Search results

As much as any cross‐border destination may be an attractive notion, it clearly requires more profound research as both theoretical and practical research seems hardly satisfactory. This paper will attempt to present tourism development of the cross‐border region of Bug, consisting of three national components: Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian. There are both advantages and disadvantages resulting from the fact that one part of the destination belongs to the European Union (EU) and the other does not. The authors analyse the potential of the Euroregion and present main actors responsible for the destination development. Based on both desk and field research, special attention is given to the model of tourism organisation. The theory of tourism transformation is carefully scrutinised. One can distinguish 4 stages of this process, namely: preparation, creation, verification, gratification (Studzieniecki 2000, p127).

Europe as a destination seems to be in a critical stage. There is more competition than cooperation between European nations and regions Our continent needs new solutions and patterns of tourism development. As new initiatives take place in transborder regions it is important to analyze opportunities for transborder tourism development. Several euroregions function only as “umbrellas” facilitating tourism development in national components however some of them are becoming attractive transborder destinations. The author tries to compare regions and euroregions as destinations. The paper shows the role of structural funds (e.g. Interreg), in transnational cooperation and to describes examples of good practice in transborder tourism. According to Association of European Border Regions, “the border regions themselves would not be able to overcome their problems without being granted assistance from the UE. The Oresund is one of the first euroregions promoted as transnational destination. The creation of a transborder destination is a long term process. It requires stable partnership between national components that leads from alienation to integration

A tactic can be considered as a way to implement a strategy and fulfil its objectives; in terms of marketing, it is an actual fact of promotion, pricing, branding or distribution, meant to bring to reality the pursued goals.

The purpose of this paper is to refract March’s views on leadership to re-frame them within an authentic model that understands optimistic failure and mindful resilience as likely byproducts of enabling ambiguous innovation. An analysis of March’s theories of slack, and the concepts of exploration and exploitation, as well as that of foolishness, are used to support the adoption of authentic and ethical leadership as an intelligent practice and, more concretely, to portray the leader as a resilient “juggling fool.”

This paper makes use of primary data by focusing on March’s published works, as well as on interviews and other materials written about him, or those discussing his contributions. A post-hoc practice of “appreciation” facilitated a fresh refraction of the “evidence” to identify or recognize new perspectives and/or challenges to March’s conceptualization of leadership, while relying on literature and metaphor to engage in “polymorphic research.”

This paper presents March as a complex thinker, whose thoughts on leadership have received, perhaps, less attention for being thought to be more refractive and less empirical. Nonetheless, his reflections on leadership re-discover him as a solid leadership philosopher. His use of literature, his theories of slack and the concepts of exploration and exploitation, as well as that of foolishness, may help leadership scholars to understand the essence of authentic and ethical leadership as an intelligent practice.

This paper proposes to extrapolate March’s vast insights about organizational theory to further develop the framework of authentic leadership. This re-framing of the leader as a “juggling fool” constitutes an empowered view of leadership that comes closer to balancing the complementary purposes of leadership and management; an effort that rests at the core of the future of leadership.

Despite the ostensible popularity of leadership over management as a desired organizational outcome, March’s phenomenal insights remind current and developing leaders of just how much the two fields must overlap in constant tension. It is, perhaps, the conceptualization of a leader as an authentic and resilient “juggling fool” what adds depth of meaning to March’s contributions to the field of leadership beyond that of management.