Piórkowska K., Managers’ loyalty as an organizational resource in the strategic context,

‘Managing Transformation with Creativity’, Omerzel D.G., Nastav B., Sedmak S. (eds.),

Corvinius University of Budapest, Budapeszt 2012, pp.

1053-1066,

ISSN 1854-4312.

MANAGERS’ LOYALTY AS AN ORGANISATIONAL RESOURCE IN

THE STRATEGIC CONTEXT

PhD Eng., Katarzyna Piórkowska, University of Economics in Wrocław, Poland

[e-mail]

ABSTRACT

The paper’s aim is to analyse managers’ loyalty as an organizational resource in the

strategic context. The studies constitute the basis for developing the conceptual framework

and model of creating managers’ loyalty in enterprises. The main part of the paper concerns

the results of the research on attributes of managers’ loyalty constituting main features of an

internal and external dimension of the future model of creating managers’ loyalty in

enterprises.

The results of measuring managers’ loyalty from its attributes perspective were

presented in accordance with the criterion of respondents’ characteristics, the criterion of

enterprise’s size, and the criterion of a sector. Finally, the implications for further research in

this area were proposed.

Key words: managers’ loyalty, attributes of managers’ loyalty, managers’ loyalty ratio,

dimensions of managers’ loyalty, model of creating managers’ loyalty.

INTRODUCTION

Uncertainty, especially in strategic planning that has a relatively long period of existing, is a

main feature of the context of contemporary strategic management. Both in theory and in

practice the movement from a planning school of strategic management and a positional one

to an evolutionary approach and a resource-based view is noticed. For these latest not a long-

time plan but an opportunity (a chance, an occasion) becomes a basic category of growth

operationalization.

Resources, especially theirs possession and access to them, is significantly important for

flexible behaviour of organizations. Many definitions of flexibility refer to the potential of an

enterprise in the scope of using occasions. Consequently, it can be said that the determinant of

using occasions is, among others, to possess resources, especially to possess the redundancy

of resources, or at least to have the access to them. Nevertheless, this implication can be

perceived in a different way dependently on an exogenous or endogenous approach to the

strategy of an enterprise (or in other words on preferring a positional school or a resource-

based view in strategic management).

According to an exogenous perspective, a market is the most important and the essence of a

strategy is adaptation to requirements connected with a defined market position. The

adaptation including the usage of noticed occasions is determined by possessing (having an

access) resources, theirs redundancy and flexibility. Thus, a role of resources from an

exogenous perspective is rather tactical. Resources are rather the measure for realizing market

goals of an enterprise than a goal for its own.

According to an endogenic perspective, a situation is diverse. Not directed detailed actions,

but resources, the architecture of resources (configuration one another), having a potential of

activities are goals of an enterprise. An action understood as having a given market position

takes place at a tactical level. Consequently, a role of resources in using occasions means

creating a general potential in this scope and it is not connected with implementing a given

market strategy.

Literature studies unequivocally prove that contemporarily in strategic management resource-

based approaches are dominant. It means that a strategy of an organization should be

developed on a basis of original resources – rare in a sector and difficult to be copied.

According to empirical research of R. Krupski (Krupski 2006), (Krupski 2006a), mainly the

following resources reveal features of original resources: privileged non-formalised

relationships and employee attitudes, motivation and behaviour. Among these last

undoubtedly one of the most important is employee loyalty and managers’ loyalty.

The main goal of the paper is to present the results of empirical research on such a category of

attitude like managers’ loyalty in strategic context.

Managers’ loyalty – the concept and the structure of a loyalty strategy

Managers’ loyalty is a valuable strategic resource in an organization. This resource is also a

rare, difficult to imitate and to substitute resource. Generally, loyalty is defined in dictionaries

as the category of integrity, faithfulness and reliability between people. T.O. Jones and W.E.

