GREECE :
From Ancient Myths to Modern Realities
Chapter Submitted for the Second
Globe Anthology
(Corrected Version)
by
Professor Nancy Papalexandris
Athens University of Economics and Business
December 1999
GREECE :
From Ancient Myths to Modern Realities
GREECE :
From Ancient Myths to Modern Realities
I. INTRODUCTION
Study Aims and Objectives
Every researcher looking into organizations in Greece, comes across two main realities which keep recurring all the time. First, the fact that societal culture has a very strong influence on the way firms and their members are operating and second that managerial practices which are normally perceived as reasonable, fair and worth following cannot be implemented unless the appropriate organizational culture and leadership style exists.
GLOBE’s main objective to identify the effects of societal and organizational culture on leadership and organizational practices is therefore a most desirable subject for exploration among Greek organizations.
In view of the above, this study has focused on the following objectives:
 First, to help the reader understand modern Greek reality by sheding light into historical aspects of the country as well as political economic and socio-cultural elements and their influence on people’s social values and personality characteristics.
 Second, to present and discuss the results from the GLOBE study in Greece on perceived and preferred cultural dimensions as revealed from the empirical research among respondents in the tele-communications and finance sectors.
 Third, to describe and interpret results from the GLOBE study in Greece on leadership and its most desirable attributes in combination with information provided by focus groups and media analysis.
Much about modern Greek reality is deeply rooted in ancient tradition and practice which was often expressed allegorically in mythology. Is Odysseus inventiveness, Zeus powerfulness and Athena’s wisdom among the main characteristics Greeks are looking for in their leaders? To what extent a modern country strongly oriented towards the future is rooted and draws from its past?
I hope that by reading through this paper, based largely on existing information and interpretations of GLOBE findings, the reader will gain insight into a country often described as indecipherable but presenting an integrated and meaningful paradigm unique in its combination of diverse elements.
Design and Methodology
Greece participated in the GLOBE study from the initial phases with the sorting of questions and pilot testing of initial forms of questionnaires A and B. Following that, the finalized versions of the Questionnaires (Form A and Form B) were distributed to 235 middle manages as follows:
SECTOR No of Firms Questionnaires
Form A Form B
Banking 4 66 72
Telecommunications 6 48 49
Total 10 114 121
Two focus groups were conducted: The first took place prior to gathering the questionnaires in the banking sector and centered around the differences between managers and leaders. The second took place among employed adult students of engineering background attending a part-time executive MBA course. Participants were asked to select and comment on their preferred leaders from the historical/political and business perspective. A media analysis was also conducted on articles describing outstanding business leaders as well as a factor analysis of the results from the leadership part of the Globe questionnaires.
All the above combined with the author’s knowledge and experience of her country and existing relevant literature from previous research have served as the basis for this paper.
II. THE GREEK ENVIRONMENT
1. Historical Background
Situated geographically at the Southeastern part of Europe and close to Africa and Asia, Greece has a history which cannot be covered in just a few lines. Despite its small size, Greece has played an important role in world history, mainly through its contribution to civilization. The most important period of Greek history is the Classical period (6th-5th century B.C.). Classical Greece is known throughout the world for its development of the arts, the birth of democracy and its creation and implementation of great institutions such as the Olympic Games. However, the first noteworthy civilizations appear long before that, in the bronze age around 3000 B.C. These civilizations can be divided into the Cycladic, the Minoan and the Mycenean. During the Cycladic Civilization, Santorini and other islands of the Aegean Sea, became centers of trade due to their location and their natural resources. The Minoan Civilization developed in Crete, where one can admire today important remains of its architectural and artistic achievements. The Mycenean Civilization developed in Southern Greece and its discovery helps us understand the epic works of the great poet Homer, the Iliad and the Odyssey, which have most probably drawn from this era. These early civilizations gradually decline and it is later during the Classical times, that civilization reaches its peak.
During the Classical period (6th-4th century B.C.), Greece was organized into city-states, which were independent and self-governed. The greatest of these city-states were Athens, Sparta, Thebes and Corinth. During this period, the Greeks colonized many locations in Asia Minor and in the Mediterranean and developed commerce. In addition, they blossomed culturally and artistically. During the 5th century B.C., democracy, the form of government which was to prevail throughout the world, was born in Athens. At the same time, the different areas of Greece started to develop bonds through different common celebrations. The most important of these were the Olympic Games, which took place every four years and during which every hostility between city-states would stop and the Amphiktyonies i.e. meetings which took place in Delphi or Delos where city states would discuss common problems and try to solve differences.
At the beginning of the 5th century B.C., the Persian Empire, in its attempt to expand to the West, attacked Greece and threatened its independence with a strong army outnumbering by far the forces of Greece. The Persian attack was finally confronted after a series of battles in Marathon, Thermopylae, Plataea, and the sea battle at Salamis. These battles are still alive in the mind of Modern Greeks as proofs of spirit and bravery and the names of their hero figures such as Aristides, Miltiadis, Themistocles, Lykourgos, are quite common birth names among Modern Greeks. The most important outcome of the war was the fact that the Greek city-states united for the first time under the common enemy.
The 5th century is known for Athens as the Golden Era of Pericles. During his rule, the Acropolis and the famous temple of Parthenon dedicated to Athena, goddess of wisdom, was built. Pericles made Athens the military, political and artistic capital of the Ancient Greek world. Unfortunately, peace did not last long. A series of wars between Athens and Sparta, known as the Peloponnesian Wars, broke out and lasted for twenty seven years. This gave a weakening blow to the unity of the Greeks and led to a decline of both powerful cities of Athens and Sparta.
Soon another great power, Macedonia, emerged. From his headquarters in Vergina close to Salonika, King Philip and his son Alexander the Great, succeeded in uniting continental Greece, and began a great campaign in the East with the purpose of spreading civilization. A huge amount of territory was conquered and Alexander reached as far as India. He created a huge empire which could not survive intact after his death (323 B.C.). His heirs divided the lands but his spirit survived for many centuries. He succeeded in spreading Greek civilization and he is perhaps the only invader in history who won the hearts of the people he conquered. During that period, Thoucydides, Xenophon, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, as well as many great historians, writers and scientists, lived. Antigone, Electra, Medea, the famous tragedies were written by famous playwriters such as Aeschylus, Eurypides and Sophocles.
After the fall of the Macedonian Empire, the Romans, the new great power moved to Greece. It was during this time that Christianity was born which soon became the main religion for the Greeks. The gradual weakening of the Roman Empire lead to its division into Eastern and Western part and thus at the creation of the Byzantine Empire at the eastern part with Constantinople as its capital (323 A.D.).
The new capital got its name from its founder Constantine the Great, who was a great supporter of Christianity and decided to create a new empire independent of the Roman influence. The Byzantine Empire was completely Greek in character, with Christianity as its main religion. All of the strength of the Empire was concentrated in Constantinople where Greek language and culture reigned. Constantinople was the become one of the great world capitals with vast wealth and beauty and the chief city of the Western world until the 11th century it was the strongest and most prestigious power in Europe achieving the first long-lasting unification of Greece.
Economically and politically strong, Byzantium repelled the attacks of its numerous invaders. In the 6th century A.D. under the great Emperor Justinium, Byzantium reached its peak. He wrote "The Roman Civic Law", a monumental piece of work and fought to strengthen the borders of his Empire and to spread Christianity. The followers of Justiniun tried to keep control over the territories of the Empire, but it was extremely difficult as at the same time the Arabs were threatening Byzantium with their emerging power. In Mecca, Mohamed created the new religion of Islam and fought with Byzantium with great fervor. Byzantium was then attacked by the Turkish Sultans. Many territories were lost together with the control over the areas with the best soldiers and the greatest income.
Western Europe, in an attempt to intervene, organized eight crusades to free the Holy Land but also to take advantage of eastern wealth. During one of the Crusades Constantinople was seized. These wars resulted in the weakening of the Empire and led to its eventual downfall. The Turks seized one city after the other in Northern Greece and the Balkans. Then they attacked Constantinople. On May 29, 1453, Mohammed the Second, conquered the “queen of cities”, 1,129 years after it had been built by Constantine the Great and after having survived twenty sieges. The fall of Constantinople is a tragic moment in Greek history as it marked the beginning of four centuries of slavery. Conquering forces of the Ottoman Empire were prepared neither to continue nor to assimilate into the existing civilization. The entire East fell back into the dark Middle Ages. This was a deep wound for Hellenism. However, Greek people, humbled and enslaved, kept their faith strong for their future independence during the four centuries of occupation which followed.
This was a great period of suffering for Greece especially at a time when other Europeans were developing and experiencing the Renaissance, having successfully confronted Turkish invasion which reached the outskirts of Vienna. The main consequences of occupation were:
- a reduction in the population because of slaughter, kidnapping of children, and forced conversion to Islam;
- the destruction of Greek culture;
- a weakening of the economy due to the burden of harsh taxation.
An important role was played by famous educated Greeks of diaspora who had studied in Europe and supported Greece by making its cause known throughout Europe. These learned men, led by Adamantios Korais and Regas Feraios, were the pioneers in creating a sympathetic movement for the liberation of Greece. At the beginning of the 19th century a Secret Society “Filiki Eteria” was founded in Odyssos to which many Greeks contributed money and became members. The Society planned carefully the country’s struggle for independence against the Ottoman Empire which began on March 25, 1821, in the monastery of St. Lavra in the Peloponnese.
The revolution quickly spread throughout Greece and bloody battles started with the Turks. The first great victories in Tripoli, Valtetsi, Gravia, and in Vasilika raised the morale of the Greeks. At the same time, skilled Greek sailors succeeded in naval victories against the Turkish navy. With the passing of time, Greece started to hope for the help of the great European powers, who at the beginning were against the country’s struggle for independence. The change in European policy followed the change in public opinion both in Europe and U.S., which was in favour of its independence.
The year 1825 was the most decisive because Greece’s limited resources were weakening while the Turks were reorganizing and accepted reinforcements from Ibrahim in Egypt. Ibrahim seized all of the Peloponnese, and with the help of Kioutachis, he conquered Messolongi where Lord Byron the British poet fought and lost his life. The descriptions and accounts of the heroic exodus in Messolongi moved the world and greatly increased feelings of philhellenism. Following the sea battle of Navarino in October 1827 where the naval forces of England, France and Russia defeated the navy of Turkey and Egypt, Greece was declared an independent country occupying only a small part of its present territory.
In 1828, Ioannis Kapodistrias became the new governor of the country with the blessing of the other European countries. He undertook the reorganization of the state. At the same time, the Russo-Turkish war broke out which led to the defeat of the Turks. In 1832, prince Otto a Bavarian Prince became the king of Greece.
