universal, and therefore they can just command respect
simply by having their position. This is a mentality that Gaffney specifically addressed,
saying it was a wake up call for him to recognize that just because one is in authority does not
mean that they command respect. He states that recognizing that each person is a person with

31
individual thoughts, feelings, and experiences means that the “one right way to manage” and
“hero manager” mindsets are incorrect.
I know it sounds cliche to say you have to manage people on an individual basis. It's even like a
layer before that and just go like, ‘where does this person come from? What kind of managerial
style are they used to? Okay, I have my style, but what gets the best out of them?’ So I think it's
really. The biggest myth these days is that there is one, one style to be a manager. So one needs to
lead by example to, lift people up, empower them and to be there talking with your team on a daily
basis. I think that's a kind of a misconception in terms of, the reality of the role. (Kieron Gaffney
interview, Pos. 4)
Duron was the only one who did not specifically address the hero manager idea either directly
(as Sinha, Warren, and Gaffney did) or indirectly (as Catone did). For Duroň the most

common myth in his experience was the idea that doing risky things is impossible. In his mind
it was an organizational culture with a conservative mindset that often buys into the “if it isn’t
broke, don’t fix it” mentality, doubting whether innovations can really be successful. One
example he shared is of his time as a director at O2. believed in his teams’ capability to
expand O2 TV from 135,00 connections to 500,000, but his team doubted the approach. The
team, organization, and stakeholders thought that the plan was too unsure, the market was not
ready, and it was too risky. From his perspective breaking the rules was necessary for him to
have any success as a marketing and media manager.
When I was talking to these people, they said it doesn’t make sense to do it if we will not grow
[quickly]. I said no. It makes sense to do it, but we'll grow slowly. We'll not grow like 200 final
thousand. It's too much. It took time, and right now O2TV has about 850,000
connections, if I'm correct, and Czech Republic is becoming a pay TV market. (David
Duroň, Pos. 5).
One thing that was interesting was how Sinha pointed to the negative impact a hero manager
mindset had on his self-perception and ability to lead. As noted above he said that it made
him feel like he was lazy or did not work hard enough whenever he did not get the right
results. What he believes he realized because of all of that is that making mistakes was
actually important in order to become a better manager.

“And now instead of trying to defend saying ‘No, no, no, I did everything I could,’ I'm like, ‘Okay, it
didn't work. Tell me the impact it had on you. Tell me what we need to do to fix it.’ So I'm much more
open to that because I'm not trying to feel like, oh, I need to defend myself. I haven't made a mistake.
So, that was a good learning.” (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 4)

32
4.3. Where Myths Come from and Why They Remain
External Factors Internal Factors (Emotional)
Conventions promoted by Managers (Sinha, Fear resulting from conventions
Warren) (Duron)
Principles Learned in Study of Management Easiness to Believe/Simplicity (Sinha)
(Warren)
Media (Gaffney, Catone) Comfort (Duron)

Table 5.0: External vs Internal Reasons Myths Persist

Two of the questions that were asked during the interview process were “what gives rise
to/what causes myths about management, and how do they gain an influence in modern
business practices?” and “Why do you believe some myths remain influential in business
management?”

While related questions their purpose was to help the participants frame their answers around
why these myths gain popularity and why certain ones remain popular. For instance, myths
like “women cannot be as effective managers as men” are no longer popular in Western
society, for instance, but were at one point quite common belief systems. In asking this, the
research aimed at properly understanding the perspectives of experienced managers on how
myths exist and persist in their own various business contexts.

As seen in the table the responses could be divided into both external or internal reasons. The
external are as follows:

Respondent Answer
Sinha “If a CEO says, you know what? Hard work is what I expect from all, you
know, employees. That is good for him, right? Cause if the employees are
working really hard, you know, 15 hour days, et cetera, he earns more money. If
he says loyalty is a good trade, right? Then he basically keeps the employees,
they don't leave. Even though they could get higher salaries another way, they
stay there because of this loyalty. So you spread certain ideas of what a good
employee is…this, that, et cetera, it's in their best interest.” (Kanishka
Interview, Pos. 10)
Warren Some management theories are super old, and depending on what you read that

33
 will have an impact in terms of what you believe is good management. The
reality of us as humans is we obviously learn by watching it happen. That's how
kids learn. They watch and they learn. It happened with management. You
watch your leader, and the reality is if you have a leader who demonstrates bad
traits, then. You will potentially see that as the only way to manage. And unless
you are prepared to try something different or to actually try a style that suits
you, you can fall into the trap of just assuming that there is only one style of
leadership or management. (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 6)
Gaffney “So I suppose in the West, I think a lot of it is media driven, right? Because if
you look at the generation that I came into work for, the media they were
consuming was very much ‘here's what a manager should be, right?’ You go
into work, you work hard, you're very serious for your 10 hours a day, and then
you’re successful. My generation when I was going in, it was like, okay, we had
that as well, but we had that cause we wanted to impress the generation above.
What we actually wanted was somewhat of a different work experience”
(Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 10)
Catone “It's just media. I'll say again. Media. I think it's undeniable. We, especially in
finance, I mean in our industry, media representation is Wolf of Wall Street.
Wall Street 2, or whatever. The Bernie Madoff scandal and his documentary and
I would imagine it's similar like with legal media stuff about the law and how
attorneys work on a day-to-day basis. And the reality, it, there's not, there's no
truth to it all. Of course there's truth to the Bernie Madoff story, but, this stuff is
crazy. Our industry is actually very boring in comparison to the way it's
portrayed. And so if you translate that over to the leadership space I think when
people think of leaders, they think of the military in the United States, they
think of government.” (Daniel Catone, Pos. 19)

Table 6.0: External Sources of Myths

Each of the respondents stated that they have been affected, either partially or strongly, by
these external sources. The trend evident from their statements was that these myths take on a
social character, spreading through various mediums (whether it is individual managers,
management literature, and visual media (Television, Documentaries, Films, etc.).

34
Sinha pointed to these myths as avenues through which managers would be able to take
advantage of their employees. While it is false that a manager will know everything, it could
be useful for them to promote this idea to maintain control and try to command respect of
those people who are subordinate to them. While it is untrue that a manager never makes
mistakes, it could be considered useful by some managers to control the narrative about their
failures as a way of maintaining an authoritative hold on those of lower rank.

A common part shown in all of these is that myths and their prevalence tie back to the sort of
organizational culture that forms the business. The MAXQDA analysis revealed that
organizational culture was the most common theme recurring in each of the interviews,
followed by experience. It has the most co-occurrence with the ten other major themes
(Experience, Conservative, Explorative, Heroic, Communication, Participation, Trust, and
Role Models)

Figure 2: Code Map (source: author)

The data seems to suggest that there is an agreed upon mindset among the various participants
– organizational culture is the “factory” and the “storehouse” for management myths. But in
truth, according to those who emphasized the internal/emotional reasons, it is the feelings that
managers have about their jobs that is what dictates the external forms of myth promotion.

