Management is often defined as the way of managing individuals and groups in a given system, including the structure, strategy, managerial style, skills, employee profiles and the values of the organization. However, many speeches or "expertise" deal with management in a way that is disconnected from its ecosystem. They describe methods presented as "recipes" that are valid everywhere, regardless of the culture, sector or size of the organization. Hence this question: are management principles truly universal or should they always be linked to their context? This article aims to analyze this question by describing both the universality of certain essential principles and the necessary adaptation of these principles to local realities.Despite the diversity of cultures and professional environments, academic research and practitioner experience agree on the existence of major principles, sometimes referred to as "truths" in management. Among them, we find:
Leadership: the need for a vision and the ability to inspire teams.
Communication: the importance of clear information and regular exchange between stakeholders.
Clear objectives: the ability to define and share common goals to mobilize efforts.
Motivation: taking into account the needs and aspirations of employees.
Coordination: the organization of efficient work processes and the establishment of reliable decision-making mechanisms.
These principles are relatively universal because they are based on human dynamics (for example, the need for meaning and recognition) and organizational realities (need for coordination, resource management, etc.) common to most companies and institutions.
The importance of the local ecosystem
While these major principles seem to transcend borders, their implementation varies greatly depending on the environment:
National or regional culture: leadership styles can differ (more or less hierarchical, more or less participative).
Organizational culture: some companies value autonomy, others favor control and compliance.
Regulatory framework: social legislation, labor law, environmental or tax constraints influence room for maneuver.
Technological factors: the degree of digitalization of a company (teleworking, automation, artificial intelligence) will impact the way of managing.
Strategy and the market: management needs are not the same depending on whether we are operating in a growth situation, a crisis or a hypercompetitive sector.
This variety of contexts explains why techniques considered “good practices” in one place can prove ineffective — or even counterproductive — elsewhere. It is therefore essential to translate the fundamental principles into concrete actions and practices, adapted to the local ecosystem.
Finding the balance between universality and adaptation
There is thus a fine line between general principles that seem valid in most environments and their multiple practical variations. Two pitfalls must be avoided:
The all-universal: considering that the same method will be applied successfully everywhere, regardless of cultural, regulatory and organizational specificities.
The all-local: denying the existence of general principles applicable beyond a specific context, which would prevent capitalizing on the lessons of research and management experience.
A balanced position consists of recognizing that there are fundamentals, the implementation of which must however be deeply adapted to local realities. It is this reasoned approach that will allow managers and companies to combine performance and cultural relevance.
The consulting approach: diagnose before acting
This dynamic of balance is particularly true during consulting missions or organizational transformation programs. Before formulating recommendations, a wise consultant conducts an in-depth exploration of the ecosystem:
Analysis of the organization's culture: founding values, informal operating methods, usual leadership style.
Study of the structure and skills: organization chart, level of technicality, cross-functionality.
Evaluation of available resources: budgetary constraints, technological infrastructure, internal know-how.
Examination of the environmental framework: competition, market trends, legislation, societal pressures.
It is only after this diagnosis that concrete solutions can be formulated, by adapting general management principles to the specificities encountered. This approach encourages team buy-in, minimizes the risk of rejection and increases the chances of success.
Enriching management theory: the contribution of “glocalization”
In a globalized world, multinationals or organizations working on several continents are confronted with multiple cultural realities. Researchers and practitioners sometimes speak of “glocalization”:
The idea is to combine the lessons learned from theory and best practices (the “global” dimension) with increased sensitivity to the specificities of a territory (the “local” dimension).
This glocalization does not only concern large international companies: even small and medium-sized organizations, or even public administrations, can benefit from this logic to adjust their management methods to the evolution of their environment.
Conclusion: management that is both universal and contextual
Ultimately, management is not completely universal if we consider its practical modalities: it depends largely on the ecosystem in which it is located (culture, organization, regulations, technology, etc.). However, certain key principles — leadership, communication, motivation, coordination, clear objectives — remain largely valid across time and contexts, because they respond to deep human and organizational realities.
True managerial success therefore lies in the ability to juggle these two facets:
Rely on proven general principles to guide thinking and ensure overall coherence.
Decline them in a specific way so that they make sense in a given environment and produce tangible effects.
This balanced approach is the key to building sustainable, effective management that respects the particularities of each ecosystem.
Comments