There followed a period in which the Greeks were able to liberate part of Thessaly. In 1863, George, a Danish prince, was declared king of Greece. In addition, the Ionian Islands were returned to Greece. In 1866, revolution broke out in Crete for union with Greece. Following victorious battles, Crete was granted self-rule and the use of the Greek language. Finally, with the Treaty of Berlin in 1878, the Turks conceded Epirus and the rest of Thessaly to Greece.
In the meanwhile, a new enemy had appeared in the north- the Bulgarians, who wanted to take control of Macedonia (1990). Following great battles the Greeks expelled the Bulgarians. At the same time, in 1908, the Cretans conquered the Turkish army and declared Crete’s unification with Greece.
Due to the threat of New Turkey under Kemal Ataturk, the Balkan Countries united and the first Balkan war broke out (1912-1913). The war had positive results for Greece as Salonika was liberated and for the Balkan Countries in general. However, the Bulgarians and the Serbians had agreed to divide among themselves land which was Greek. The result was the Second Balkan War between the Greeks and the Bulgarians. When the war was over, Greece had doubled its territory but many Greek lands were not liberated such as the Ionian Islands and Northern Epirus.
In Europe in 1914, the First World War broke out. Greece found itself on the side of the Triple Enteinte (France, England and Russia), fighting against Germany, Turkey and Austria. Greece first engaged in fighting on the Balkan front against the Turks and the Bulgarians. This war led to the defeat of the central axis powers. In 1919, with the signing of the Treaty of Neilly, Bulgaria handed over Eastern Macedonia and Western Thrace to the Greeks. Then in 1920, with the signing of the Treaty of Sevres, the Turks had to render Eastern Thrace, Imvro, and Tenedos, as well as Smirna, to Greece. The Greek government under Eleftherios Venizelos as the prime-minister wanted this treaty enforced, but the Turks refused. For this reason, the Asia Minor campaign began. Greek troops were defeated and the result was the destruction and the uprooting of 1.6 million Greeks from Eastern Thrace, and from the coast of Asia Minor, as well as the loss of these territories. With the influx of refugees amounting to an extra 1/3 of the country’s population, the impoverished, weakened, defeated Greek state entered a period of political instability, which led to the dictatorship of Metaxas on August 4, 1936. On October 28, 1940, when Mussolini attacked, Greece refused to surrender thus entering the Second World War, which was catastrophic for the country as Greece suffered 1 million victims (The highest percentage of population for any country involved in World War II).
The siege against Greece lasted 216 days, from October 28, 1940 to May 31, 1941. Of those 216 days, 160 were the resistance of Greece to the invasion of the Italians in the mountains of North Epirus; 25 days were the resistance of the Greek army to the Italians and the Germans in Northern Macedonia and 31 days were the resistance in Crete. This shocked the world which did not expect such bravery at a time when other, larger countries did not resist or were defeated in just a few days. It is at that time when Winston Churchill prime minister of Great Britain said: “From now on we will say not that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks”. Although the country was eventually conquered, this resistance forced Hitler to delay his expedition to Russia. This delay contributed largely to Hitler’s defeat due to the Russian Winter which his troops were unable to face.
The next four years were very difficult for Greece. People suffered, there was no freedom at all, and every family suffered loss as thousands died from famine. Despite these difficult conditions, the National Resistance was organized. It created many problems for the Germans during their occupation of Greece. The climax was the explosion of the Bridge of Gorgopotamos, which blocked the import of German provisions into Northern Africa for many weeks and contributed to Rommel’s defeat. After five years, on October 12, 1944, the Germans, having been defeated, left Greece. This was not, however, the end of the difficulties for the country.
Immediately after the end of the Second World War, a civil war broke out in Greece between pro-Russian forces wishing to establish a communist regime and the pro Western government forces. This lasted for 5 years. At the end of this, Greece found itself deeply wounded, both physically and in terms of morale. The visible losses were 80,000 dead and 700,000 left homeless. But the most substantial consequence was the ideological, political and cultural gap which divided the people. However, most of the Greeks, sensing the dangerous direction their country was heading, started on a path towards reconciliation and healing.
During the first period after the civil war, Greece joined NATO and with the support of the Americans, Greece took back the Islands of the Dodecanese but not Northern Epirus or Cyprus. The Cypriots, with Archbishop Makarios as their leader, started a fight for independence, demanding their union with Greece. Cyprus became an independent free State with Britain, Greece and Turkey as guaranteeing powers. In 1967, democracy was abolished in Greece and a military regime under George Papadopoulos was established. In 1974, just before the end of the dictatorship, the Turks found a minor pretext and with Greece not standing in their way due to the internal political problems, seized a large section of Northern Cyprus. This part they control even today against various resolutions passed by the United Nations, while information about 2000 missing Cypriots has been withheld ever since.
In July 1974 following the fall of dictatorship, Konstantine Karamanlis became for the 3rd time Prime Minister of Greece. Under his presidency, on January 1, 1981, Greece became the tenth member of the European Economic Union. The economic situation of Greece, falling slightly short of criteria set by the Maastricht Treaty prevented the country from entering the European Monetary Union in 1999. However, it is very likely that this will happen in 2001.
Despite its size, Greece is a nation with a great, yet tragic, history which has seen its existence threatened several times. Due to this, its heroes are mostly respected for their achievements in preserving Greek national entity and Greeks seem to draw strength from their example. They take pride in the fact that their culture is known throughout the world. They believe that their civilization and tradition has still a great deal to offer to humanity. However there is common feeling that modern Greece being a small country cannot live up to its desired state and this leads to disappointment and wounded national pride especially whenever its national rights are not respected.
THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN GREECE
Ancient Greece is the place where democracy was born. Although modern Greece has seen its democracy suffer at times, after 1830 when the democratic form of government was re-introduced, democracy has survived two world wars, a civil war immediately after World War II, various kings and dictators.
Over the last twenty five years the state of politics is characterized by an impressive stability and the Presidential Parliamentary Democracy functions smoothly. From 1974, when the last dictatorship fell, Greece has enjoyed its most peaceful and creative period of the 20th century. As the name of the government suggests, the power is shared between the Cabinet and the Parliament which are elected by the people and the President who is elected by the Parliament
Internally, the legislative body revolves around two political axes: the center and the right. The two main parties, which represent these two sides, the Panhellenic Socialist Party (PASOK) and New Democracy respectively, have had clear differences in their policies for many years. Today, the differences between the two great parties are small, and there are no serious differences as far as the basic choices and the future where the country should go. The two parties compete only for being elected in order to implement what they believe is the most effective policy for the country and its people. Among the most important goals are the restriction of the public sector, the curbing of public spending, the improvement in productivity and competitiveness of the economy, and the implementation of large public works for the country’s infrastructure.
Greek politics appear to be entering a phase of maturity after the departure from the political scene (and from life) of Konstantine Karamanlis and Andreas Papandreou. These were the personalities, which ruled public life from the 50's to the 90's. After the departure of these “charismatic” as they were considered leaders, the new party leaders have acted with moderation and realism. Many spoke about the end of politics, as we know it, meaning that it has lost its glory and mythic dimensions which the leaders of the past had given it. Things are not exactly that way, of course. The truth is that as we approach the 21st century, the interest is shifting away from European capitals, including Athens, towards Brussels. The prospective of the economic and monetary unification of Europe has forced the Greek political parties to rethink their goals with Greek foreign policy in particular keeping a strong European orientation.
The "thorn" in Greek foreign affairs is its proximity to Turkey. In 1996, the relationship between the two countries has been tested again. This happened when Turkey announced its belief that certain rocky-islets in the Aegean were a "grey area". The argument presented is that the ownership of these islands, established through international treaties, remains undetermined.
Everyone knows that this so-called "grey area" does not exist since Turkey accepted the boarders which were set by the Lausane Treaty signed in 1923. It has been suggested to take the matter to the International Court in the Hague, but Turks refuse to do, so they propose instead a two way dialogue on problems existing between the two countries. The permanent position of Athens is that this is not a two way problem, but merely the unfounded claims of the Turks towards Greece. Consequently, there is no reason for any conference on this matter.
The foreign policy of Greece still has to face the challenge of the Cyprus problem. As U.N. resolutions have declared, the issue is that of a military invasion and an illegal occupation of an independent country, Cyprus, by another, Turkey. On this basis, the Cyprus issue is an infringement on international law, which has lasted for 25 years now. It is a problem, which must be solved by the departure of the invading forces from Northern Cyprus.
Lately in August and September 1999 following the catastrophic earthquakes, which hit both Turkey and Greece, the two countries have come closer offering humanitarian assistance to each other. It is hoped that this will be the beginning for easing out tension and solving long standing political problems.
Greek diplomatic relations with the Balkan States is especially friendly and is based on the premise of being good neighbors and providing support when necessary. Greece has already done this during the time the Balkans were threatened with great political and economic problems. The only dark point was when a neighboring state separated from the Confederation of Yugoslavia and named itself the Republic of Macedonia. Greece requested the removal of the word "Macedonia" since the same name is used for a large district of Greece. They succeeded in getting this country renamed the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" or FYROM. It was further agreed that this name would be temporary until a commonly acceptable solution could be found. To date, no progress has been noted, but this in no way prevents the two countries from having very good diplomatic and economic relations.
All this has happened during a time when Greece has been undergoing changes in its internal structure. Since 1994, the importance of local government has increased resulting in administrative decentralization. From last year, 1998, the political map of the country has also changed, according to the "Plan of Kapodistrias". The 900 municipalities and 5,500 communities were combined to make 1,100 municipalities. There are many changes happening now which will not have immediate results. They will cause changes in later years which, it is believed, will contribute to the modernization of Greece and its equal participation in the EU.
THE GREEK ECONOMY
The spectacular improvement in the macro-economic indicators, the change in the mentality of the public sector and of business, as well as the opening of new export routes to Eastern Europe and Asia are the most important achievements in the Greek economy during the last years.
International organizations, like the UN, the OECD, and the International Bank, have ranked Greece as an industrial economy, however not among the most economically developed nations. Greece does not possess a developed heavy industry or a high-tech industrial base. Food, beverages and textiles, constitute the largest portion of manufacturing. It is clear that Greek industry is oriented towards producing goods, which are labor intensive rather than innovative and high-tech and therefore of a lower total value.
Most economists rightly believe that the main structural problem in the Greek economy stem from the large, slow and low performing public sector. The 320,000 public-sector employees are equal to the number of workers in industry but their work is of less value when compared to what they offer the economy. This has caused a large deficit and finally an accumulated debt, which surpasses the annual national budget of the country (O.E.C.D. ’98).
The large public sector with its heavy bureaucracy and inefficiency receives constant criticism (Papalexandris and Bourantas, 1993). However its overstaffing has a cultural explanation. The 19th centrury Greek state lacked any effective development policy and merely acted as an employment agency for peasants who had left the countryside in search for work in the cities (Mouzelis, 1978). This was accomplished through a large clientelistic network under the patronage of highly personalized political parties and using a practice commonly known as “rousfeti”. This is a word of Arab origin which means personal favour to supporters and differs from bribery (Broome, 1996).