Respondent Answer
Duroň It’s fear because a lot of managers, they are afraid that if they do something

35
 wrong, they'll be fired. So then it's better to do it the way when someone else is
doing it, and then you can blame someone else. If your way of doing it is not
working, then you can say to your boss, but I was doing it exactly how you do
it, my boss, or I'm doing exactly how my colleagues in the other companies are
doing it. So what is wrong? The page looks the same, the webpage looks the
same like our competitor's webpage. So they're afraid to come up and bring a
completely different view or different way of doing it, or breaking the pyramids
because they are scared they will lose the job.”(David Duroň , Pos. 7)

“People in this area are following the myths. They are just under one position
and they are sitting there for 10 years. Yeah. They have good examples. Even
from Vodafone, if I just remind myself about some of them. Yeah. So they have
very good workers, but they are there. They even don't want to do big changes
in terms of their job description or, so yeah they're happy if the sellers growing
up, but, and the competencies as well, a bit or responsibilities a bit, but not such
a big movements.” (David Duroň, Pos. 9)
Sinha “I think for one it's just simpler, right? So if I say, you know, you should trust
people, right? That's too simplistic, right? Or honesty is the best policy. Let's
say honesty is the best policy. It sounds good, it sounds inspiring, it sounds
great, but you know what? If a terrorist is holding a gun and saying, tell me
where your kids are hiding. Is honesty the best policy? Are you going to lie?
Cause they're going to find my kids and shoot them. I'm going to lie. So then
you say, where is this not going to be true? And then find examples of places
and then you get into a deeper understanding of that. So I think that is
something that was there in my video as well which is that idea ‘don't look for
the simple answer because it feels right.’ It seems right. Go deep and keep
asking where would the situation not be? (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 8)

Table 7.0: Internal Sources of Myths

Duroň and Sinha argue that, in a large part, the myths function as limiting beliefs. Because
managers are afraid or because they want things to be simple, they settle for ideas that are
inaccurate as they help them feel safe. They suggest that managers may often have an internal
disposition, motivation, or anxiety that drives them to certain mythical beliefs about their role,
causing them to limit themselves in their vision, purpose, and goals. What this means is that

36
what is pushed on an external level is drawn from motivations on an internal level. Sinha
points to this in his statement in Table 6 – the inward motivation for money is what may lead
a manager to push some inaccurate idea towards their employees, which in turn results in
greater output and therefore higher revenue. This concept of inner motivations strongly
influencing managers’ beliefs is most prominent in the interview with Duroň, who, being
a self-declared “rule breaker”, had to deal with this mentality the most out of the five
participants.

These questions regarding the sources and staying power of management myths naturally led
to the next topic.

4.4. Myths in Managerial Decision-Making

At this question, Sinha emphatically stated “I don't think you can hold onto the myths of you
are the final decision maker (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 14)”. His reasoning was simple –
reality will break apart the incorrect ideas that a manager may have about what management
should be like. Duron, holding a very consistent theme across his responses, pointed to top-
down decision making as being the natural result of the fear of failure:

“I would say mainly because of these people, these like followers of myths the small sort of
organizations, they have a huge hierarchy because you need someone more senior to push up,
push people to perform” (David Duroň interview, Pos. 11).

Warren used the opportunity to show that, in results driven contexts, believing management
myths may cost the organization the potential of those who are working within it every single
day.

“If you are very results focused rather than focusing on the people, you could potentially miss skills or
opportunities that people may have to help you develop and lead that strategy in the best way possible.
So I think it's super important to make sure that, if you are trying to deliver a new strategy, first and
foremost, you share that with the team because you're not always right. You may not have that strategy
right. You need their input to make sure where you want to go, they can get behind and align to ”
(Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 10).

This is very consistent with other statements from Duron and Sinha, showing a continuity of
experience – managers tend to think they can dominate and control when they are operating
37
from a place of insecurity, which is a place of fear, because they have bought into the myth of
following conventions. Pointing back to the authenticity theme, Warren argues that behaving
in this way is often incredibly offensive towards subordinates. Managers sometimes, in her
mind, take on a level of authority and entitlement that leads to bossing around their
employees (a point Gaffney made as well). This sort of approach stems from dehumanizing
people, not recognizing their rights, feelings, hopes, dreams, but disregarding that they have
lives outside of their workplace.

Let's be honest, we all have lives. Covid has taught us. More than anything that it's super important
not to just assume that the world is status quo. And that means you cannot assume anymore that
workers will be in at nine and go at five and work eight hours without a break, constantly delivering
their all day in, day out. You need to expect the fact that they have personal and home lives that need
prioritization. I think if you can get that balance right and if you can help and support those
individually, those individuals the payback you get in terms of loyalty in terms of their satisfaction and
their motivation pay dividend and actually you probably get more productive and best results from an
employee who's supported and encouraged to look after and bring their home homes, bring their
whole self. To work and to be to take the time they need while focusing on delivering what they need to
in the time they've got. I think that's super important. (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 10)

Gaffney’s response to the decision-making question echoes the authentic leadership ideas by
Warren and Catone. His anxiety, he admits, has sometimes been to preserve his image. He
points out that there is a tendency to care so much about image and appearances as a manager
that decisions are made in response to that insecurity:

“The biggest thing for me is to stay true to myself in my kind of managerial style. So even though I'll
vary it a little bit. So say when I'm dealing with somebody from the uk the way I'll talk to them about
something. Is very different to the way that I'll talk to somebody about something in Cambodia who
also consults for me. I think from a, a strategic perspective you'll make decisions that. Aren't
necessarily sometimes the best for your business from an economic perspective, at least immediately.
Cause you want your business to be perceived a certain way, or you as a manager want to be
perceived a certain way, right? If for example, you can end up over-correcting. So say if you like, have
a relationship where maybe like with one of your team, you go for a beer with, more regularly than the
rest cause of, this

38
perception that, we have everything as it has to be, a very kind of everything has to be done like
on a very even, almost scientific basis for management now, right? There are these categories that
you have go into like a. Into a greater role, like into a greater role. Even if you think that person
that you go for a beer with, more regularly than the others is the best person for the job. You may
find yourself in like an interview scenario. Say there's free candidates going for it,
overcompensating towards the other people when you're interviewing them because you don't
want the perception to be that in any way you like them less? Or that you are letting the perceived
personal relationship impact your professional judgment. So I, definitely know that on probably at
least one occasion I've probably given the wrong person the job, like promotion. Cause I didn't
want to seem like I was being unfair.” (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 12)

Sinha points to this same notion of fairness in relation to the first question (on most common
myths). The balance held, from all these respondents, is between acknowledging the needs of
employees while not privileging any of them for the purpose of maintaining a positive image.
Gaffney’s experience, he notes, is based on an inauthentic approach – rather than operating
from honesty, he (in that instance) was operating from a need for validation.

This touches on a common (and important) thread shared in each of the interviews, is that
management necessitates both an acute awareness of others as well as a proper perception of
oneself, and to recognize that what one is doing in management is managing people.

Catone addresses this portion of the interviews by emphasizing that every manager is
cultivating vice or virtue in the way that they approach each of their decisions. Virtue ethics
were a strong aspect of his responses in this portion.

