Search

The debt crisis in the European Union is known to be caused by the interdependence of banking and state financial stability, and, together with the non-existence of the fiscal union, it has taken on the existential dimensions of the EU project itself. Under the guise of financial fragmentation within the financial markets of the Eurozone, and from the aspect of the outbreak of the crisis, EU member states resorted to national interventions, thus closing national banking and financial markets, which ultimately resulted in deepened and stronger structural foundation of the crisis and its economic and financial consequences. In that context, the Banking Union is the regulatory and institutional response of the EU after the global financial crisis, about which the first proposals have found a place in institutional controversies since 2012. In addition to the key moment and motive for establishing such an institutional regulatory arrangement, the reason for its creation is more to create a union that is connected with the creation of a single market for financial services and free money circulation, and certainly with the tendency of fuller monetary integration. However, certain questions which arose remained relevant to date: whether these established and instrumentalized frameworks, mechanisms and procedures are in fact sufficient; whether the EU banking union, conceptually designed, really represents banking integration; and whether the "centralized-common" and "sovereign-national" relationships continued in the EU financial architecture, the use of the principle "one measure for all" in the implementation of the Basel III, non-inclusion of all types of banks, and the conflict of emission and supervisory roles of the Central Bank, be a structural conflict in achieving the desired financial stability, which is the ultimate goal. In the broader context of the functioning of the EU, financial stability can also be interpreted as a factor in the survival of the common currency and the European Union itself, regardless of the intertwined contradictions and construction conflict. In this paper, we analyze the functional scope of the regulatory framework for banking supervision in the EU during the five-year existence to date, and finally the effects and impact that this framework has had on the regulatory adjustment of the Serbian banking sector.

Copyright of Bankarstvo Magazine is the property of Association of Serbian Banks and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Taking into account today's mobility of managers in banking and financial industry, the challenges of the digital transformation of financial institutions' operating, modern effective development of bank managers cannot force them, for all good intentions, to accept the goals of the Bank, much less can such development manipulate their behaviourso as to adjust it to organizational needs. Effective development of bank managers, today, actually entails encouraging establishment of relations in which an individual manager can take responsibility for the development of then-own potential, to draw up their own development plans and to learn lessons from the implementation of these plans into action. Nowadays, banking managers are required to exceed the limits of their job description, they need to know more, have to think more and take more responsibility for the results. These are the key postulates of human capital in a contemporary commercial bank. Actually it is a contemporary transition from hardline Taylorism to the behavioural approach which is made to relocate the focus from job description onto the skills and individual potential. Competence becomes a source of competitive advantage for the individual and for the bank, whereas competence development becomes a comprehensive, purposeful and lifelong motto of modern corporate life of a manager in the banking industry. This paper will focus on the analysis of preconditions for the development of competencies of middle managers in the banking industry in Serbia, in light of the issues and corporate environment where the development occurs and the increasing challenges of the digital transformation of operating that questions the need for traditional management of a team creating results in direct contact with clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]