“Rousfeti” often serves to surpass bureaucratic formalities and serves to connect individuals thus offsetting insecurity. While today staffing in the public sector is strictly limited to objective types of entry procedures, personal relations are still important in dealing with the State while political affiliations influence staffing decisions for higher positions.
Apart from the peculiarities of the public sector, careful study of the structure of the Greek economy shows another important structural problem, the orientation of the Greek economy toward the production of low value goods until recently. Greece produced and exported mainly food and cheap garments, while it imported cars, industrial equipment, computers, electrical appliances, and other similar items. The country exhibited a phenomenal consumption, which was far greater than its production. This was translated to deficit for the state as well as in the trade balance. For years this has caused inflation, downward trends and the devaluation of currency. For the past three years this situation has been changing for the better. Investment in technology and economic leanness measures applied from 1985 to 1987 and from 1990 until now have yielded their fruits improving the picture of the economy. Today, inflation is at 2%, the public deficit at 2.5%, interest rates have fallen substantially while public and private investments have shown steady increase since 1996.
Capital gains, as shown in the Athens Stock Exchange, are growing. The number of firms entering into the Athens Stock Exchange is constantly increasing, and continue to multiply. In 1992, there were approximately 60,000 investors’ accounts making a daily turnover of 10-12 million dollars. As the year 2000 is entering, there are more than 1 million investors’ accounts with a daily turnover 1-1,5 billion dollars.
Despite the improvement the Greek economy has exhibited, serious structural problems continue to exist. One of these is the distribution of employment among the various sectors, which shows the high percentage employed in agriculture (Table 1).
Table 1
SECTOR SHARE IN EMPLOYMENT SHARE IN
G.N.P.
Agricultural Sector 17,7% 12%
Manufacturing Sector 23,1% 20%
Services Sector 59,2% 67,9%
Source: O.E.C.D., Report on Greece, 1998
In agriculture, the fragmentation of land due to the mountainous regions occupying five sixths of Greece’s surface, the lack of infrastructure and limited scientific support allow little room for improvement. Manufacturing after some years is now showing some spectacular developments in construction, ship building and infrastructure work in tele-communications. In the service sector, some worthwhile developments are seen in the area of tourism, shipping, telecommunications, and finance with Banks and Insurance companies, showing continuous growth, offering new modern products and investing in technological equipment and automation. Tourism and shipping have traditionally been and continue to be important sources of revenue for Greece. Today, Greece is among the most attractive world destinations offering luxurious hotels, a rich culture and tradition, sea and mountain resorts, exhibit and conference centers, recreation areas, ski centers, modern marinas, paths for hiking, and other tourist attractions. In Shipping, for many years Greece has been officially the world’s leading shipping power. Today due to the legal framework many Greek ships have changed into convenience flags. Yet there has been an economic recovery in the passenger and cruise ship sector and the Greek fleet is renovated with ships, which are distinguished for their luxury and safety.
To sum up, despite structural problems, continuous change and improvement is taking place in the Greek economy. The extensive privatization, the improvements in the infrastructure of transportation, energy, communication, the environment and education, the improvement in the economic index and the increase in private investments show that the country is progressing towards its central goal which is to have equal standing among other countries in the European Union.

THE BANKING SECTOR
Banking was one of the two sectors 'Globe' used in this study. The selection of banking is due to the great importance it has gained over the last few decades in the creation of a world economy and the important role Banks are playing in the Greek economy. Two Semi-state Banks, Emporiki and Ioniki, and two private Banks, Alpha Credit and Barclays were included in the sample with the purpose to have later the possibility to conduct inter sector comparisons.
For the past few years, the reorganization of the Greek banking market, following the trend towards mergers, which has already started in the international market, has become an important issue. The multifaceted Greek banking system, consisting of many small and medium sized banks, both Greek and foreign on the one hand and some large State Banks on the other, have dictated a change in the face of Greek banking.
Today in the Greek market, there are two great banking conglomerates, which are controlled by the state. One is the National Bank of Greece, with many branches all over the country. Controlling this bank allows the government to institute monetary policies, since it has access to a large portion of the market. For the last few years, the National Bank has experienced developments, which have established it as one of the most reputable banks in Europe. The other state bank is the Agricultural Bank, which serves the specific needs of the people in rural areas. Also belonging to the semi state sector are Emporiki and Ioniki Bank. In the private sector, the three banks which will play a major role in the 21st century are Alpha Credit Bank, Eurobank and the Bank of Piraeus. Over the last few years, the important moves in the banking map have included a number of mergers and acquisitions which is continuing so that over the next two to three years, the following is expected in Greek banking:
-Three to four banking conglomerates will become stronger through
mergers with smaller banks, which belong to the same group or are outside
the group and through acquisitions of certain smaller, state banks which will be bought
up by other larger banks.
-Certain foreign banks, in the framework of their more general plan, will withdraw from the Greek market, while others which have decided to increase their activity in Greece will probably buy out smaller Greek banks that can not survive in
the new competitive environment, in order to strengthen their worldwide networks and infrastructure.
In view of this wave of mergers and acquisitions, exploring values and attitudes in the Banking sectors through Globe can be later used for purposes of organizational culture integration and leadership training necessary for smooth operation of the new entities.
Telecommunications Sector
In recent years drastic changes occurred in the field of telecommunications. Until 1992, there was only one state-owned company, OTE (Organization of Telecommunication of Greece) providing conventional phone services. Today OTE continues to be the only company to provide standard (conventional) phone service in Greece but in 1995 its stock went public, meaning that now 35% of the company is owned by private investors. Since 1992, three other enterprises have entered the market providing mobile phone service. Telestet Greece, Panafon, and Cosmote, a subsidiary of OTE.
Telecommunications is not only a dynamic, rapidly developing branch of the Greek economy, but a sector, in which the country has shown real technological progress and in which Greece parallels international development having surpassed every forecast made by economic policy makers. A few statistics are enough to show the strength of telecommunications in Greece. The profit of the telecommunication industry approaches 3.3 billion dollars and constitutes 3% of the GNP of Greece. In 1990, this was at 1.5%. From 1994 to the year 2000, the yearly investments in this sector are estimated at 1.5 billion dollars.
The most interesting statistic, however, is the number of people who have mobile phones. When they were introduced in 1992, forecasts were that in the year 2000 half a million Greeks would have cellular telephones. Today there are already 950,000 cellular phone owners, and the number is expected to reach 4.5 million by 2005. The great jump came in 1997 when mobile phone subscribers increased by 87%, which ranked the Greek mobile phone market as the 4th most developed in Europe, according to statistics published by Mobile Communications International.

The impressive development of the Greek market is based mainly on three factors:
1) The variety of products which subscriber mobile phones offer. At this time, every subscriber can choose from various packages according to his needs.
2) The fact that most Greek businessmen spend a lot of time out of the office, and for this reason, they need a phone especially since major Greek cities are large and have serious traffic problems and
3) Greeks are very fond of going out, have a strong social life and like to communicate with friends at all times. Therefore phones are used not only for business but also for social purposes.
In the present study respondents were taken from OTE and the two mobile phone companies mentioned but also from other companies all falling within the wider classification of telecommunications such as production of telecommunication equipment and production of software and multimedia applications. The common characteristic of all companies is that they operate in a dynamic changing and demanding environment.

III. GLOBE AND SOCIETAL CULTURE
Before presenting and interpreting GLOBE findings some major characteristics of Greek culture will be introduced as background information.
Social Values and the Greek National Character
The great Cretan writer Nikos Kazantzakis refers to “the two great currents which constitute the doubleborn soul of Greece” (Kazantzakis, 1966). By this duality he meant the complex mixture of character constituents which have resulted from Greece’s location between East and West, and from the combination of classical with modern elements in the Greek national character.
The four centuries of Ottoman rule imparted to Greek institutions a structure radically different from what is the norm of the West. An important feature was the astonishing tenacity of the Greeks in maintaining their ethnic identity through long-lasting foreign dominations. A strong contributory factor in this respect was undoubtedly the love for independence, the importance of religion and the strength of the family institution.
Religion is closely linked with Greek nationality as 97% of the people are Greek Orthodox Christians. The Orthodox clergy has played a major role in the revolution for independence and in preserving Greek language, culture and tradition through centuries of foreign occupation. Links between Greek Orthodox Church and Greek tradition are believed to be very deeply rooted dating from the time when the Roman Empire was divided into its Eastern and Western halves in 395 A.D. and the Byzantine Empire was established in the Eastern part with Greek as its official language (Armstrong and Markus, 1960). The church with its many scholars, some living in monasteries, played an important role in preserving ancient Greek culture and philosophy. It is believed that the Renaissance in Europe started when the Byzantine thinkers brought ancient Greek works to Europe following the fall of Constantinople in 1453 (Campbell and Sherrard, 1968). Today important events in a person’s life, such as baptism and marriage, are usually celebrated in churches, people celebrate their saints’ day (name-day) instead of their birthday, while many religious feasts to honour saints involve music, drinking and dancing, thus acting as occasions for social gathering and reinforcement of social ties.
The family institution in Greece has been the social entity, which protected its members against unfavourable or hostile elements. In the Ottoman period, it was the head of the patriarchal family who alone dealt with the Turkish overlords when this was necessary. In the majority of Greek families, parents still strive to the maximum of their ability to provide their sons and daughters with property and education, or to start a business to secure employment for them, hence the large numbers of small family-owned firms.
Most large firms in Greece have started as family firms and for many years these larger firms have functioned as large patriarchal families, where members of the work-force and staff, depended on the benevolence of the owner for their well-being. While this tendency still somehow exists today, increase in size, social awareness and questioning of authority make it necessary to find other means for securing cooperation and weakening antagonism, a characteristic often shown both in industrial and peer relations within firms (EIRR, 1998).
Antagonism, a strong characteristic of ancient Greek history still marks the quality of life in Greece. It is combined with individualism, a tendency to mistrust, difficulties in sharing or combining efforts for a common goal, and constant verbal conflict and arguments over facts and ideas. One of the most common sources of conflict in most social situations is arguments over politics since every person has a strong opinion on every issue and strongly fights to support his views. According to an American study of a small Greek village “where perpetual struggle, principally outside the family, is a part of life”, the ultimate aim of this struggle appears to be the assertion of individual identity (Friedl 1962). Individualism often stands as a barrier when it comes to delegating authority, or collaborating in teams. However all the above is offset by an important feature which acts as a moderator in group conflict, namely “philotimo”. There is no equivalent for this word in English; literally translated it means love of honour and as a concept it implies a self-imposed code of conduct based on trust and fairness. “Philotimo”, often helps in overcoming difficulties and encouraging cooperation between workers or staff, which no rule or order could impose. It also means that if treated “properly” an employee will give more than what is normally expected in order to please his/her employers, “properly” meaning being respected, praised and shown concern over personal matters. As Triandis (1972) indicates, a person who is considered “philotimos” behaves towards members of his ingroup in a way that is “polite, virtuous, reliable, proud, truthful, generous, self-sacrificing, tactful, respectful and grateful”.