Daniel Catone – Virtue as Key to Management Decisions and Organizational Culture

If we don't cultivate a culture of inclusion, a culture of cooperation, communication, and
collaboration, then they'll just go somewhere else. And now I'm competing against the
smartest people in the world, which, so that's, so it's what's, it's fortunate for me, it's
serendipitous that my value orientation lines up well with that management style. Yeah.
And if you interviewed my employees, I would hope they would all say invariably that
those are values that we hold. Our motto as a company is we leave every person better off
for having met us, period (Daniel Catone, Pos. 27)

39
Our measurement of success is not only making money, of course, that's why we're doing
this. We are trying to make a living, but we have success in other measurements. And if
we meet somebody and we leave them better off for having met us, that's a win. And this
is something we talk about at all of our management meetings, all of our corporate
excursion stuff, everything that we do, it's oriented around maximal human dignity and
leave everyone better off for having met you (Daniel Catone, Pos. 27)
I think you're either cultivating virtue or you're cultivating vice. And if you are acting in an
authoritative manner, authoritarian manner. An authoritative authoritarian manner, you
are going to be moving towards pride because I know best because I'm in charge and this is
the way it's gonna be. Think about what I miss out on now. Now the brilliance of the team,
which I am hiring, is being squashed under my heavy foot. And so you're gonna have less
innovation, less general happiness within the workplace. So morale will be terrible. People
just won't want to go the extra mile because why bother? (Daniel Catone, Pos. 29)
If you're not treated as a valuable member of a group, you're gonna feel excluded, you're
gonna feel less than the others or whatever. And you're gonna resort to going to one of
two places. It's either fight or flight. You're either gonna bucket and you're gonna cause
problems in the workplace, causing rebellion in a sense, or you're just gonna leave. Both
of those are terrible for corporate mission. We have very specific goals as an institution
and we cannot achieve those goals if our team members aren't working at 100% or more.
Really maximal efficiency and attention. So it's deleterious to overall performance and
destroys corporate profits. (Daniel Catone, Pos. 29)
Table 8.0: Myths in Decision Making Responses

Catone emphasized the need for reordering the internal motivations of managers. When
managers become motivated by virtue, their character changes, which ultimately brings about
better outcomes, as their approach to their decisions is formed by a desire to honor and uplift
other people rather than a “by any means necessary” approach. While Sinha, Gaffney, and
Warren touched on adjacent to this, Catone spent considerable portions of each of his answers
tying it back to his overarching ethical framework that drives his business enterprises.

This segment, in all five interviews, is built on the motivations discussed in the previous
segment, demonstrating a necessary link between the internal world of the manager, the
myths they believe, and the decisions they make as a result.

40
4.5. Identifying and Challenging Myths within Organizational Culture
This portion of the discussions was where each participant had the opportunity to share their
practical vision for managerial conduct and was the first portion where much of the answers
diverged from each other in distinct directions. A sample of this is found below:

Respondent Answer
Kanishka We must start with three guiding factors, right? One is results. If you're not
Sinha producing the results, it's telling you that something about what I think is
required to produce the results. There's some mismatch and there's some
belief that it is not working. Cause I thought if I do this, I'll produce the results.
If the result is not there, that's telling me my belief system needs to be
reevaluated, right? The second one is feedback from other people. So I might
produce the result. But people might say, Hey, listen, that's a short-term result
and I think you can do better. You know, I, I felt like you got the result, but you
know, it's gonna have long-term consequences. People are gonna quit, it's
attrition is gonna rise, et cetera. So feedback is also other people's opinions,
and they can see from an outside perspective, right? (Kanishka Interview, Pos.
18)

“You gotta look, look at all those three, the feedback, the results, and my
own intuition. And then make a decision. Say, okay, you know what, maybe,
you know, I was feeling guilty. That I haven't done my best job, but maybe,
yeah, I did a great job actually. You know, my boss says I did a great job. The
results are there. So maybe I'm just suffering from imposter syndrome. I need
to just trust myself. (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 18)
David The manager has to be leading by examples, and I will tell you, let's say.
Duron What I was really fascinated with, whenever I had a chance to talk to Mr.
Kelner from PPF, was that he was very inspiring person in this area, but my
biggest teacher was the CEO of Vodafone. When I was working for him, he
was always showing like real examples. And always gave you always this
inspiration. (David Duroň interview, Pos. 13)

What I'm saying is that if you want to break these myths, you have to lead by
example and it has to come from the top. Or you have to create a platform for

41
 your people that they feel free and secure if they come. (David Duroň
interview, Pos. 13)
Lydia How can the manager do that? It's about being authentic. Role managers need
Warren to be role models. At the end of the day, we're all humans, right? And that
means we all have the same challenges. And I think the worst thing you
can do as a manager is pretend you've got everything together. The worst
thing you can do as a manager is pretend you have all the answers. And the
worst thing you can do as a manager is ignore your team. So it's super
important. Keep those communication channels open. To role model that
authenticity. And that means that sometimes I say I've got things wrong, that
means that I have to say sorry when I do things that don't work. Or upset the
team. That also means that I celebrate with the team when results are delivered.
But it's being, it's about being prepared to do something which potentially
is quite radical and be that authentic person. In doing so, I think number
one, the team will appreciate it. They are more open and honest, but also it
then delivered better results because people feel appreciated. (Lydia
Warren interview, Pos. 17)
Kieron I think it's very difficult to challenge that up upwards, to be honest. I
Gaffney think it varies once again, I think a little bit by region. I found people more
willing in the West who are maybe of a certain age and had certain experience
to be willing to change and. For example, in Cambodia where ‘face’ is a very
big thing. So if they were to change their style of management it's quite a
hierarchical system, so it would be very difficult to change those above
you. And if you are trying to you can become a, you can come across and lose
a relationship elsewhere in so far as if you're trying to persistently change their,
the way their behavior is above, they can view you as being condescending or
as just another person on an ID list and you don't really know how it goes.
“You don't have the same amount of experience as us”! So I think it is
very difficult to change that culture above” (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos.
19)
Daniel Step one is establishing a corporate value set. That is non-negotiable. So it's
Catone funny because the only time when I'm going to become authoritarian, is if we
have a team member that refuses to treat people with maximal human dignity.

42
 So step one is you have to establish a set of values within the institution
that are like the constitution. This is what we do, this is what we believe,
this is who we are corporately as a group, and of course, individually in
some way as well. So to establish the value set, the second step is you act as
a gatekeeper. No one comes into the team that's gonna be a cancer in that
team. (Daniel Catone, Pos. 33)
Table 9.0: Identifying Myths in Organizational Culture Responses

Sinha’s solution relies heavily on the functional use of feedback – feedback functions as a
way of gaining information. If an approach does not end up with the results a manager desires
the problem, in his mind, is a lack of information. To gain the necessary information for
restructuring one’s approach, Sinha says that feedback works to locate it.

Duroň also emphasized the need for better information but argues that it is externally found in
the leadership of others. To be a manager who doesn’t fall into the traps of mythic fads or
limiting beliefs it isn’t enough to seek feedback, for him it is necessary to have someone as a
role model that demonstrates how to operate. He found this in the late Peter Kellner, who, he
states, was amazing at understanding strategy and achieving his goals and set a high standard
in his managerial role.

Warren pointed to the personal responsibility of the managers themselves. Rather than
beginning with looking to role models, she urges managers to be role models, and to
challenge misconceptions from a place of authenticity – acknowledging their weak spots,
being open about their mistakes. Feedback is part of it, but it begins not necessarily with
merely listening to others but from being honest with one’s colleagues, from operating from a
place of entrusting oneself to their co-workers. It is harder, in her mind, to make the processes
of one’s business function from mythic principles if managers resolve to do their work
without unnecessarily assuming authority and more from a place of seeking to earn trust and
respect.