Sassem Jr think that employee loyalty first of all means a feeling of a bond and attachment to

an organization (Rudawska 2005). On the other hand, F. Reichheld thinks that employee

loyalty is the willingness of a person – a customer, an employee, a friend to renounce in order

to deepen relations (Reichheld 2004, 44), (Reichheld 2001). A. Lipka treats employee loyalty

as a kind of organizational behaviour translating into employee’s attachment to a company

and being the feature of human resources (Lipka 2005, 76-77). Similarly, A.K. Koźmiński

names loyalty among other human resources’ qualities, namely employee commitment, an

ethical level, an innovation level and the ability to cooperate. These features are essential to

act in uncertain environment respond to unpredictable changes in environment, to create new

products, penetrate markets, enter into alliances and leave ones (Koźmiński 2004, 45). The

structure of a loyalty strategy can be presented as in the picture 1. Loyalty as an attitude

and/or the behaviour of a man towards other people is especially important in interpersonal

hierarchic relations, which are main relations in classical management (superior – inferior

relations). In this meaning, it is necessary to acknowledge loyalty as a peculiar valuable

resource (the figure 1). Loyalty enables to accomplish both superior and inferior goals and it

is also a goals indication by a superior – regardless of its basis (calculated loyalty or

emotionalism). Managers’ loyalty means managers’ identification with an organization,

strong emotional attachment arising due to identification with a chosen object. Loyalty creates

a feeling of closeness, safety and commitment (especially affective commitment entailing

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour). It facilitates the conduct in accordance with

established norms parallel to the skill of a continuous critical attitude.

The expected

effects of

managers’ loyalty

Vision

A valuable resource:

the importance of loyalty for an organization

The way of resource’s

acquiring:

the consolidation and

development of a

loyalty system

Distinctive features of

loyalty: psychological,

personnel,

organizational

Skills

in a range of managers’ loyalty

which is used for both

occasion exploit and value

generation for an organization

Figure 1. The strategy of employee loyalty as a system UC (adapted from Krupski, Piórkowska 2008).

The research methodology

1

So as to verify the veracity of assumptions made on a basis of literature studies and

concerning dimensions (features) of managers’ loyalty the qualitative studies and quantitative

ones were planned. The research is the part of a research project conducted in Poland in a year

2011 and 2012 titled ‘Managerial attitudes from a strategic perspective’ (a research project

no. ZIF/KSMZ-411/7/11).

The research on managers’ loyalty was rooted in the following paradigms: critical theory,

structuralism, theory of social conflict, theory of exchange, symbolic interaction, naturalism,

ethnomethodology, grounded theory, ethnography, an interpretative paradigm, and a

paradigm of radical humanism. Using theoretical triangulation determined using

methodological triangulation in studies.

The character of studies on managers’ loyalty constituting the element of research in

management science is determined by descriptive-normative methodology and precised

methodology that is characteristic for detailed empirical science, especially social science

including management one.

Using deduction and induction connotative meaning of ‘loyalty’, and attributes of managers’

loyalty were identified. An analogy in a close version and comparison of selected enterprises

with a defined level of managers’ loyalty was also used.

A direct interview – personal free slightly directed (non-standardized), a direct interview with

a standardized list of sought information, a behavioural interview, and a situational interview

were used.

1

The main assumptions of the research methodology were adapted from the research on creating employee

loyalty in enterprises conducted in Poland in a year 2007 in the scope of PhD thesis.

The assumption that managers’ loyalty is a polytomous variable was made. It is frequently

said that loyalty is a variable with various intensity towards its subject or object. It is also

regarded that it is a quantitative and metric variable.

A sample group turned out to be a sequential one. Probabilistic sampling was not used due to

difficulties with respondents’ availability. Consequently, as a result of not successful

probabilistic attempts sampling based on respondents’ availability was used. Managers from

top management, middle management, and low management (156 managers from 72

enterprises) from Poland (especially Lower Silesia) were surveyed.