The strong individualism of Greeks make them to prefer working for themselves. The phase “I want to be my own boss” is commonly heard among young people who after working for a few years as employees, start their own small business. About half of the labour force is self-employed and 90% of Greek firms have fewer than 10 workers (Ball 1992).
Overall, the readiness of Greeks to engage in entrepreneurial activities is further strengthened by the considerable degree of social mobility in Greece. With no line of separation between classes, there is high expectation and much opportunity for success. There is no limit to the opportunities for people to advance, and Greeks tend to compete fiercely to grasp these opportunities before anyone else does. This explains also the preference for ventures which allow a high margin to profit (trade, shipping) and, the willingness to seek opportunities abroad (Papalexandris, 1995).
The desire to advance socially and secure social recognition together with the love for learning and self fulfillment also explain the great value Greeks attach to higher education which was traditionally a prerequisite for success, social status and economic prosperity (Dimaki 1974). Higher education in Greek Universities is free for those who can pass the national admission exam. However since the number of candidates by far exceeds the available places for admission, for students who are not admitted to the Greek Universities, the Greek family is ready to sacrifice important sums of money for their education either abroad or in private colleges in Greece. Also it is quite common for the family to finance children’s post-graduate Studies abroad.
Against this overall country background results obtained from Globe on societal culture will be interpreted.
Quantitative results on perceived and desired cultural dimensions
Results from Globe on the societal level of culture in Greece are presented in Table 3. This Table shows the mean scores and ranks of the various dimensions of culture, as respondents believe that they currently exist and should exist, as well as the differences between them.
Before beginning the analysis of the different dimensions we can generally observe that Greece has low mean scores in “society as is” and high scores in “society should be”. These results confirm the existence of a culture gap found in previous research studies on organizational culture. According to Bourantas and others (1990) there is a discrepancy between general organizational culture as perceived by managers and their personally preferred culture. They believe this to be an indication of the desire for change within organizations. If this is true within organizations, it is even more the case within societal culture which respondents perceive as being different from what they would like it to be.
Here we must note that respondents were mostly university graduates and worked in some of the best firms in Greece, therefore their perception of societal reality as lacking in certain dimensions is partly due to their high expectations about an ideal societal culture. Furthermore there is a widespread tendency for self-criticism among Greeks especially those living in Athens where problems of traffic congestion overpopulation and pollution have made life quite difficult. The influx of 1,5 million economic refugees mainly from Eastern countries after the 90’s has worsened the situation while the poor public administration, although trying hard, cannot cope with increasing complexities of life especially in overpopulated cities.

TABLE 2
GLOBE RESULTS ON GREEK SOCIETAL CULTURE
Societal Culture Dimension Society
As Is
Country
Ranking Group
Ranking Society
Should be Country
Ranking Group
Ranking Difference between
As is & Should be
Score Rank Group Score Rank Group Score
Performance Orientation 3.20 61 C 5.81 39 B 2.61
Future Orientation 3.40 51 C 5.19 48 B 1.79
Assertiveness 3.42 58 C 3,21 56 C -0.21
Collectivism 1: Societal Emphasis 3.25 61 C 5.40 5 A 2.15
Gender Egalitarianism 3.48 29 B 4.89 16 A 1.41
Humane Orientation 3.34 59 D 5.23 48 B 1.89
Power Distance 5.40 21 A 2.39 52 D -3.01
Collectivism 2: Family Loyalty 5.27 35 B 5.46 41 B 0.19
Uncertainty Avoidance 3.39 57 D 5.09 17 A 1.70
1) Performance Orientation
The first dimension examined in the research refers to the degree to which society is encouraging and rewarding individuals and groups, which have high rates of success. In this section, Greece has an especially low score of 3.2 with the maximum being 7 ranking last among 61 countries. In addition, the great gap between what is happening now and what should be happening must be noted. This difference is 2.61, which places Greece in the 39th position.
Results show that middle managers perceive, as low the recognition granted to high performance in their society, while they believe this should be much higher. A number of explanation can be offered here:
• These results express the complaints expressed by many Greeks over the general tendency towards mistrusting those achieving individual goals, and reaching high levels of success. Here we must observe that something similar to the tall poppy syndrome observed in Australia (Ashkanasy and Falkus 1998) is also evident in Greece. This is also reinforced by the previously mentioned characteristic of antagonism. Thus although Greeks strive for achievements, they often refuse recognition to those performing well, while on the contrary they very often think of themselves as victims of this lack of recognition having a feeling of being betrayed by society in general.
• Through these results respondents send the message that Greek society must become more performance oriented competing for and rewarding employees’ successes. The stress must not only be placed on quantity, but on quality as well.
• Results reflect the general tendency of most Greeks to criticize and find fault with things happening around them. This self-criticism stems to a large extent from their need for progress, results and excellence, which everyone would like to see, but due to the lack of infrastructure, or the general framework finds difficult to achieve. This drive and desire for excellence can be seen in the achievements of overseas Greeks who show great progress as immigrants in their new countries.
• Finally, results express the disappointment with the Greek public sector which constitutes an important portion of the total working force of the country. The indicators of productivity and effectiveness in the public sector are low and constitute the main problem for any government since they present obstacles to the economic development of the country and have re-delayed its entry in the European Monetary Union. It is a fact that the prevailing mentalities of political favouritism and poor service, found in the public sector and in some large semi-public organizations, often have influence on the overall economic performance. The low performance of the public sector although widely criticized somehow influences attitudes toward work of the average Greek and is often a serious obstacle for Greek businesses.
However, over the last few years as shown by economic figures, things have started to change. The concepts of productivity and free trade already prominent in the private sector have entered in the public sector while at the same time, there are more and more professional managers with scientific background offering their services in various posts in organizations controlled by the State. At the same time competition has caused a change in the philosophy of management and has forced companies to make constant improvements in order to attain better results. The great gap existing between the current and desirable state of affairs shows that Greek managers have accepted the need for a more performance oriented society as well as the high value and desirability for achieving results and recognizing them.
2) Future Orientation
This dimension is defined as the score a society receives for motivating its members to be oriented towards the future. In other words, to help them face whatever situation occurs with a more long term perspective.
The results for Greece are slightly better in this than in the previous dimension.
The mean score for what is happening today is 3.40 showing limited use of programming and of long term planning within Greek Society. Compared with the rest of the countries, Greece is in the 51st position among 61 countries. It is classified in group C.
With regards to desired future orientation, the managers who participated in the study gave an average coefficient of 5.19, which places Greece in the 48th position. This position differs from the current state of affairs and puts Greece in the group B, having a statistically lower difference than only 22 other countries. The difference between the current and ideal state of affairs is 1.79 and is believed relatively high even though it is in the middle of the table in comparison to other countries.
Those surveyed gave the message that there is a need for more planning and future expectation both at the level of society and at the level of organization. More programming, long-term perspectives and better preparation will lead to the desired future orientation. It seems that the long history of instability in the external political and economic environment have made Greeks reluctant to plan ahead. Greek culture, on all levels, has always been characterized by its “here and now” attitude mainly due to the environmental instability, wars and the resulting insecurity. What is missing is the sense of belief in the future and the systematic approach to a long –term program which will look ahead and prepare action plans to meet future needs. It seems that wars, threats and various calamities which Greeks have faced over the years make them reluctant to plan too far ahead. To this should be added the frequent changes in legislation practiced over the past years by the state and the general mistrust about what lies ahead due mainly to the country’s geopolitical position. According to Broom (1996) the Greek approach to time is considerably different from that found in the U.S. or Western Europe. There is little advance planning unless it is imposed from the outside. On a personal level if you ask a Greek what he will do over the next few years you may receive the following answer “Who knows? I may even not be alive then”.
Until recently this phenomenon could be observed at all levels of Greek Culture with politicians and businessmen in the forefront. As a result the talent for business and the intelligence which distinguish Greeks was rather channeled to short-term plans. Trade has been a preferred activity over manufacturing and short-term profit was more appealing than long-term investment (Alexander 1968). Over the last few years there have been efforts in large Greeks organizations to implement strategic planning and get ready to anticipate and face the future by building alternative solutions for unpredictable changes. Thus many Greek firms have invested abroad both in Eastern and Western countries hoping for long term benefits. This is largely due to globalization and the competition faced by the operation of Multinational firms in Greece. Furthermore the fact that Greece is a member of the E.U. where detailed planning ahead of time a necessary in order to participate in projects and get access to available funds has forced state administration to adjust their practice and become more future oriented.
Finally in this dimension Greece follows the general tendency of countries in the globe to desire a higher degree of future orientation.
3) Assertiveness
This dimension refers to the degree to which members of the society are encouraged to be tough, dominant and aggressive. Greece is 58th in the society “as is” and 56th in the society “should be” ranking showing the least intra country difference between the two as compared with all other dimensions.
This means that respondents believe Greek society is not high on aggression and wish even lower aggression.
It is true that from their early childhood children are taught to cherish peace and there is a general tendency for young parents to discourage use of toy weapons. Aggression is permitted only in case of threat to existence.
Although Greece has been involved in several wars over the years, it was always in response to a foreign invasion or in order to liberate occupied territories. The Christian spirit of peace loving and the motto of “Love though neighbour as thouself” is something strongly encouraged by parents and teachers in child rearing. Among school children it is not the person who shows aggression that will become a leader but rather the child who can help schoolmates in meeting difficult assignments and teachers’ requirements or the child who will defend verbally his class mate to the teacher even if the latter is a wrong doer.
In the organizational setting, although competition and the need for efficiency make aggressive behavior necessary, back-stabbing or judging strictly your colleagues or subordinates is not encouraged and solidarity is reinforced. With reference to supervisors’ behaviour, unless people’s feelings are taken into consideration in the work place, little can be accomplished and threats or tough and aggressive behavior can often bring the opposite results.
As Broome (1996) describes in order to motivate employees to put extra effort into a project it is necessary to appeal to their “philotimo” or “love of honor” by showing trust in their abilities, kindness and concern about their personal problems. The allowance of nonwork-related activity on the job and the time often spent by managers in order to learn about their employees’ family concerns and problems can create more loyalty and a sense of obligation thus leading to higher degrees of productivity whenever needed. Kindness and concern about people rather than about products will bring much better results since keeping to the norms and being tough and strict can create an adversarial relationship and very negative results. It appears that less aggression is what all countries participating in the Globe around the world desire and Greece is among the countries with the strongest orientation towards lower levels of aggression.