Gaffney’s position regarding the subject of challenging managerial myths was decidedly
negative in comparison to the others, stating that doing so may not be the easiest thing to do.
From his position it really depends on the level of management one finds themselves in. If
one isn’t the very top manager, but is, say, a middle-manager, it may be extremely difficult to

43
challenge myths that have been baked into the status quo (an idea present in much of Duroň’s
interview as well). And that wouldn’t just be the case for middle-managers, as top managers,
as Gaffney previously said, may not really have as much power as they would like to think,
and so even a top-down approach to eliminating modes of thinking and working may be
detrimental given established work cultures.

Catone’s perspective, continuing from his emphasis on virtue ethics, is that myths are going to
be much easier to challenge when the culture of the organization is built on proper ethical
values rather than merely making a profit and building a brand. He stated in many places that
the one time he would be much more harsh with his employees is if they would behave in a
way that was fundamentally opposed to the values set into the company – one of which is
treating all with absolute human dignity. The myth he targeted the most frequently is the idea
that hard, authoritarian leadership is necessary for companies to make a profit and reach their
goals. He believes this would hardly be able to exist in a company if the set of values they
were built on explicitly precluded that notion.

4.6. Transformational Leadership and Effective Change

The next portion of the discussion was based on assessing the viability of transformational
leadership as a means of effecting change management. The perspectives that each person
shared on the subject seemed to track consistently with their other answers, so their responses
were not particularly surprising.

In favor (in most cases) David Duron

In favor (depending on organizational culture) Sinha, Warren, Gaffney
Conflicted Daniel Catone
Table 10: Perspectives on Transformational Leadership

Of the five, David Duron was the only one to take a strong stance. Yet, this was expected, as
Duron’s response to the question of transformational leadership was consistent with his prior
statements. Repeatedly stating that risk taking and breaking rules is essential to how he
approached his roles, he argued that transformational leadership is essential for businesses to
be able to stay afloat and to remain effective at all for the long run, arguing that innovation
and constant improvement is necessary if they are to be successful in the future. He also made

44
an interesting point about religion, connecting it to the need for security and fear of change
that is common among most people.

David Duron on the Necessity of Transformational Leadership

It's super needed. And you see right now the companies who are big vibrant like
startups, they are getting to the peak. They are growing fast. And I think this is what big
companies need as well because they are such elephants, such dinosaurs, right there in
the business forest, and if they don't change their behavior, they will die. (David Duroň
interview , Pos. 15)
And even in business, you don't want to be lost, so you want to believe in something. So
you are creating the world that someone has wrote this “business Bible” and you are just
reading it, copying what you see in it? And you are not creating a new kind of religion.
So it's the same thing. People, we want to be in, we want to be safe, right? We want to
know that we are somehow protected. And that's what Christianity and any other
religion is offering you. And the same thing is in a business, people believe in it because
they feel more secure. (David Duroň interview, Pos. 15)
People, they want to believe in something because for them it's Safeway. It's Safeway forward.
Rather than to create my own way to be an explorer. So you have some type of people who are
explorers, just few of them, like five, 7%, and the rest, they're just followers and, which is not
bad. It's fine. This is how the world is set. But then my wish is that most of these explorers are
sitting on the top of the organizations, and they have excellent followers who are following their
ideas and they can make it even bigger and better. (David Duroň interview , Pos. 15)
Table 12: Duron on Necessity of Transformational Leadership

While Duron sang the praises of the concept, Sinha, Warren, and Gaffney resolved to take a
much more modest approach, arguing that organizational culture is a strong determinant of
the effectiveness of this method.

Respondent Answer
Kanishka It depends on the context. In some places you need a command-and-
Sinha control structure. So for example in the Army the idea is when the general
says, "okay, you guys go climb up that mountain, you un, you know, circle
those guys from that side." The guys will immediately, without
questioning, even if they think they might die, just go and do what

45
 General says. Because if they say, "oh, but you know, I don't think that's so
safe. Maybe this is another idea and somebody else says, no, but I don't want to
do that. You guys do this." Well, you know, in that time the bomb is gonna
come and everybody's gonna die. So in situations where, you know, make life
or death decisions instinctively, you don't have time for debate, then the
situation is where you basically, your, our job is not to question the who water
wire as is us, to do and die. You just do what is said. And in fact, if you join the
Army, that is the expectation that you have already said, I am willing to follow
my commanding officer's thing without questioning. And if I don't do that, if
I kind push back, then it's gonna be treated as insubordination and I'm
gonna be court-marshaled. (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 25)
Lydia I think transformational leadership is good, but it has to be used in the
Warren right context and in the right culture. So transformational leadership is one
of the things that's been It's been documented as a great way to, to transform a
team, to, to change, et cetera. But actually there are then other theories with
any of these ideas. It's super important to make sure that it fits with the culture
in which you're trying to work, because if you take any of these management
principles and apply them, If that doesn't work in the culture, it's not gonna
stick. And actually it will be a fad and it won't be adapted. So do I think it's
a good idea? Yes. In the right culture? Yes. If it's properly embedded and yes. If
it's properly explained and allowed to flourish I think the challenge will be, Is
if you try and put this in transformational leadership into a very stoic
culture, so a culture where actually it's very much hierarchical where it's
about delivering results as opposed to the individuals, et cetera, then it
won't float and it won't deliver. (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 27)
Kieron I would probably say is I think transformational leadership in certain
Gaffney environments can be incredibly rewarding for an organization. Because,
people who, people can just first come into an organization and you have
absolutely no idea what they're potentially capable of. Now, what they're
potentially capable of could be far beyond what other people are potentially
capable of in that organization from a particular element of the business. And I
think encouraging that type of leadership, as I understand it, ultimately
leads to new ideas ultimately leads to people being able to come and

46
 present their ideas and know that their ideas are going to be developed in
good faith. However, going to the kind of myths that we were talking
about. And as I mentioned earlier, one of my bugbears is, the kind of
management leader things on LinkedIn. I think where people get bogged
down a little bit now is we do need leaders in an organization. You do
need people who inspire other people to be a certain way, but you also
need people who manage a process. You need people who manage the day-
to-day, who make sure that things are going out the door, who make sure
that whatever the deliverable is or whatever a client is expecting ends up
in that client's hat. (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 26)
Table 11: A Moderate Perspective on Transformational Leadership

A few key themes are apparent in the more moderate perspective shared by these participants:
First, the benefits of transformational leadership are real. They think it helps make
employees feel included, generate new ideas, and upscale their work in such a way that can
benefit the companies they work for in significant ways. Second, transformational leadership
can easily become a faddish idea that has little positive impact if the organization is not ready
for it. This has several factors: the type of business, the organizational culture, the experience
and leadership of the managers, the trust (or lack thereof) among employees, and the project
and purpose that transformational leadership is aiming to complete and achieve.