The precised goals of the research were as follows: a) to identify connotative meaning of

managers’ loyalty, b) to identify attributes of managers’ loyalty, c) to measure a level of

managers’ loyalty in researched enterprises.

A table 1 presents the features of a loyal manager due to respondents’ opinions with a number

and percentage structure of these views.

Table 1. The features of a loyal manager due to respondents’ opinions

The features of a loyal manager due to respondents’ opinions

A

number

structure

of

indications
(from 156)

Indications
[%]

Honesty towards an owner

69

44,23%

Honesty towards co-workers

45

28,85%

Enhancing a market position of a company

72

46,15%

Punctuality

25

16,03%

A sense of duty

31

19,87%

Not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond
the company

66

42,31%

Commitment with co-workers

46

29,49%

Caring about a positive image of an enterprise

65

41,67%

Caring about welfare of an enterprise

68

43,59%

Preference of organization welfare to own one

58

37,18%

Interesting in a lot and the future of an enterprise

71

45,51%

Responsibility

33

21,15%

Following the established norms

35

22,44%

Meeting obligations

24

15,38%

Devoting to work in an enterprise

59

37,82%

Integrity and conscientiousness

68

43,59%

Informing an owner about problems and willingness to solve
problems mutually

66

42,31%

Ability to devote oneself, ability to more efforts when a situation
requires it

55

35,26%

Emotional attachment to an enterprise

69

44,23%

Not discouraging by temporary problems of an enterprise,
willingness to help a company

39

25,00%

Caring about positive climate in an enterprise

28

17,95%

Sharing experience, ideas, information with co-workers

70

44,87%

Conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s goals

77

49,36%

Openness

39

25,00%

Willingness to meet expectations of an owner

56

35,90%

Caring about material goods of an enterprise

61

39,10%

Identifying with an enterprise

58

37,18%

Trustworthy

50

32,05%

Engagement

69

44,23%

Not avoiding critics

22

14,10%

Feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise

68

43,59%

Willingness to contributing to enterpise’s growth

74

47,44%

Not exposing an enterprise to financial and moral loses

55

35,26%

Not abandoning an enterprise in a case of better work offers

59

37,82%

Willingness to develop qualifications for organization’s growth

44

28,21%

Not working for competitors

59

37,82%

Source: own study.

The features of a loyal manager mostly pointed by respondents were as follows: a) enhancing

a market position of a company, b) caring about welfare of an enterprise, c) interesting in a lot

and the future of an enterprise, d) integrity and conscientiousness, e) sharing experience,

ideas, information with co-workers, f) conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s

goals, g) engagement, h) feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise, i) willingness to

contribute to enterprise’s growth, j) honesty towards an owner, k) caring about a positive

image of an enterprise, l) not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond the

company, ł) emotional attachment to an enterprise.

Consequently, the following meaning of the notion ‘managers’ loyalty’ was adopted.

Managers’ loyalty considered in two dimensions (as an attitude and behaviour) means

identifying with an enterprise, strong emotional attachment resulting from the fact that

identification with a selected object creates the feeling of closeness and safety, commitment

(especially affective implicating Organizational Citizenship Behaviour), representing and

realizing organization’s goals, creating a positive image of an enterprise, aiming to

organization’ growth, enhancing a market position of a company, protecting tangible and

intangible resources of an enterprise.

According to attributes of a loyal manager mainly pointed by respondents and according to

literature studies, the measure of managers’ loyalty in surveyed enterprises was made. The

measure was based on a ratio determining an average level of managers’ loyalty and taking

into consideration the evaluation of particular attributes of managers’ loyalty. The evaluation

was made on a basis of Likert scale. A table 2 presents a level of managers’ loyalty

dependently on a value from the scale.