4) Collectivism 1: Societal Emphasis
The dimension of collectivism refers to the extent to which the structure of the society leads to or favours the cooperative versus individualistic behaviour. Here, Greek society has a very low coefficient, 3.25, and is in the 61st position. This coefficient places it in group C, since it is statistically lower than 49 other countries. On the question of what should be happening in Greek society, the coefficient is especially high, 5.40 which places Greece 5th among the other countries. The difference is 2.15 and is the greatest difference any country has.
The results of this section bring forward one of the characteristics of Greek society, which is individualism. Greeks have learned to take initiative, they are intelligent and have a strong entrepreneurial spirit. However, they do not easily work well with others especially in organizational settings. It is common for those in position of power to take all the responsibility and delegate only to a limited extent, since their subordinates are neither trained not encouraged to work in teams. Team spirit is reached only in cases of emergency. In Greek history there are instances where prominent Greeks have overcome their differences and came together when important decisions had to be reached. However, it seems that once the danger was over the need to act as a team faded and individuality prevailed again.
An important characteristic in Greek societal culture is the distinction between ingroup and outgroup which affects significantly the ways in which Greeks relate to others (Triandis, 1972). The ingroup usually includes family, relatives and friends and there is a lot of protection, trust, support and cooperation between its members. The outgroup is often viewed with hostility and relations with outgroup members are often characterized by suspicion and mistrust. According to Doumanis’ (1983) in traditional Greek communities social relationships were polarized being either positive or negative with no room or neutral gradation in between the two. This explains the lack of cooperation between management and employees or between state officials belonging to different political parties. However any stranger or foreigner is a potential ingroup member and receives excellent treatment because of the emphasis tradition places on “philoxenia” or friendliness to strangers.
As Herzfeld (1987) observed one finds in the mosaic of Greek culture a mixture of the traditional and modern that cannot be easily separated. Although the largest percentage of Greek population live in urban centers such as Athens, Thessaloniki, Patras, most Greeks have their roots in the rural communities. Thus, while leading the life of a modern city dweller with fast and busy schedules and little time for team spirit and collectivism they identify with their own or their parents’ village community and long for the type of societal collectivism which prevailed there. The first thing two Greek strangers do when they first meet is try to find out their place of origin . If they happen to come from the same geographical area or happen to know someone from each others’ area this can form enough basis for cordial social relations. Strong or influential members of a village who have “made it” in large cities often become a source of jobs or contacts that lead to employment and it is still common to find in large organizations large percentages of employees coming from the same province who, happened to be the owner’s or the top manager’s province.
The “should be” results of Globe confirm the research, which was carried out in Greece by Hofstede 15 years ago (Hofstede, 1991). Greece was among the countries, which showed strong desire for great collectivism. This was apparently due to the fact that respondents, all belonging to the same firm, felt as members of the in group and had developed solidarity among themselves.
The “should be” collectivism scale is also consistent and reflects the antagonism and distrust mentioned on page 22.
Today on the societal level as a great portion of the population has moved to the cities and relationships have become more impersonal, collectivism even at the inner group is perceived as low although it is highly desirable among respondents. As we can see in the study the coefficient on what the situation should be is especially high and places Greece is 5th on the “should be” dimension. Therefore, Greeks seem both to miss collectivism and to realize that they have to work together in order to be successful as Europeans and develop team spirit if they want to develop as a country. It is therefore a task of top managers to transform the organization in a big extended family in order to make their people feel as members of the inner group and achieve the results of team work. In fact most executive training in modern Greek firms today aims at improving teamwork and systematic efforts have already brought promising results as expressed by many consultants working in that field (Broome 1996).
5) Gender Egalitarianism (equality)
This dimension refers to the score a society receives for minimizing the different roles of the two sexes. In this section, Greek society is very democratic even if there are restrictions placed on females due to their dual role in work and family settings (Papalexandris and Bourantas, 1991). The coefficient is 3.48 placing Greece is in the 29th position, and in group B. Statistically it differs from only 10 countries which reinforce sexual equality more strongly in the undertaking of social roles. As follows from the research, the coefficient of “should be” is 4.89, a difference of 1.41. With this coefficient, Greece is 16th among other countries and is in group A, which shows the importance Greek society assigns to women.
In this area of research, one could expect a greater difference since Greek society had until recently a traditional more inflexible position regarding the independence of women and their involvement in important aspects of economic, and political life.
It is true that although in reality women have traditionally held a most important place in communities were men were absent for long periods of time due to emigration, work at sea, or wars, at the presence of men women were traditionally expected to serve and make men feel as masters in the house. Young women would often marry according to their parent’s will and they would gain status after bearing children while the mother-in-law was a most important figure in rural communities.
Ethnographer Irvin Anders (1962) who studied rural parts of Greece in the early 1960’s reported that when he asked a villager how many children he had, he replied “two children and one girl”, referring to the preference for sons. As fathers needed to provide daughters with “prika” or dowry in order for them to get married, daughters were often considered as financial burdens. Today the dowry system does not exist and equal treatment in given to both male and female children which share the overprotectiveness and financial sacrifices of their parents and are strongly encouraged to study and progress in their lives.
Thus, we can see that the differences between the sexes are constantly being reduced. Although the presence of women in top levels of the hierarchy is still limited, according to Dubish (1986) most of the power of Greek women remains out of public display. Women have demonstrated that they can play an important role within Greek society as professionals, academics and executives both in the public and the private sector. Women outnumber men gaining entrance to Universities, women managers have been very successful in the services sector and over the next few years, trends show that they will be an important part of the business world. Still the large share of obligations having to do with child rearing and housework is carried out by women who seem to manage particularly well in most cases largely due to the support of the extended family (parents and close relatives) still prevailing in Greece.
6) Humane orientation
This dimension is defined as the effort and practices which a society shows in support of human beings including generosity, concern and friendliness. In this dimension, Greek society has a coefficient of 3.34, which is very low. This score places it 59th among the other countries and in-group D, which is the lowest group. The coefficient for the desired state is 5.23 and puts Greece 48th and in-group B. The difference between the 2 coefficients is 1.89, which is significant. This difference shows that as respondents feel, Greek society should be more caring towards people.
While it also reflects the antagonism often existing in organizational settings. One must however look closer at the Greek society in order to understand the respondents views.
A person not familiar with Greek culture may gain the impression that Greek society is actually low on the humane orientation. The fact is that it is much lower than what respondents would like it to be and this high desire for humanism is deeply rooted in Greek traditional values which respondents see as being threatened in an era of commercialization and cut-throat competition.
One of the most well-known traditional Greek values has been the offer of “philoxenia” or hospitability. As Fermor (1958) states, philoxenia is based on “a genuine and deep-seated kindness, the feeling of pity and charity toward a stranger who is far from home as in ancient Greek the word “xenos” means both stranger and guest. Greek hospitality especially in smaller communities is one of the reasons that many tourists keep coming back to Greece.
The inborn foreigner or the newly met person is considered a potential friend until he proves the opposite.
Of course this contradicts the already mentioned antagonism and distrust often shown by Greeks. The explanation can be found in the distinction between inner and outer circle described by Triandis.
In spite of the apparent contradiction, the independence and individualism of Greeks coincide with the strong loyalty and even sacrifice for the in-group or for appropriate others. According to Hart (1992) who studied rural Greece, individuality is admired whereas autonomy which disregards needs of family or community is condemned.
As Broome (1996) describes, closely related to hospitality is generosity or the overwhelming spirit of giving that accompanies true friendship in Greece. A person may make real sacrifices to help a friend in need. However if something goes wrong in the relationship or the person joins a conflicting interest group, the situation may change drastically and strong antagonism may develop.
An example from the recent past shows the difference between Greek culture and the West in humane orientation. In 1993 during the campaign for parliamentary election, one of the two major candidates was in a bad health condition and apparently unable to rule the country as before. The opposite party, following advice by foreign consultants, used this as an argument against their opponent. Contrary to what foreign advisors had believed, the weak candidate did not lose any of his supporters who felt very sympathetic towards him, and he finally won the election.
It is true that Greeks of all social levels have traditionally been humanitarian and supporting towards their fellow men. It is still common for poor people to survive on neighbor’s support and charity donations are very common even from people with limited financial means. Almost all major educational institutions, hospitals and public buildings are due to donations of diaspora Greeks and there is a widespread tradition to help the needy around the world. Greece at presents supports 1,5 million immigrants from poor neighboring countries and helps third world countries. At the same time the state is expected to contribute to its citizens’ welfare, something which it cannot do to a satisfactory degree thus creating dissatisfaction and unrest. In general people fear that the impersonal nature of life in urban centers will deprive them of their natural qualities of caring for each other. It is a fact that over the last few years, with increasing population and alienation in large towns people feel uneasy. Not knowing your neighbour and not being able to know whether to trust him or not is something against traditional values. We believe that this change is reflected in the low score perceived in the humane orientation. Furthermore in work settings the need to increase competitiveness seems to threaten existing employee-friendly practices, tenure and supportive labour measures and this is something people resent in general.
Overall one may conclude that as is the general Globe results, Greek respondents show a great desire for a stronger humane orientation and this desire makes them perceive the present situation as worse than what an outsider or an objective observer would perceive it to be. Thus higher expectations and a longing for what is universally considered good in evident across respondents and explain the gap between the “as is” and the “should be” findings.
7) Power distance
In this study, this dimension is defined as the score given for the centralization of power and the great gap in power between different levels of society. Here, Greece has a coefficient of 5.40 and is 21st among other countries, which puts it in the A group. This coefficient is especially high and expresses the centralization of power perceived by respondents as existing within Greek society.
The desired state has a coefficient of 2.39, which puts it 52nd and in group D. The managers which participated in the research send the message that the gap in power between different hierarhical levels must be reduced, since the difference observed is 3.01 and is one of the greatest among all countries.
According to Hofstede (1991) this large power distance coincides among others with might prevailing over right, the powerful having privileges and the ability to use force. This is something found among powerful people all over the world (politicians, mass media or influential business people) but which is something that most respondents consider undesirable and unfair. A person who is not familiar with Greek society may conclude from these results that Greek society is a formal society where people’s opinions are not considered and people are kept at a distance from their superiors. However this is not the case. People have the tendency to challenge, question and criticize authority and react fiercely whenever they feel that their rights are violated. In fact industrial relations have traditionally been a difficult area for large firms and union leaders competed strongly whenever their views were not taken into consideration. So, it might well be that the “as is” power distance is perceived higher due to the desire of Greeks for a more egalitarian and participatory society.
A multinational comparison of employee attitudes found Greece to rank high in dissatisfaction with pay and work (Griffeth and others, 1980) while labour disputes and expressed dissatisfaction was further strengthened by the high expectation of Greeks to move up in a society with great social mobility something which explains the gap between perceived and desired situation.
Holden (1972) states in his book on Greece:
“Greeks are indeed not only natural participators but compulsive egalitarians as well. Rank, class or status mean little to them. Normally they expect everyone from the Prime Minister downwards to maintain an open door to them at all times. The dream of most Greeks is to work for themselves something which explains the fact that half of the workforce is self-employed.