Each of these respondents argued that there is a wrong mindset in business culture that
denigrates the need for hierarchy within business. There is a sense in which the roles of
hierarchical leadership are being diminished in a faddish and unrealistic sense that can greatly
hinder the progress and effectiveness of many modern businesses. As several of them note,
companies such as legal firms will not be as malleable and would not benefit from
transformational leadership as much as organizations that are more open to (and often need)
innovation, while creative firms would experience much growth and higher levels of success
if they engaged in a transformational approach.

The final respondent, Daniel Catone, had a much more conflicted position on
transformational leadership.

47
There's a lot of management trends. Or fads. And sure. Can things like transformational
leadership be effective? I think it's undeniable that it can be effective. But it's largely irrelevant to
me. Because I, as I said, I, it's values first. And like for example, if I tried to engage, let's say I had
a toxic corporate culture. And I tried to engage in some type of transformational leadership
perspective. And it won't matter because I must change the value orientation. And these people
might not have buy-in to the value orientation. And then I have to move them to that. But that
might not be who they are as people. So my leadership would be ineffective. So it's almost like
starting from scratch. You'd have to step in to transform. Establish the values and then just build
that up again. And I've done that. That's what we do. I buy companies too. I don't know. I shy
away from fads and trends and if you look like a hundred years ago, the types of fads and trends
of leadership and then the 1950s and the 1980s, and then today these things come and go. But I
think Aristotelian ethics is a better management guide than any management guide that's been
written since. (Daniel Catone, Pos. 42)

Catone seems to, in some parts, agree that transformational leadership is effective for some,
and seems to indicate that it is his personal preference to not participate, but, in his mind, it is
much better as a general, universal rule to manage from a consistent, established ethical
framework. So while Duron argues that all should do it, and the others state that it should or
should not be done based on context, Catone argues that it is not fundamentally important,
regardless of industry, and that all should instead approach their management of others from a
value system that doesn’t just inform their leadership but their very lives. It is character and
virtue that will be effective in all circumstances, he argues, and so transformational
leadership, regardless of context, is not important, because trendy ideas will come and go,
while ethical frameworks have a greater sense of reliability, stability, and point to the deeper
things of life that truly matter.

4.7. Addressing Management Myths on the Popular Level

The second to last segment of each interview was based on discussing why each of the
participants thinks that management myths are not ultimately addressed on the popular level
(in business literature and popular business culture).

48
Sinha’s answer could be categorized as this: management myths are not entirely mythic, as
many of them are conventional management wisdom that works in some contexts, or at least
used to.

“People want pieces of wisdom. They want management wisdom, right? So if you did a search for
management wisdom or management insights, it will give you a list of hundred great management
pieces of wisdom. Each of them is a myth, right? So you, if you want to find the management myths, do
a Google search for management wisdom. And each of those answers the, what is being called
wisdom. Well, that's the management myth. Cause that's what everybody believes, right? So if
everybody believes that, let's say honesty is the best policy, right? What is management wisdom? Treat
your customers good, and you'll become successful. Well, no, if you underprice yourself, you'll go out
of business because you're paying, you're charging less to the customer that you're paying per, that's,
that's non-management wisdom. Treat your customers good. So you take whatever statement is called
wisdom, and you say, where would this situation not be true? And that is the place where it's actually
a myth, right?” (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 29)

For Sinha the reason these ideas are not being addressed as myths is because business culture
cannot necessarily pronounce certain ideas as myths in a universal sense, since there are (or
may be) instances where they would work. In a very hierarchical, honor-shame culture, for
instance, authoritarian management could potentially work, given that the society is, in some
sense, authoritarian. But in an egalitarian culture this would be ineffective and would lead to
losing employees and conflict.

The key to identifying the myths, in Sinha’s mind, is something managers must do
individually, and so literature or popular level discussions about business cannot be the
medium through which managers determine what ideas are flawed and which ones are sound,
as their own experience can teach them so they can figure out the best way forward.

Duron’s statements agree, highlighting that experience teaches what is and isn’t effective –
and ties this back to transformational leadership and innovation. Using a sailing analogy,
Duron argued that most managers do not have the time to think about “myths” and instead
spend their time trying to emulate competitors and see what works.

Number one, the leader is just not looking forward. They are just looking backwards. And they're just
watching what the other boats are doing. And if they see that hey, these guys,

49
they're changing what they’re doing, then just do it. Don’t say “we have an analytical team. We are a
big boat.” Shut up. Do just what they are doing. I don't want to give them any chance to beat us. Or
even though it will slow us down, it will slow them down as well, right?
(David Duroň interview, Pos. 19)

Warren’s response focused on the practicality of such discussions. Her approach was to touch
on the connotations that people assign to the concept of management. As an idea, she argues,
management is incredibly broad, and nailing down what sort of things people should or
shouldn’t do as managers may be a wrongheaded pursuit, because there cannot be a
standardized way of doing things – that itself, she says, is a myth! She also made the point
that leadership tends to be distinguished from management nowadays and seen as a topic that
is easier to speak of, harkening back to the debate over whether leadership and management
are separate subjects, two distinct portions of one whole, or the same thing.

“If you say management, people can sometimes have a negative connotation. These days we talk about
leadership more because we recognize that you are not trying to manage people, it's more about
leading people to get their potential. And I think the times have changed that actually you may not see
much around management of the topic because actually we've realized that's too broad and that we
need to break things up more into more areas. Hence you'll get separate books around motivation.
Hence you'll get a book on rewards. You'll get a separate book on coaching. You'll get a separate
book on developing potential. All of them could be glass out management, but actually that
understanding of what that word means has grown significantly.” (Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 34)

The responses given by Gaffney and Catone, by contrast, were more focused on the utility of
such discussions, and their answer was two-fold: managers lack the time to spend dissecting
potential myths, and those who would write about these subjects tend to be academics with
little practical experience.

Academics, Managers, and Refuting Business Myths

Respondent Answer
Kieron I'd say in very simple terms from a practical perspective. Generally,
Gaffney refuting doesn't matter from a literature perspective. It's the actual putting into
practice in an organization what you believe, what works best for that

50
 organization. Myself, for example, I don't have time to go around, refuting
what I think is, these kind of managerial myths or or things that I disagree with
within certain literature. I just have to apply what I think is best practice in my
own organization. And I think it's that kinda academia side of it. Tends to come
probably when you have a bit more. You are either in academia to begin with
and then it becomes hard to refute because you don't actually have the practical
experience. (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 30)
Daniel I think it's pretty simple. The people who would be able to write about
Catone those things are really good at it, probably. And they're busy executing
those ideas in business. And just don't have the time or desire to execute
them outside of the business that they do. Yeah. I'm not going to be trying to
reform the management world. It's not my mission. I have very little desire to
that, no desire to, that I have the people that have been given to me by God to
care for. These are my partners, my customers, even to some degree, my
competitors. That's my orientation and focus. And so it's practical execution
application. But a good manager doesn't just sit there and think all day. They
actually do things just does things, or the president does things we're not
academics by nature. I think that there's a gap between academia and
management or leadership, or whatever you want to call it. Because you
have people in the world, you have people in the ivory tower in a way. And
you just don't get a lot of crossover. (Daniel Catone, Pos. 55)
Table 12: Refuting Management Myths Responses

For all five participants, business myths are conventional business wisdom that is context
dependent, and no one can know what those things are without practical experience as a
manager within their field. Seeking to discern what is a myth may have some utility, and
certain ideas are inaccurate, but there is little purpose to managers seeking out to refute such
ideas on a large scale.

