Social intelligence in the cultural context: comparison of Ukrainian and Slovak managers

Economic Annals-ХХI: Volume 169, Issue 1-2, Pages: 62-66

Citation information:
Frankovský, M., Birknerová, Z., Zbihlejová, L., & Medviď, M. (2018). Social intelligence in the cultural context: comparison of Ukrainian and Slovak managers. Economic Annals-XXI, 169(1-2), 62-66. doi: https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V169-12

Miroslav Frankovský
PhD (Psychology),
Associate Professor,
Vice-Dean for Science and Research,
Department of Managerial Psychology,
Faculty of Management,
University of Prešov in Prešov
16 Konštantínova Str., Prešov, 080 01, Slovakia
miroslav.frankovsky@unipo.sk
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1822-9730

Zuzana Birknerová
PhD, (Management),
MBA,
Associate Professor,
Head, Department of Managerial Psychology,
Faculty of Management,
University of Prešov in Prešov
16 Konštantínova Str., Prešov, 080 01, Slovakia
zuzana.birknerova@unipo.sk
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8478-4337

Lucia Zbihlejová
PhD (Management),
Associate Professor,
Department of Intercultural Communication,
Faculty of Management,
University of Prešov in Prešov
16 Konštantínova Str., Prešov, 080 01, Slovakia
lucia.zbihlejova@unipo.sk
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4787-1378

Marta Medviď
MA (Management),
PhD Student (Economics),
Faculty of Management,
University of Prešov in Prešov
16 Konštantínova Str., Prešov, 080 01, Slovakia
marta.polianska@gmail.com
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3548-0668

Social intelligence in the cultural context: comparison of Ukrainian and Slovak managers

Abstract. The presented theoretical and methodological study is based on the assumption that social constructs do not have a generally valid form but are culturally conditioned. The study presents the results of a research aimed at an analysis of the consistency of the factor structure of the MESI methodology (Measuring Social Intelligence) in the Ukrainian and Slovak managerial environment. At the same time, the results of the analysis of differences in the assessment of the extracted social intelligence factors (Manipulation, Empathy and Social Irritability) between the managers from Ukraine and Slovakia are presented. The data collection was carried out between August 2014 and March 2015 on a research file which consisted of 131 managers, of whom 65 were Ukrainian and 66 were Slovak managers from the areas of administration, trade and services. The findings make it possible to formulate answers to two questions. The first is related to the degree of universality of the extracted factor structures of social intelligence in the individual cultures. The second relates to the assessment of individual specified social intelligence factors within different cultures.

The presented findings confirm that the factor structure of the MESI methodology, which is based on the samples of the Ukrainian and Slovak managers, is consistent. The existence of several differences in the assessment of social intelligence, with social irritability as an attribute, was confirmed. Social irritability is more prominently rejected by the Slovak managers. The cultural impact in terms of Social irritability is manifested by the fact that the Slovak managers reject the specifics of this construct (such as «it makes me nervous when I am with other people», «I rather avoid the presence of others», «the manifestation of the feelings of other people baffle me», and «the weaknesses and the wishes of others distract me») more strongly than the Ukrainian managers. This finding also points to the necessity of accepting the cultural context in examining social intelligence and social constructs in general.

Keywords: Social Construct; Social Intelligence; Cultural Context; MESI Methodology; Manager

JEL Classification: L29; Z10

Acknowledgements: This research was conducted with the support of two grant projects: VEGA 1/0909/16 (Research of determinants of decision-making in the business management and sales management, taking into account the personal and psychological aspects of trading, and analysis of the possible implications in neuromarketing) and  KEGA 003PU-4/2017 (Coping with demanding situations – subject innovation and university textbook preparation).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V169-12

References

1. Heine, S. J., & Ruby, M. B. (2010). Cultural psychology. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(2), 254-266.
   doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.7
2. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (2003). Culture, Self, and the Reality of the Social. Psychological Inquiry, 14(3-4), 277-283.
   doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2003.9682893
3. Matsumoto, D. R. (2000). Culture and psychology. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
4. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
5. Vávrová, S., Andrysová, P., Hladík, J., Hrbáčková, K., Birknerová, Z., Frankovský, M., & Janovská, A. (2013). Selected social phenomena in cultural contexts: Research survey among Czech and Slovak university students. Prague: Hnutí R (in Czech).
6. Silvera, D. H., Martinussen, M., & Dahl, T. I. (2001). The Tromsø Social Intelli-gence Scale, a self-report measure of social intelligence. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42(4), 313-319.
   doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.00242
7. Thorndike, E. L. (1920). Intelligence and its use. Harpers Magazine, 140, 227-235.
   Retrieved from https://harpers.org/archive/1920/01/intelligence-and-its-uses
8. Sigmar, L. S., Hynes, G. E., & Hill, K. L. (2012). Strategies for Teaching Social and Emotional Intelligence in Business Communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(3), 301-317.
   doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569912450312
9. Boyatzis, R. E. (2011). Managerial and Leadership Competencies: A Behavioral Approach to Emotional, Social and Cognitive Intelligence. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 15(2), 91-100.
   doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/097226291101500202
10. Frankovský, M., & Birknerová, Z. (2014). Measuring Social Intelligence – The MESI Methodology. Asian Social Science, 10(6), 90-97.
    doi: https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n6p90
11. Frankovský, M., & Birknerová, Z. (2013). Social inteligence in the context of manager’s work. Prešov: Bookman, s.r.o.
    Retrieved from http://www.unipo.sk/public/media/21074/Monografia%20AAB.pdf (in Slovak)
12. Kaukiainen, A., Bjorkqvist, K., Osterman, K., Lagerspetz, K., & Forsblom, S. (1995). Peer-Estimated Social Intelligence (PESI). Turku, Finland: Department of Psychology, University of Turku.
13. Hudec, O., Suhányi, L., & Urbančíková, N. (2014). Regional decision-making criteria: Strategic investment in the central Europe. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 9(2), 104-117.
    Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/24873498
14. Suhányi, L., & Suhányiová, A. (2014). Multi-criteria decision-making tool design for the investment decision-making of territorial self-government regions. Journal of applied economic sciences, 27(9(1)), 110-122.
    Retrieved from http://cesmaa.eu/journals/jaes/files/JAES_2014_Spring_short.pdf
15. Štefko, R., & Nowak, S. (2014). Cooperation shrines of Europe in regional management and development. Polish journal of management studies, 10(2), 209-215.
    Retrieved from http://oaji.net/articles/2015/1384-1424084887.pdf

Received 11.12.2017