According to Broome (1996) Greeks are not the least intimidated by status or hierarchy and they believe they have the solution to all company or state problems. Every individual has a strong opinion about how things should be done and doesn’t hesitate to let that opinion be known. A visit to the employees’ cafeteria or to the neighbourhood coffee shop will convince the person visiting Greece about the extent of this characteristic. There he will have the opportunity to listen to CEO-like statements about the firm’s strategy or speeches worthy of experienced politicians. It is therefore normal for members of a society where power distance is largely condemned to desire for more equality and a smaller power gap. In organizations the perceived power distance is high, this often leading to adversarial relations between top management and employees. Today the tendency towards globalization requires the involvement of the individual and his/her conscious participation in the common vision. Greek management is still characterized to a large extent by formal relationships which no one approves and everyone questions. A different type of employee involvement is evident in some modern organizations and the perspective of spreading this to other organizations and other institutions of Greek society is highly desirable and strongly demanded.
8) Family collectivism
This dimension describes the strength of the family bond. In this section, Greece has a high coefficient of 5.27 and is 35th among participating countries in the “as is” score. This coefficient places it in group B with statistical coefficient higher than 26 countries. The position Greece holds in the “should be” score in relation to other countries is 4rth, which puts again it in the B group. The difference between the current and desired state of affairs is only .19. This shows that on the issue of family life respondents feel that Greek society in on the right track.
Family collectivism together with assertiveness are the two dimensions where respondents feel that Greek society approaches the desired state. This was to be expected since the bond of family has an unbreakable connection to the development of Greek society. As already mentioned throughout the tradition of centuries and with the passing of different forms of family, from the patriarchal family found in continental Greece to the matriarchal family found in the Greek islands, the family bond has constituted the first, and strongest societal group through which the individual develops his personal identity.
Family collectivism is expressed in the form of most small-medium Greek businesses of the past decades. The majority of these businesses preserve their family character throughout their life and very often the motivation for establishing them stems from the need to create a safe working environment for members of the family. There are many examples of companies in Greece, which have developed while preserving their family nature. These companies face the serious problem of transmission when the founder grows and when some other member of the family taking over is not necessarily able to keep the business alive.
Something which must be added here is that the Greek family does not include only parents and children. The elderly are always included as well as aunts, cousins, nephews and nieces while relationship with in-laws are also important. Younger members of the family enjoy a high degree of support from the family and older members enjoy in turn a lot of care in their late years. It is very common for mothers of young children to spend evening hours tutoring their children and for grand mothers to baby-sit for their grandchildren while their daughters or daughters in law are out at work. Also in times of illness there are always family members who will take turn at the sick persons bedside.
Perhaps this explains the fact that Greece has the longer mean life expectancy in Europe. Also the fact that Greece has the lower suicide rate in Europe and the lowest percentage of children born outside marriage.
The family in Greece manages to replace the gap in organized state services in the area of education, health, day care centers for children and care for the elderly. At the same time it serves as a mean to control behaviour of its members.
As described by Gage (1987) in a discussion he had with a criminal lawyer, the latter had told him that almost all his clients involved in a crime were more concerned about their family’s reaction than about their judge’s verdict.
In conclusion we must mention the fact that the family bond has been going through a difficult period for the past few years, throughout the world and this has inevitably touched Greece. The relationship between family members is becoming more loose, divorce rate is increasing and this phenomenon is especially important for the Greek society if we take into account that the Greek society is largely supported and draws its strength from the family institution. However compared with western societies which have similar levels of industrialization, Greece in unique in still keeping alive the family tradition.
9) Uncertainty Avoidance
This dimension refers to practices adopted and encouraged within the framework of a society in order to avoid the uncertainty existing among its members often at the expense of experimentation and in favour of strict rules and strong legislation.
In this dimension, Greek society has a very low mean of 3.39. Which places it in the 57th position and in group D, which is the lowest group. In the desired state, Greece has a mean of 5.09, which is very high and puts it in the 17th place and in-group A.
From the above, we can see that respondents feel that there is low uncertainty avoidance in their society which suffers from lack of preventive measures for the avoidance of unpleasant situations (wood fires, floods, road accidents, crimes etc.). This was to be expected since the Greek State is often accused for improvisation in solving problems and a lack of programming in facing important issues. The result of this is the inability to face emergency situations, which cause panic and are met with great difficulty and often without result. The distance separating Greek society between where it currently is and where respondents feel it should be is shown in the difference of 1.70 between the mean scores which is significant. In order for this distance to be bridged, there must be a transition from the existing common awareness to actual decision making and action taking. Unexpected situations can not be faced ad hoc and serious efforts for planning ahead in order to meet them when they occur are necessary.
Results in this dimension match results in the future orientation. Despite certain exceptions, people are reluctant to plan ahead since they feel uncertain about the future, and there is a common attitude of “who knows what lies ahead”.
According to Hofstede (1991) Greece showed the highest score in the uncertainty avoidance index. This coincides with the high “should be score” found in Globe. High uncertainty avoidance cultures are more anxious cultures and also more expressive cultures where people appear busy, emotional, aggressive, active. This description coincides with the impression one gets from watching Greeks.
Greeks tend to react to unpleasant situations and uncertainty with sociability. Talking, eating, drinking, dancing, discussing the world’s problems and telling jokes seem to provide a release from tension. Also in order to fight uncertainty Greeks were attracted to State jobs, which in the past offered tenure and voters exercised great pressure to politicians to obtain them. While the heavily staffed state sector allows little room for such practices any longer, political parties have for many years secured votes in exchange for the certainty offered by a tenured job in the State-Sector.
Hofstede (1991) also found that countries with high uncertainty avoidance in an attempt to moderate it have a complicated and precise system of laws and rules. Ironically this does not reduce but increases uncertainty. This is also true for Greece where the complicated legal framework, lending itself to various interpretations is something which adds to the general feeling of uncertainty. It seems that the difference between “as is” and “should be” also reflect differences in opposite characteristics which simultaneously occur at the Greek Societal level.
Thus, although respondents who were mostly managers in secure jobs, would welcome even lower levels of uncertainty, innovation and experimentation is common among a number of business persons. Many entrepreneurial firms are created at high risk mostly to satisfy the individualism of their founders but also because people who have a high motive to assume entrepreneurial risk have in fact high levels of tolerance to uncertainty. Research among people employed in State’s those employed in less secure more demanding jobs has shown that people attracted to more secure jobs (Banking-Telecommunications) as is the case with our respondents have different personality traits and somehow higher security needs (Bourantas, Papalexandris 1999).
One should mention the fact that the high scores of perceived uncertainty do not hinder large parts of the population from engaging in entrepreneurial activity something which makes Greece the country with the highest percentage of entrepreneurs within the E.U. (Papalexandris). As Broome (1996) believes a lot of safeguard against uncertainty is provided by the extended family and friends/members of the in-group. Insecurity caused by the societal environment and the lack of infrastructure can be met by establishing personal connections and Greeks invest a lot of time and effort in that direction.
Final Remarks on Societal Culture
The quantitative results from the Globe Study have only served as a starting point for offering some overall explanations reflecting Greek societal culture. Many cultural anthropologists and sociologists have stressed the duality and the various elements comprising the Greek mosaic. In his excellent book on Greece Broome (1996) mentions several of this dualities. Some of them are:
 The geographical location between East and West and the simultaneous proximity with both sides.
 The orientation towards the past as a source of strength for heading for the future.
 The tendency to leave Greece for distant lands combined with the great tenacity in keeping ethnic identity.
 The general critical and pessimistic attitude with the great desire to enjoy life and engage in social activity.
 The urbanization of Greek population combined with love for the place of native birth with which most people keep close ties.
 The persistence of the traditional family institution and the independence young women enjoy lately.
 The close link with a religion which although close to old tradition and early rituals is full of feasts, music and dancing and offers an informal atmosphere to members of its community.
 The love and support granted to members of the inner group towards the rivalry and antagonism shown to outgroup members.
 The resistance to imposed behaviour and the voluntary self-sacrifice when appeal to a persons philotimo is made by someone perceived as fair, friendly and trustworthy.
 The fear of the unknown and the need to challenge the future by being venturesome, travelling abroad and exploring new lands.
 The love for friendship and close ties and the enjoyment in engaging in continuous argument over political issues, constant criticism and debate over facts and views.
 Elasticity as shown by the adoption of modern life styles and tradition as shown by keeping family and religious traditions.
Perhaps the following statement written by Holden (1972) best describes these characteristics of Greek culture.
“Greek identity as a whole is best seen as a constant oscillation between just such opposites as these. The spirit and the flesh, ideal and reality, triumph and despair-you name them and the Greeks suffer or enjoy them as the constant poles of their being, swinging repeatedly from one to the other and back again, often contriving to embrace both poles simultaneously but above all, never reconciled, never contented, never still. This perennial sense of tension between diametrically opposed forces is the essence of their existence- the one absolutely consistent feature of their identity since Greek history began. In the phrase of the Cretan novelist, Kazantzakis, they are double-borne souls”.

IV. GLOBE AND LEADERSHIP

Literature Review on Leadership in Greece
The word leadership literally translated into “igesia” in Greek is a word usually serving to describe the top rank official in large institutions such as the army, ministries or political parties. Only during recent years and after extensive use in executive seminars and business courses has the term acquired the meaning it has in the English language.
On the contrary the term leader when used alone as a noun e.g. “he is a leader” refers to the person who has some kind of special quality or charisma to guide people, while when used in combination with another word “the leader of the party” simply refers to the person who is on top of the hierarchy.
Somehow difficult for those not having studied management is the distinction between leaders and managers. In fact there is no corresponding translation for “manager” in Greek language. For higher levels the word most often used is “diefthintis” meaning director. Indeed many managers still carry out their jobs in a more directive and controlling approach than is commonly found in western companies. Research in the mid-sixties showed that autocratic management was a consequence of the family structure and the lack of separation between ownership and management (Alexander, 1968).
Today even in family-owned companies which could be characterized as patriarchal, very rarely the directive style means harsh treatment to employees. According to Broome (1996) the successful Greek manager is expected to take care of employee needs as they arise, showing an interest in their family problems, as for most Greeks, the family is most important than work. The personal relationship with employees and the ability of the manager to develop and maintain personal connections with both subordinates and colleagues is often what distinguishes a manager from a leader especially at the middle levels of hierarchy.
Very important at this level is the ability of the leader to appeal to the “philotimo” or love of honour of his employees and create conditions which allow employs to show their creativity, diligence and dexterity while creating a system that encourages and supports individual initiative. One must take into account that Greeks are very hard working people when the situation requires and it is the personal quality of diligence not work itself which is important. (Lee, 1959). Meaningless and routine work is viewed with disdain and this explains the low productivity of the public sector which is nevertheless sought by employees since it offers job security. Yet many people showing lower productivity in lower paid jobs of the public sector will take and extra job to support their family. Recent statistics have shown than Greeks work the longest week hours in the European Union (New Ways 1998).