Catone also insinuates that management literature’s necessity in general is in question:

“Do you know how many management books I've read in my life? Nada. Zero. I've never read one of my

entire, I never needed to read one. I think there's a lot of hocus pocus. Why do we have education?

Education can be the attainment of a specific skill. Like becoming really

51
good at plumbing or electrical work or playing a musical instrument. Okay. However, you can't
learn not really how to be a good entrepreneur. Not, you'll get some skills and talents and things
like that, but there's so much instinct involved and so much that is not taught at school that you
just can't do unless it's like a personal thing. Like I'm talking about like virtue attainment. But
what education is very useful for you? It shows me two things. One, It shows me someone can do
something, stick to it and finish it, even if it sucks. Okay. And that's unfortunately most of life.
Yeah. So I like that. And I have to, they, applicant would have to prove to me if they don't have an
education, those things that someone with a good education wouldn't have to necessarily prove.
The second thing is it can teach you how to be nimble with your mind”. (Daniel Catone, Pos. 61)

For Catone virtue, character, instinct, personal intelligence and hard work are what make a
manager effective, not management theory. This idea seems to have some support in the other
interviews. Duron and Sinha state that management theory is often based on conventions and
what is controllable. Warren states that management theory gets easily outdated and misses
the personal aspects that make managers good at their jobs. Gaffney points to the need to
recognize that not only is each context different, but each individual person is also different,
and there is no book or theory that can really prepare you to be a manager to each individual
person that is subordinate to you. Management theory, then, is seen by all five as something
that may, at least in part, be unnecessary for managers to effectively conduct their jobs.

4.8. Avoiding Myths as a Manager

The final segment of each interview was dedicated to answering the question of how
managers can prevent themselves from falling prey to management myths.

Respondents Answers
Kanishka I think one is, learning when you made an error, right? So like I said,
Sinha sometimes you act on the basis of a belief and either the feedback or your
intuition or the results will say that belief is not grounded. It didn't work. So
then I re-question it, and if I do that every time, the belief doesn't get the
result that I want or the appreciation that I'm looking for or doesn't feel good.
That way I can keep updating my beliefs. After the event, after I've taken
decision based on the beliefs. The other way is where I'm learning, especially
in an academic situation, I would always ask. Where is this situation that I'm

52
 like seeing as a greatest insight? Where would this not work? Right? And if I
can say, where in the situation this would not work is this, then I've got a
more 360 understanding of that point of view. (Kanishka Interview, Pos. 33)
David Duron I think your results will tell you. At first I was I was doing small revolutions
at first, but then later I found that probably I've got something from the most
high of my mother and father that I have a nose for such opportunities, right?
And I started to risk more and I started to convince my bosses more and
more, and once they saw that the money is coming and they are very happy
and the shareholders are happy, they gave me more and more freedom to do
it. So I would say you have to start with a small successes. You have to test
even capability of the company to deliver the innovation. You have to test
capability of your team because if you are too much crazy, they will talk
about you. That you are really too much crazy. They will not tell, oh, he's
super talented. He's super creative, super innovative. No, they will say, he's
just crazy. So even in this area, you have to go slowly. (david Duroň
interview , Pos. 21)
Lydia I think in reality, the biggest thing you can think as a manager, or the worst
Warren thing you can think as a manager is that you will not fall into any of these
traps. We are human, we will fail. Yeah, that's just. That's just taken for
granted. So if you think you're never going to fall into any management
myths I suggest that person goes back and rethinks. It's important to realize
that sometimes you get it wrong and then you learn from that mistake. It's
important to be able to apologize when you get it wrong. Because again, it
shows that humility, which is key, shows that you are human and it shows that
you respect the individuals. So do I think there's any way to not fall into those
traps? Not necessarily. I think you can learn. You can read, you can. There are
so many TED Talks. There are so many podcasts. There are so many snippets
that you can pick up if you work in a good company and they encourage you
to learn, you can find books. And it's great, but there is nothing like the
experience of living and breathing it yourself to really cement that learning.
(Lydia Warren interview, Pos. 38)
Kieron I think what tends to happen is you tend to be aware of that. So when
Gaffney you’re coming through, you tend to be aware of what the myths are.

53
 You've observed people above you and you can either say I want to be
like them, or I don't want to be like them. They either feed into the myths
or they don't feed into the myths. I think one, you are always going to be
aware of what the myths are.I don't think you can avoid falling prey of them
either through actually falling prey of them insofar as them existing and you
acting upon them in a way, or over adjusting the other way. So being so aware
of them that you're like, okay, I need to be so far the other way. So yeah, I,
think you, you are likely to fall prey of them one way or another. I think it's
just being aware and having enough self-reflection to know maybe when
you have fallen prey to them and thinking about mechanisms you can put
in place to make sure, or to try and reduce the risk of falling prey to
them again (Kieron Gaffney interview, Pos. 32)
Daniel You're gonna make mistakes, right? It's just inevitable because of the
Catone defects in our nature. But you can only bring to bear what you are and
what you have. And so having a good understanding of the man you are
and a good understanding of the man who you want to be, and those
parts of which we don't want. That's critical for any good decision
making…Your parents are your first managers in a sense. And so that d n a is
passed into you. And so you have to see that. So just sit in the dark, think
about it, be alone, be quiet. Just listen and hear yourself and look at yourself
and see that. Tell us like, this is the man I want to be. This is the man I am.
Here's those things that need to change. Bring that to bear because that will
reduce the amount of friction you're going to have with other people who
don't do that or need help to learn how to do that. (Daniel Catone, Pos.
69)
Table 13: Avoiding Management Myths Responses

Sinha emphasized that for each individual manager, learning from experience is necessary, so
it may be the wrong idea to try and “avoid” myths and more about staying alert and aware of
what happens as you manage. Mistakes are guaranteed, so being ready to learn and adjust will
help a person discover when they’ve been operating on false assumptions.

Duron pointed to success. In his mind, the myths that hinder most managers are limiting
beliefs. Limiting beliefs form a comfort zone that convinces a manager they are making the

54
right decisions, when, in fact, what they are doing will not be as rewarding as they would
assume, and will expose the need to branch out, take risks, and move beyond what has been
conventionally promoted as management wisdom.

Warren stated that managers should spend their time being OK with the unknown. Mistakes
will happen, problems will arise, and when that time comes a manager learns, not just about
what they must do at work, but about themselves as a person. Each of these moments are a
step to grow, in her mind. To be fully authentic, then, requires that managers are honest about
this with those around them, as a mindset of triumphalism is ultimately doomed to fail.

Gaffney, while taking a similar approach, pointed out that managers may indeed be aware of
the myths as they seek to do their jobs, but the likelihood that this will somehow entirely
diminish the effects of these misconceptions is unfounded. One cannot avoid being acted
upon, in some manner, by management myths – they are part and parcel, in his mind, of the
managerial experience. One can, however, diminish these effects, and learn to do one’s job
with honesty and, in a sense, humility.