Table 2. A level of managers’ loyalty dependently on a value from the scale

A level of managers’ loyalty

Value

A manager is strongly loyal

(4 – 5]

A manager is loyal but not satisfactorily

(3,5 – 4]

It is difficult to assess a level of managers’ loyalty, it is rather average

(3 – 3,5]

A manager is rather disloyal

(2 – 3]

A manager is strongly disloyal

[1 – 2]

Source: own study.

The key research results

Managers’ loyalty in surveyed enterprises was evaluated averagely at the level 3,98. A table 3

presents the percentage share of respondents regarding a level of managers’ loyalty.

Table 3. The percentage share of respondents regarding a level of managers’ loyalty

A level of managers’ loyalty

The

share

of

respondents [%]

A manager is strongly loyal, scale (4 – 5]

33,24

A manager is loyal but not satisfactorily, scale (3,5 – 4]

28,19

It is difficult to assess a level of managers’ loyalty, it is rather average,
scale (3 – 3,5]

24,51

A manager is rather disloyal, scale (2 – 3]

11,96

A manager is strongly disloyal, scale [1 – 2]

2,10

Source: own study.

A table 4 presents a level of managers’ loyalty from a general perspective and due to criteria

describing respondents. A table 5 presents a matrix of correlation between attributes of

managers’ loyalty. A table 6 presents a level of managers’ loyalty in reference to the criterion

of enterprise’s size. A table 7 shows a level of managers’ loyalty in reference to the criterion

of a sector.

In the process of analyzing research data the following criteria were considered: the criterion

of respondents’ characteristics, the criterion of enterprise’s size, and the criterion of a sector.

Taking into consideration the criterion of respondents’ characteristics (see the table 4) and

considering education empirical data authorize the statement that respondents with higher

education revealed a relatively bigger level of loyalty. According to the conditions of

employment, the highest value of a managers’ loyalty ratio was noted in a case of a

managerial contract and a contract for an indefinite period. According to the criterion of

enterprise’s size measured by a number of employees, the highest value of a managers’

loyalty ratio was observed in micro- enterprises and the lowest in small companies (see the

table 6). According to the criterion of a sector, the following sectors were taken into

consideration: a mining industry, trade, production, services. The highest value of a

managers’ loyalty ratio was noted in a production sector; the lowest in services (see the table

7).

Table 4. A level of managers’ loyalty from a general perspective and due to criteria describing respondents

Source: own study.

Respondents’
characteristics

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

The average evaluation

The variance

All respondents

4,41 3,86

3,40

4,20

3,75

3,38

4,12

3,95

4,42

4,00

4,25

4,00 3,96

3,98

0,34

Secondary school
degree

4,20 3,50

2,80

2,50

3,50

2,84

3,20

3,51

3,22

3,05

3,31

3,95 4,21

3,37

0,48

Higher education (BA,
MA, PhD)

4,15 4,10

3,65

3,88

3,52

3,15

3,99

3,80

4,02

3,90

4,05

3,95 4,06

3,86

0,32

A contract for an
indefinite period

4,45 3,98

3,60

4,35

3,85

3,42

4,00

4,12

4,50

4,10

4,15

3,95 4,12

4,04

0,20

A fixed-term contract
of employment

4,10 3,72

3,07

3,95

3,55

3,07

3,98

3,92

4,21

3,55

3,95

3,68 3,85

3,74

0,37

Civil law agreement
(mandate, specific task)

3,96 3,96

3,50

3,80

3,65

2,95

3,86

3,50

3,65

4,00

4,15

3,95 3,55

3,73

0,32

A managerial contract

4,45 3,92

3,65

4,25

3,95

3,56

4,15

4,25

4,56

4,25

4,12

3,98 4,08

4,09

0,30

Legend:
1 – Enhancing a market position of a company
2 - Caring about welfare of an enterprise
3 – Interesting in a lot and the future of an enterprise
4 -

Integrity and conscientiousness

5 – Sharing experience, ideas, information with co-workers
6 – Conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s goals

7 – Commitment
8 – Feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise
9 – Willingness to contributing to enterprise’s growth
10 – Honesty towards an owner
11 - Caring about a positive image of an enterprise
12 - Not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond the company
13 - Emotional attachment to an enterprise

Table 5. A matrix of correlation between attributes of managers’ loyalty

Source: own study.