Very important is the ability to treat each employee as a person. As stated by Broome (1996) “in Greece you must manage persons, not personnel”. As already mentioned in the societal environment Greeks are both very individualistic and independent. According to Fermor (1958, 1966) an English author who fought in Greece during World War II and has studied Greek culture extensively, “every Greek may be said to comprise a one-man splinter-group” while the Greek word for person, “atomo” comes from the word which was believed by ancient Greek scientists to be the indivisible unit of the universe. In the work environment employees are always inclined to fight against perceived limitations on their personal freedom, independence and individual rights.
In view of the above, being granted the attribute leader in a Greek organization is not a simple task but a great achievement. Greeks do not like to be told what to do without proper explanations, dislike orders and are not at all intimidated by status. They face difficulties in cooperating and are very fast at questioning authority and mistrusting superiors. Therefore only the person who can win approval, encourage teamwork, be recognized as superior due to his qualities, skills, fairness and integrity can be characterized as a leader. Such a person can achieve levels of performance from his group that far excel what would be considered as normal by international standards.
This overall picture of Greek leadership will be further analyzed with the help of data from media analysis, focus groups findings and factor analysis of leadership results from Globe.

Media Analysis
In this section, we will examine the concept of leadership and the special practices, which are considered as characteristic of a successful manager/leader according to media analysis. For the needs of GLOBE we carried out media analysis in a series of magazines and newspapers, with economic contents.
The magazines used have permanent columns on leaders who are selected due to their success and their contribution to the high performance of their firm. These media were: “Economicos Tachydromos”, “Epilogi”, Industrial Review, Capital and Know How. The newspapers were: “Nafteboriki”, “To Vima” and “Express”. The period covered by the study was from 1-1-98 to 15-9-98. The main objective was the identification and collection of expressions assigning characteristics to well known managers/leaders in order to arrive at the ideal profile according to the media.
At this point we must stress the difficulty we faced in identifying leadership characteristics among persons described. The Greek press gives special emphasis to what top managers, both professionals or entrepreneurs have done. Therefore, the classic presentation of a top manager is though his studies and continues with the field he has chosen and how he has developed in his career or in his business. This presentation is given without any special mention to his personality, behavior, and practices, which contributed to his/her success.
Thus no valuable information on leadership qualities of managers, which were mentioned in the press, could be drawn. In some cases where special reports were made on important business personalities, the qualities mentioned were that they were self-made or were able to take over and expand a small family business. The ability to overcome obstacles of the external environment and to identify new business opportunities was also stressed. Entrepreneurial ability was considered important for a top manager and if he had succeeded in staying for many years in business, this was also attributed to his humanistic feelings and supportive behaviour to his employees which had secured him their loyalty and commitment.
Apart from these top-managers making the headlines, the list of characteristics according to the context of the articles appeared as follows:
TABLE 3
MEDIA ANALYSIS RESULTS
CHARACTERISTICS FREQUENCIES PERCENTAGE
%
Experienced 88 30.14
Intelligent 27 9.25
Decisive 25 8.56
Innovative 19 6.51
Good administrator 18 3.16
Risk Taker 14 4.79
Inspirational 11 3.77
Enthusiastic 9 3.08
Forecaster 9 3.08
Independent 9 3.08
Cooperative 7 2.40
Encouraging 6 2.05
Sincere 6 2.05
Problem-solver 5 1.71
Improver 4 1.37
Positive 4 1.37
Well prepared 4 1.37
Fair 3 0.03
Diplomatic 3 1.03
Emifier 3 1.03
Mind-stimulator 3 1.03
Unique 3 1.03
Calm 2 0.68
Clear-concrete 2 0.68
Consultative 2 0.68
Orderly 2 0.68
Mediator 2 0.68
Morale booster 1 0.34
Formal 1 0.34
TOTAL 292 100.00
From the 150 top-managers who were in the analysis every one was characterized by more than one adjective. As we can see from the result of the research, the basic characteristic of the successful Greek manager is experience as from the total characteristics 30.14% referred to the experience of the managers. Other characteristics, which were mentioned, were intelligence and decisiveness, innovation and administrative ability, risk taking and the ability to inspire. Along general lines, there are no significant differences in the results of the media analysis and the research on managerial effectiveness across countries. The qualities were those usually attributed to a successful manager most probably because the distinction between manager/leader is not so common in the business world.
Most important for the overall understanding of Greek leadership are the results from the two focus groups, which follow.
FOCUS GROUPS ON LEADERSHIP
Here we will present the results of two focus groups. The first was conducted among executives attending an executive part-time MBA program and working mostly as mechanical and electrical engineers. The discussion aimed at selecting the most important leader both from the historical/political and the organizational perspective.
The second was conducted in a Greek semi state bank. The discussion covered the respondents’ perception of characteristics possessed by a manager versus those of a leader.
First Focus Group
The two persons selected were E. Venizelos as political leader and A. Onassis as business leader.
Eleftherios Venizelos is considered the principal political leader of modern Greece. As the country’s prime minister at the beginning of the 20th century he had the vision to liberate all parts of Greece who were still under Turkish occupation. He won victoriously the two Balkan wars and started the Asia Minor expedition counting on the support of Western allies. When the latter withdrew their support and the Greek army was defeated, Greece was forced to accept 1, 6 millions Greek refugees from the coast of Asia Minor. Yet his political insight, diplomatic talent, ability to mobilize his people and commitment to the vision of freedom for the homeland have won him perhaps the top position among political leaders of modern Greece.
Aristotelis Onassis was born at the beginning of the century in Smyrna in Asia Minor. After the loss of Asia Minor he had to emigrate and started his business ventures trading tobacco in Argentina. He soon developed a fleet of whalers which he later turned into cargo ships and later tankers of very large tonnage. In 1956 when and Suez canal was blocked, he was able to carry oil fast by transporting it around Africa with his huge oil tankers and this made him a billionaire. His legendary affair with the famous opera singer Maria Kallas and his marriage with Jackie the widow of U.S.A. President John Kennedy occupied headlines for many years. He was the founder of the Greek airliner Olympic Airways and left a huge fortune after his death including a large medical center in Athens, a scholarship foundation for students in higher education and the Onassis world prizes for persons showing outstanding achievements in the area of humanities, arts and sciences.
His intelligence, business intuition, global awareness, risk taking, ability to adapt and take advantage of unexpected events together with his love for the homeland place him at the top of business leaders in the eyes of Greeks and have won him also a position among best known business leaders of the world.
SECOND FOCUS GROUP
All the participants agreed that there are important differences between a manager who tries to carry out his duties correctly and a leader who creates a team, prepares its members for action, and gets them all to work together. The differences, which were stressed, are:
Manager
- He puts emphasis on results.
- He plans, organizes and controls the different branches.
- He assigns tasks and directs in the best possible way.
- He assigns power and responsibilities.
- He dictates his will by giving orders.
- He does not have the ability of the leader to stimulate his team.
- He acts as the conductor who directs orchestra with his wand.
- It is possible that he is good at his job without being a leader, like a good basketball player who does not necessarily make a good coach.
- His opinion dominates.
- He functions within already existing limits.
- He takes initiatives and has ideas, which cannot always be applied because he can not get the rest of the team to collaborate.
- He attributes importance to bureaucratic details.
- He pays special attention to scheduling and control.
- He is not necessarily flexible and multi-faceted and often avoids risk.
- He can use threats such as firing.
Leader
- He puts emphasis on results and on people. He gets results through the trust he has won.
- He motivates his team to do their work in the best possible way.
- He motivates not by giving orders, but by persuading his employees.
- He persuades by giving example to others.
- He creates the ideal environment and climate in order to motivate his people.
- He is differentiated from the other members of the team by his ability to help in the work.
- He is the conductor, but communicates with the orchestra without using the wand.
- He gains the admiration of those around him.
- He has vision.
- His opinion does not dominate.
- He offers new ideas at difficult moments.
- He has the ability to persuade, to impress and influence others to accept his ideas.
- He psychologically supports his team.
- He is able to transform an unproductive team into a successful, productive one, making them realize that this is the correct way to work.
- He is often insubordinate, going against the rules and taking risks.
- He is talented, has a strong personality which helps him lead others, spread his vision, create enthusiasm.
The conclusions reached from this focus group describe the leader as someone with vision and inspiration, and the ability to be persuasive. He is a person who can motivate others and present new ideas, which can be materialized. The leader is thought to be a charismatic person with a strong personality, who is able to win the acceptance not only of his subordinates but also of his superiors.
GLOBE RESULTS ON GREEK LEADERSHIP
Globe used 21 leadership scales 9 of which were reversely scored. Respondents were asked to.
Among positive dimensions, diplomacy ranks the highest among Greek respondents something quite expected since the ability to negotiate, to find a balance between opposite trends, to survive in changing circumstances and to take advantage of unexpected events require a great deal of “diplomatic” skills with business leaders must by all means possess.
The other three dimensions ranking high in the Greek sample describe a leader as decisive, administratively competent and collaborative team oriented. In all the above dimensions Greece ranks among the 10 first countries in the sample of 61 countries participating in Globe. Greece also ranks in Group A in the dimensions of self-sacrifice, team integration, modesty, humane orientation. The only dimension in which Greece shows a low position (49th in 61 countries) is that of performance orientation. Greek leadership is still lacking in this dimension something already found at the societal culture level. Generally speaking Greek leadership ranks high in the 12 dimensions with positive values as in 8 dimension it is classified in Group A and in 4 dimensions in Group B.
In the second group of dimensions which have negative value, Greek leadership ranks low in the malevolent behaviour, as well as in non-participative, autocratic, conflict inducer and procedural behaviour. However relatively high scores appear in status consciousness, self-centered and autonomous (formerly individualistic) behaviour. One can conclude that all negative dimensions have largely to do with the leaders “ego” while fortunately they are outnumbered by positive dimensions. Individualistic characteristics of Greeks managers which are deeply rooted cannot change easily, and seem to be reflected in their leadership style.
However very encouraging is the high score given to participative and collaborative behaviour which is gaining ground in modern companies and which is the only way for offsetting strong individualism in the work environment.
Table 4 shows the mean score, the ranking of Greece in each of the 21 leadership dimensions and the group of countries in which Greece has been classified.