Catone’s response focused on the need for individual managers to assess what influences have
had an impact on them through deep self-reflection. He made a point that parents are a
person’s first managers, and much of how we manage the things in our lives is derived from
how we observed our parents manage things in their lives. What happens, then, is that things
such as upbringing, context, culture often create the space for myths to affect us, and so to
better address such ideas a manager needs to take adequate time reflecting - not just on their
decisions, the outcomes, and the motivations for their decisions, but on the influences that
create the motivations and mindsets that inform their decisions.

The qualitative portion of the research offered a wealth of interesting, complex, and practical
topics, and each of the respondents contributed in distinct yet complementary ways.

5. Discussion
5.1. The Qualitative Interviews and the Research Goal
The goal, as stated in the methodology, was understanding the nature, cause, and effects of
management myths in business contexts around the world. The workplace experiences of the
respondents include the United States, Western and Eastern Europe, Africa, Southwest and
Southeast Asia.

55
The questions that the research sought to understand were the following:
4. What types of management myths persist across various industries around the world?
5. How do these myths form, and what reinforces them?
6. How can business managers recognize these myths in their contexts and correct them?

The key management myths that were identified in the interviews were the following:
1. Hero Management (also could be called “ego management”) – managers often
struggle to admit their shortcomings and overestimate their abilities due to their
assumption that appearing strong and unwavering requires them to put on a persona.
This, however, often results in poor decision making, toxic workplace culture,
breakdowns in communication, and managerial burnout.
2. “What is Conventional is Most Practical” – managers often operate from the
assumption that what other managers are doing, what they have seen in media and in
their personal experience, and what their perceptions of what a manager must be, is
necessary to emulate to replicate the same results that other managers have. This,
however, leads to limiting beliefs about innovation and improvement, causing
stagnation, as well as buying into outdated or half-baked ideas that, while they may
work in other contexts, may not be the best decision for that manager.
3. Authenticity, ethics, and virtue aren’t essential – this myth stems from the idea that
management must be top-down, authoritarian, or at least strongly hierarchical to the
point that the organization works like a machine. This leads organizations to prioritize
results over people, numbers over culture, image over character, which makes them
more vulnerable to unethical practices, scandal, and harms employees.

Within the interviews it was established that the society within which organizational cultures
are formed is the source of management myths and why they persist. The reason it is difficult
for managers to often identify these misconceptions and adjust is since many of these myths
are passed off as truth within the societies and businesses contexts in which they find
themselves.

Finally, the means through which said myths can be challenged was identified as both a need
for experience and personal inventory: exploring, trying, testing, and failing in managerial
endeavors coupled with self-reflection, feedback, and open communication. The consensus
opinion on management myths and managerial experience, from the beginning to the end of

56
each interview, is that there is a distinct need for risk for any manager to be able to develop
themselves and become the type of leader that their subordinates respect and admire. Stepping
outside of one’s comfort zone in terms of ideas, self-awareness, empathy, openness, and
cooperation are necessary if a manager is going to conduct their job in a way that isn’t swayed
by half-baked business ideas and that doesn’t ultimately leave a destructive legacy. As Catone
put it:

“If you can't treat people with maximal human dignity, if you don't help people achieve
everything that they want in their life, that's good. Then you will leave destruction because
you'll just try to achieve what's best for you and you will leave, you'll end with emptiness and
loneliness” (Daniel Catone, Pos. 71).

In all of this, several key themes tie the qualitative research both to the literature review and
to practical application in the lives of managers.

5.2. Self-Awareness: Deeper Reflection as a means of Myth Busting

One of the themes that permeated the qualitative portion of the research was the idea that self-
awareness is essential to effective leadership. Inner motivations and inclinations strongly
influence the approach, reasoning, and decision-making that goes into managerial activities.
The conversation in much business literature seems to be about “what,” and “how,” but
seldom break down the “why”: the reason managers make certain decisions, why they treat
others the way they do, and how that all ties into their understanding of themselves.
Duron repeatedly harped on this subject: the reason that managers prefer to think there is only
one way to do something is because they are insecure regarding their ability to manage the
pressure of adopting a different strategy. The clash that happens between innovators and
conservative managers is, in Duron’s mind, about inner motivations rather than merely about
outward actions. The ideologies that drive each are based on entirely different
presuppositions.
This is the place where communication and feedback become necessary tools of leadership
development. Insecurities that are unaddressed translate into managerial behaviors that can
lead organizational cultures down toxic paths. This relates to ethics directly, as moral
awareness, argued for by Trevino and Brown (2004, p.70), seems to necessitate a prior self-
awareness. A lack of either comes from either an ignorance or refusal to self-reflect on the
inner matters of the heart that energize the actions of a person in the day to day. Sayeed and

57
Shanker (2009) strongly support the notion that it is through the process of self-reflection that
managers increase their emotional intelligence, which allows them to be more effective in
working alongside other people.
Managers are people, and subordinates are people. A theme constantly repeated throughout
each of the interviews is that people must be engaged with dignity and understanding, as
without those things it drives people away, makes them angry, tired, and breaks down
cooperation. Managers must not only go on a journey of reflection but also of empathy,
learning to understand those around them. And this ties directly into the next theme.

5.3. Ethics: Cultivating Virtue as a Means of Better Management

While implications of this concept were throughout the various interviews it is really in the
conversation with Catone that the need for a strong ethical foundation is necessary for
managers to operate in a way that is life giving. Catone’s insistence that Aristotelian virtue
ethics form the baseline for how managers operate echoes Matthew Stewart’s (2009)
admonition that managers spend more time studying philosophy and history than reading
books about business and management. When asked about whether he agreed with Stewart’s
opinion (that managers should focus more on philosophy) Catone said the following:

“Yes. The fundamental basis of Aristotelian ethics is that there are vices and there are virtues, and you can

put them on a line, right? And do you know anything about Aristotelian ethics. Very little. Okay, cool.

That's fine. I don't want to talk something about you already know cause I don't Yeah, exactly. Exactly. So

you have let's take let's take cowardice and courage. Excuse me. Cowardice and fool. Hardiness. Okay. So

on one end of the spectrum, you have somebody who's a coward. On the other end of the spectrum, you

have fool hardiness. We'll just do anything, jump off a bridge kind of thing. Because they're brave. That's

not brave. The midpoint between virtue and vice, or, excuse me, the two vices is virtue. So the midpoint

between cowardice and foolhardiness is courage.” (Daniel Catone, Pos. 45)

The pursuit of self-actualization without a necessary desire to cultivate virtue can, in Catone’s
mind, lead to destructive and toxic behavior that harms rather than ethical behavior that heals.
Without recognizing the need for virtuous character, the very foundation for organizational
health is undermined, as the organization will always carry the scent, to be poetic, of those
who are a part of it. That which is in the character of the managers becomes the character of
the company, and that forms the way that people relate to one another and the company itself.

58
It seems that there is a severe lack of business literature that seeks to help managers and
entrepreneurs tie an ethical framework to the vision and workings of their companies, and
more so materials that focus on numbers, systems, strategies. Yet as all the ethics literature
discussed in the literature review suggests, ethics cannot be an addition or a foregone
conclusion but must be intentionally integrated into the very fabric of organizational culture if
it is to have any significant effect.