Attributes

of

managers’

loyalty

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1

0,71

0,65

0,54

0,48

0,59

0,60

0,65

0,68

0,49

0,66

0,54

0,58

2

0,66

0,70

0,58

0,69

0,71

0,58

0,59

0,55

0,55

0,56

0,78

3

0,55

0,47

0,68

0,55

0,68

0,60

0,58

0,54

0,51

0,60

4

0,51

0,45

0,48

0,55

0,49

0,54

0,48

0,52

0,49

5

0,51

0,42

0,45

0,45

0,40

0,37

0,41

0,39

6

0,59

0,61

0,59

0,58

0,50

0,51

0,55

7

0,75

0,74

0,65

0,57

0,68

0,33

8

0,65

0,62

0,58

0,69

0,58

9

0,66

0,55

0,65

0,55

10

0,60

0,55

0,61

11

0,66

0,72

12

0,69

13

Legend:
1 – Enhancing a market position of a company
2 - Caring about welfare of an enterprise
3 – Interesting in a lot and the future of an enterprise
4 -

Integrity and conscientiousness

5 – Sharing experience, ideas, information with co-workers
6 – Conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s goals

7 – Commitment
8 – Feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise
9 – Willingness to contributing to enterprise’s growth
10 – Honesty towards an owner
11 - Caring about a positive image of an enterprise
12 - Not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond the company
13 - Emotional attachment to an enterprise

Table 6. A level of managers’ loyalty in reference to the criterion of enterprise’s size

Respondents’

characteristics

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

The average

evaluation

The variance

All respondents

4,41

3,86

3,40

4,20

3,75

3,38

4,12

3,95

4,42

4,00

4,25

4,00 3,96

3,98

0,34

Micro- enterprises

4,21

3,77

3,45

3,95

3,85

3,23

4,00

4,02

4,18

3,96

4,18

3,99 4,02

3,91

0,29

Small enterprises

3,45

2,96

3,23

3,48

3,15

2,95

3,56

3,29

3,73

3,12

2,97

3,55 3,40

3,30

0,26

Medium enterprises

3,66

3,44

3,25

3,85

3,35

3,25

3,65

3,55

3,71

3,11

3,18

3,12 3,51

3,43

0,24

Big enterprises

3,75

3,48

3,25

3,95

3,33

3,41

3,76

3,65

3,82

3,26

3,74

3,25 3,65

3,56

0,24

Legend:
1 – Enhancing a market position of a company
2 - Caring about welfare of an enterprise
3 – Interesting in a lot and the future of an enterprise
4 - Integrity and conscientiousness
5 – Sharing experience, ideas, information with co-workers
6 – Conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s goals

7 – Commitment
8 – Feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise
9 – Willingness to contributing to enterprise’s growth
10 – Honesty towards an owner
11 - Caring about a positive image of an enterprise
12 - Not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond the company
13 - Emotional attachment to an enterprise

Source: own study.

Table 7.

A level of managers’ loyalty in reference to the criterion of a sector

Respondents’

characteristics

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

The average

evaluation

The variance

Mining industry

3,35

3,65

3,55

3,30

3,65

3,45

3,84

3,58

3,99

3,30

3,55

3,58

3,25

3,54

0,22

Trade

3,39

3,58

3,02

3,01

3,24

2,98

3,45

3,76

3,65

3,55

3,76

3,25

3,56

3,34

0,28

Production

3,66

3,46

3,25

4,25

3,56

3,45

3,35

3,75

3,96

3,66

3,45

3,66

3,44

3,61

0,27

Services

3,35

3,19

3,31

3,01

3,24

3,01

3,18

3,44

3,42

3,28

3,33

3,14

3,25

3,24

0,14

Legend:
1 – Enhancing a market position of a company
2 - Caring about welfare of an enterprise
3 – Interesting in a lot and the future of an enterprise
4 -