TABLE 4
GLOBE RESULTS FOR GREECE ON LEADERSHIP
Dimensions Mean Score Rank Group
Diplomatic 6,01 2 A
Decisive 6,18 8 A
Administratively Competent 6,18 8 A
Team I: Collaborative Team Orientation 5,76 10 A
Charismatic III: self sacrificial 5,24 11 A
Status Consciousness* 5,12 11 A
Team II: Team Integrator 6,19 12 A
Modesty 5,28 20 A
Integrity 6,27 21 B
Face-saver* 3,05 22 C
Autonomous* 3,98 22 A
Charismatic I: Visionary 6,19 23 B
Humane Orientation 5,02 23 A
Charisma II: Inspirational 6,25 28 B
Self-centered* 2,10 33 C
Procedural (formally bureaucratic)* 3,74 41 B
Conflict inducer* 3,62 48 B
Performance orientation 5,82 49 B
Autocratic* 2,14 51 C
Non-participative* 2,25 52 C
Malevolent* 1,55 53 D
* Dimensions marked with an asterisk had a reserve score and a negative value.

FACTOR ANALYSIS ON GLOBE RESULTS ON GREECE
The following step in the exploration of Greek leadership was to conduct a factor analysis in order to arrive at certain types of leaders as they appear from the questionnaires. Using the Rotated Factor Matrix we arrived at six factors which explain approx 50% of the variance in our data and can therefore serve as basic indicators of Greek leadership.
On Table 5 which follows, only variables with loadings higher than .30 are included. Some variables, which loaded on more than one factors were included only under the factor in which they showed the highest value and provided they had a difference of .10 from each other (absolute value).
Although we conducted the factor analysis separately for each sector (banking and telecommunications) here we present only the results from the overall data. This is due to the fact that the observed differences were not significant and did not lend themselves to further distinctions and interpretations.
Further analysis in the light of organizational culture results will provide the ground for meaningful interpretations in the future.

TABLE 5
Rotated Factor Matrix
FACTOR
1 2 3 4 5 6
Morale Booster ,644
Intuitive ,637
Dynamic ,561
Team Builder ,561
Willful ,546
Encouraging ,543
Visionary ,520
Confidence Builder ,498
Asocial -,493
Hostile -,482
Win-Win problem Solver ,472
Clear ,472
Decisive ,464
Communicative ,461
Collaborative ,459
Calm ,452
Integrator ,452
Prepared ,400
Convincing ,378
Enthusiastic ,366
Ambitious ,366
Performance Oriented ,362
Loner -,339
Intellectually stimulating ,322
Dependable ,311
Sincere -,680
Inspirational -,638
Tyrannical ,625
Self-interested ,619
Trustworthy -,585
Just -,561
Egocentric -527
Vindictive ,505
Non-explicit ,489
Secretive ,482
Improvement orientated -,470
Positive -,466
Ruthless ,466
Bossy ,454
Provocateur ,436
Evasive ,409
Irritable ,350
Ruler ,612
Elitist ,532
Egotistical ,463
Non-egalitarian ,448
Dictatorial ,443
Domineering ,417
Cynical ,404
Individually oriented ,365
Cunning ,355
Micro-Manager ,352
Autonomous ,333
TABLE 6 (continued)
FACTOR
1 2 3 4 5 6
Honest ,540
Compassionate ,512
Fraternal ,474
Cautious ,470
Class-conscious ,464
Modest ,464
Patient ,445
Procedural ,436
Tender ,432
Formal ,432
Generous ,405
Group oriented ,378
Logical ,365
Self Sacrificial ,365
Self effacing ,330
Loyal ,326
Foresight ,748
Plans ahead ,711
Motive arouser ,595
Able to anticipate ,585
Status conscious ,341
Avoids negatives -,315
Administratively skilled ,480
Orderly ,458
Excellence oriented ,433
Good administrator ,428
Intra-group conflict avoider ,412
Intelligent ,397
Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
According to the interesting results of this analysis we can give the following characterization to the six factors observed.
FACTORS LEADERSHIP-CHARACTERISATION
1 Charismatic/Ideal Leader
2 Ruthless-Tyrannical Leader
3 Egotistical-Elitist
4 Honest-Compassionate-Fraternal
5 Careful Planner
6 Administratively Skilled
The number of factors is similar to the ones produced by the totality of Globe results.
However there are some differences in the case of Greece. In Factor 1 we have at first the ideal charismatic leader who possesses all the characteristics which were found as most desirable both in the media analysis and the first focus group. This leader is a morale booster, has vision, has intuition, intelligence and dynamism. These are also the common characteristics among the two greek prominent political and business personalities as revealed by the first focus group.
In factors 2 and 3 we have two types of leaders with negative profiles. Two is ruthless and tyrannical with high negative values in many positive characteristics, something which drastically reduces his capabilities to lead effectively. Three is also dictatorial but also elitist with a self centred individually oriented attitude.
The remaining three factors have all positive characteristics. Factor 4 is the human oriented, supportive, generous and generally speaking low profile leader who is careful and follows procedures. Factor 5 is the leader who plans ahead, has foresight and is able to anticipate changes, therefore he has a strong future orientation and Factor 6 is the administratively skilled, excellence oriented, intelligent leader who is also skilled in avoiding intra group conflict.
In general the positive profiles coincide with results from the media analysis and the second focus group.
At this point we may conclude that the six leadership dimensions which resulted from the factor analysis seem to cover to a large extent Greek reality as already described, with most characteristics however loading as in the case of Globe’s international results on the first factor, that of the ideal, charismatic leader.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Greece is a country with a complex past history where ancient myths blend with modern reality. This has lead to a vast and diversified tank of values, attitudes and behavioural patterns from which individuals draw to form their own character and personality. Herzfeld (1958, 1987), an anthropologist who has conducted several ethnographic studies in Rhodes and Crete, describes Greece “as a country that falls disconcertingly between the exotic and the familiar”. One can find traditional attitudes as expressed by Orthodox Church along with the spirit of exploration expressed by Odysseus; The thunder power of Zeus blending with humane, egalitarian behaviour; Athena’s wisdom going hand to hand with haphazard, ad hoc solutions; People longing for strong collectivism while sticking to their individualism. One may find people strongly desiring and considering appropriate for society what they themselves would be reluctant to practice while also having high unrealistic expectations and tending to blame others or society as a whole for not being able to fulfill them. All this explains the strong gap between “as is” and “should be” found in societal culture).
To the modern world Greece means classical antiquity, pictures of the sea, the sun the Greek islands and Zorba the Greek movie hero dancing and expressing his joy of life.
In reality it is all of the above. It is a warm, sociable, vivid, argumentative society with people who can show high levels of performance, friendliness, collectivism and support to each other and low achievement motivation, antagonism and strong individualism, depending on the circumstances. Being an effective leader in Greece can be both very challenging as you develop flexibility and deeper understanding of these characteristics and very difficult, if you ignore them.
In Greece, as in any other part of the world, the leader-to-be can be compared to an explorer in social reality who sets out to find about his peers, employees and superiors while also learning about himself. Because to “Know Thouself”, according to Ancient Greek Philosophers was the optimum achievement. And there is no better way for becoming a leader than through self-knowledge and knowledge of your people who can serve as a looking glass where you can observe unknown parts of yourself.
Having arrived at the end of this short description of societal culture and leadership in Greece, I wish to thank Bob House, his scientific team and all Globe contributors for providing me with the stimulus to look again with a fresh eye into my country and gain deeper insight into my past and present.

REFERENCES
1. Alexander, A., (1968), Greek Industrialists, Research Monograph Series,
Center of Planning and Economic Research, Athens.
2. Armstrong A., Markus, R., (1960), Christian Faith and Greek Philosophy, London, Darton, Longman and Todd.
3. Ashkanasy, N., Falkus, S., (1998). The Australian Enigma, chapter submitted for the First Globe Anthology.
4. Ball, G., (1992), Personnel Management in Greece: The Spartan Profession Personnel Management (Sept.).
5. Bourantas, D., et al. (1990), Culture Gap in Greek Management, Organization Studies, Issue 2, pp 261-283.
6. Bourantas, D., Papalexandris, N., (1999) Personality traits discriminating employees in public –and in private- sector organization, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Oct. pp 858-869.
7. Broome, B., (1996), Exploring the Greek Mosaic: A Guide to Intercultural Communication in Greece, Intercultural Press, Inc.
8. Campbell, J. and Sherrard P., (1968), Modern Greece, London.
9. Dimaki, J., (1974), Towards Greek Sociology of Education, 2 vols., National Center of Social Studies, Athens.
10. Doumanis, M., (1983), Mothering in Greece: From Collectivism to Individualism, London: Academic Press, 1983.
11. Dubisch, J., (1986), Gender and Power in Rural Greece, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
12. European Industrial Relations Review, (1998), Greece-Industrial Relations, August, pp 28-32.
13. Fermor, P.L., (1958), Mani: Travels in the Southern Peloponnese, London: Penguin Books.
14. Fermor, P.L., (1966), Roumeli: Travels in Northern Greece. London, Penguin Books.
15. Friedl, E., (1962), Vasilika: A. Village in Modern Greece, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
16. Gage, N., (1987) Hellas: A Portrait of Greece, Athens, Efstathiadis Group.
17. Griffeth and others, (1980), A Multivariate Multinational Comparison of Managerial Attitudes, Academy of Management Proccedings.
18. Hart, L., (1992), Time, Religion and Social Experience in Rural Greece. Laniham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
19. Herzfeld, M., (1985), The Politics of Manhood: Contest and Identity in a Cretan Mountain Village, Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press.
20. Herzfeld, M., (1987), Anthropology through the Looking-Glass, Cambridge University Press.
21. Hofstede, D., (1991), Cultures and Organizations, London: Harper Collins Business.
22. Holden, D., (1972), Greece without Columns: The Making of the Modern Greeks, Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.
23. Kazantzakis N., (1966), Travels in Greece, Cassirer, Oxford pp. 167-168.
24. Lee, D., (1959), Freedom and Culture, Washington, D.C., American University.
25. Mouzelis, N., (1978). Modern Greece: Facets of Underdevelopment, MacMillan, London.
New Ways
26. Papalexandris, N., Bourantas, D., (1991), Attitudes towards Women as Managers: the Case of Greece, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 2.
27. Papalexandris, N., Bourantas, D., (1993), Differences in Leadership Behavior and Influence Between Public and Private Organizations In Greece, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 4, No. 4,.
28. Papalexandris, N., (1995) Greece, Human Resource Management in Western Europe, edited by Ingrid Brunstein, Walter de Gruyter.
29. Papalexandris (1997) “Issues and Prospects of Internationalization among Greek SME’s”, 24th International Small Business Congress, Taipe, Taiwan.
30. Sanders, I., (1962), Rainbow in the Rock: The People of Rural Greece, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
31. Triandis, H., (1972), The Analysis of Subjective Culture, New York: J. Wiley & Sons.
OTHER PUBLISHED SOURCES
1. Clogg, R., (1992), A Concise History of Greece, Cambridge University Press.
2. Encyclopaedia Britannica (1999), Access through Internet.
3. Encyclopaedia Papyrus, Larousse, Britannica, (1994), published by Papyrus Editions.
4. International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences (1998), published by Collier MacMillan Publishers.
5. Various Journals and Newspapers (See Media Analysis).