5.4. Issues with Management Theory and Practice

The aspect that is most controversial but necessary to address is the fact that in each
interview, whether implicitly or explicitly, management theory was in some sense repudiated.
Whether it was its antiquity (Warren), its oversimplification of complex issues (Sinha), it’s
lack of future vision (Duron), or inconsistency with managers’ lived experience (Gaffney and
Catone), it seems that management theory has only served as an academic pursuit with some
interesting aspects that has little utility in the everyday workings of modern businesses.
There seems to be a consistent disconnect between the training and practical experience of
managers. While each stated that it is impossible to avoid falling prey to some form of
management myth or misconception, there was also a strong sense from each that what is
promulgated in as management “wisdom” is often simply what is taught to students of
business. Much of the theory that is promulgated in higher education is taught to students only
to never be used or to be recognized as an oversimplification of what being a manager is like
in the real world.
Can this be amended? It would be foolish to conclude that there is therefore no value to
management theory as a subject, but it is possible that greater efforts must be taken for the
education of business students to be formational in a way that prepares them for their careers.
It does pose the question of how business education would need to adjust to bring more value
to students’ practical experiences after graduation.

6. Research Limitations
6.1. Sample
The research sample, while representing managers of various cultures and roles with valuable
experience and knowledge, was made up of five people. While important discussions were
had that helped bring together the theoretical and practical sides of management, five
individuals, however skilled, is not enough to determine generalized trends on a large scale.
While several more managers were contacted, only the five represented chose to make the
time to be a part of the research process. The research would have benefitted greatly from
59
more nationalities being represented, as well as from having more female participants. Given
that the research goal was broad and the questions very general it would have been fitting to
have a larger sample size.
6.2. Author as limitation
Due to personal circumstances the process of research and thesis writing was conducted
within a very short period, and so the result may not be as expansive and in-depth as it would
have been had the author had a larger portion of time to conduct the composition of this work.
Suggestions for further research
The author would suggest that both qualitative and quantitative research be conducted on the
importance of virtue ethics as a foundation for ethical business. A myth that seems to
consistently appear in both literature and research is that having a comprehensive ethical
framework is not a valuable or valid asset for managers to focus on and employ. The concept
of corporate social responsibility is largely based on external factors (societal pressure, image,
and trends), and appears to merely be assumed, without seeing each aspect of a business (not
merely its relation to the wider society) as needing an overarching value system that begins
with a strong ethical character. This would be most fitting and would further the discussion on
what is most expedient for managers to do to develop into leaders that others would desire to
follow.
7. Conclusion
Much can be said about management – management theory, management practices,
managerial ethics, etc. – and this thesis merely contributes to the wealth of knowledge
available to us today. In many regards the qualitative research confirmed the assumptions
made in response, namely that management myths are narrative assumptions that take on a
life of their own within organizational cultures (Geva, 2001). Each participants’ answer
regarding the effect of these myths was colored by their background, lived experiences, and
this made each interview unique in their own way. The connective tissue in each of the
interviews was the fact that who we are as people directly impacts the way we manage.
Management myths, therefore, strongly relate to how managers understand themselves, their
role, and the world around them. If managers can create space for feedback, self-reflection,
communication, and growth, then these

60
References

Aarons, G. A., Ehrhart, M. G., Farahnak, L. R., & Hurlburt, M. S. (2015). Leadership and

organizational change for implementation (LOCI): a randomized mixed method pilot

study of a leadership and organization development intervention for evidence-based

practice implementation. Implementation Science, 10(1).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-014-0192-y

Abrahamson, E. (1991). Managerial Fads and Fashions: The Diffusion and Rejection of

Innovations. The Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 586.

https://doi.org/10.2307/258919

BADEN, D., & HIGGS, M. (2015). Challenging the Perceived Wisdom of Management

Theories and Practice. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(4), 539–

555. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43698373

Birkinshaw, J. (2012). Reinventing management smarter choices for getting work done.

Hoboken, Nj Jossey-Bass.
Dayal, I. (1971). Some Myths in Management. Economic and Political Weekly, 6(9), M31–

M34. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4381683

Ewell, P. T. (2004). Editorial: Management Myths. Change, 36(1), 4–5.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/40177237

Farahnak, L. R., Ehrhart, M. G., Torres, E. M., & Aarons, G. A. (2019). The Influence of

Transformational Leadership and Leader Attitudes on Subordinate Attitudes and

Implementation Success. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 27(1),

154805181882452. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051818824529

Floyd, L. A., Xu, F., Atkins, R., & Caldwell, C. (2013). Ethical Outcomes and Business

Ethics: Toward Improving Business Ethics Education. Journal of Business Ethics,

117(4), 753–776. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42001885

61
Gehmann, U. (2015). Myths and Narratives for Management. International Business

Research, 9(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v9n1p123

Geva, A. (2001). Myth and Ethics in Business. Business Ethics Quarterly, 11(4), 575.

https://doi.org/10.2307/3857762

Hartge, T., Callahan, T., & King, C. (2015). Leaders’ Behaviors During Radical Change

Processes: Subordinates’ Perceptions of How Well Leader Behaviors Communicate

Change. International Journal of Business Communication, 56(1), 100–121.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488415605061

Hauserman, C. P., & Stick, S. L. (2013). The Leadership Teachers Want from Principals:

Transformational. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue Canadienne de

L’éducation, 36(3), 184–203. http://www.jstor.org/stable/canajeducrevucan.36.3.184

Jiatong, W., Wang, Z., Alam, M., Murad, M., Gul, F., & Gill, S. A. (2022). The Impact of

Transformational Leadership on Affective Organizational

Commitment and Job Performance: The Mediating Role of Employee
Engagement. Frontiers in Psychology,

13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.831060

62
Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2019). Leaders’ Impact on Organizational Change: Bridging

Theoretical and Methodological Chasms. Academy of Management Annals, 13(1),

272–307. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0138

PEETZ, D. (2019). Management, culture and control. JSTOR; ANU Press.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvq4c16w.10

Petrick, J. A., Cragg, W., & Sañudo, M. (2011). Business Ethics in North America: Trends

and Challenges. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 51–62.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/41476057

Rahman, Z., & Kholidi Hadi, H. (2019). Does Organizational Culture Matters in

Organizational Change? Transformational Leadership and Cynicism About

Organizational Change. KnE Social Sciences, 3(11), 353.

https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i11.4019

Sayeed, O. B., & Shanker, M. (2009). Emotionally Intelligent Managers & Transformational

Leadership Styles. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 44(4), 593–610.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27768233

Stern, S., & Cooper, C. (2018). Myths of management : what people get wrong about being

the boss. New York London Kogan Page.

Stewart, M. (2010). The management myth : debunking modern business philosophy. W.W.

Norton.

Thomas, T., Schermerhorn, J. R., Dienhart, J. W., & Bartles, D. L. (2004). Strategic

Leadership of Ethical Behavior in Business [and Executive Commentary].

The Academy of Management Executive (1993-2005), 18(2), 56–68.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166062

63
Toheed, H., Ali Turi, J., & Ismail Ramay, M. (2019). Exploring the Consequences of

Organizational Cynicism. International Journal of European Studies, 3(1), 1.

https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijes.20190301.11

Treviño, L. K., Brown, M. E., & Wall, S. J. (2004). Managing to Be Ethical: Debunking Five

Business Ethics Myths [and Executive Commentary]. The Academy of Management

Executive (1993-2005), 18(2), 69–83. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4166063

64
65