Integrity and conscientiousness

5 – Sharing experience, ideas, information with co-workers
6 – Conformity of own occupational goals with enterprise’s goals

7 – Commitment
8 – Feeling of co-responsibility for an enterprise
9 – Willingness to contributing to enterprise’s growth
10 – Honesty towards an owner
11 - Caring about a positive image of an enterprise
12 - Not sharing information about the enterprise with people beyond the company
13 - Emotional attachment to an enterprise

Source: own study.

Directions for further research

A presented part of research is the part of studies connected with developing a model of

creating managers’ loyalty in enterprises. Determining attributes of a loyal manager it is

necessary to set managers’ loyalty dimensions (internal: an attitude, external: behaviour) that

are one part of a mentioned model. So as to create a complete managers’ loyalty model apart

from studying dimensions of managers’ loyalty determining managers’ loyalty factors and

determinants influencing a level of managers’ loyalty should be researched. It requires

conducting further research on managers’ loyalty and it will be the subject of the next part of

studies.

THE KEY CONCLUSIONS

Summing up considerations about managers’ loyalty in surveyed enterprises the following

conclusions were formulated:

1.

Researched managers turned out to be loyal but not satisfactorily.

2.

Managers with higher education represented a higher value of loyalty.

3.

A managerial contract and a contract for an indefinite period are important conditions

creating managers’ loyalty.

4.

All correlations between particular attributes of a loyal manager constitute statistically

significant correlations and strong or moderate correlations what means that existence or a

lack of a given attribute of a loyal manager determines existence or a lack of other

attributes of a loyal manager.

5.

The following attributes of managers’ loyalty had the highest values of a managers’ loyalty

ratio: enhancing a market position of a company, integrity and conscientiousness,

commitment, willingness to contribute to enterprise’s growth, honesty towards an owner,

caring about a positive image of an enterprise, not sharing information about the enterprise

with people beyond the company.

6.

According to the criterion of enterprise’s size, the highest value of a managers’ loyalty was

observed in micro- enterprises and big ones, and the lowest in small companies.

7.

According to the criterion of a sector, the highest value of managers’ loyalty ratio was

noted in a production sector, the lowest in services.

8.

A level of managers’ loyalty determines qualitative and quantitative intensity of

correlations between particular attributes of managers’ loyalty.

REFERENCES

Koźmiński, A. 2004. Zarządzanie w warunkach niepewności, Warszawa: PWN.

Krupski, R. 2006. Badania nad oryginalnością zasobów przedsiębiorstwa. In Zmiana

warunkiem sukcesu. Dynamika zmian w organizacji – ewolucja czy rewolucja. ed. J.

Skalik, Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej.

Krupski, R. 2006a. Strategiczność zasobów, Przegląd Organizacji 9.

Krupski, R., Piórkowska, K. 2008. The strategy of employee loyalty creation, Management 12

(2): 14-21, Zielona Gora: University of Zielona Gora.

Lipka, A. 2005. W stronę kwalitologii zasobów ludzkich. Warszawa: Difin.

Piórkowska–Wojciechowska,

K.

2007.

Kształtowanie

lojalności

pracowniczej

w

przedsiębiorstwach,

Niepublikowana

praca

doktorska.

Wrocław:

Akademia

Ekonomiczna.

Reichheld, F.F. 2001. The Loyalty Rules! How Today’s Leaders Build Lasting Relationships.

Harvard Business School Press.

Reichheld, F.F. 2004. Najważniejszy jest wskaźnik wzrostu. Harvard Business Review Polska

Maj.

Rudawska, E. 2005. Lojalność klientów. Warszawa: PWE.