Search results

This paper explores the benefits of effective management training and consequences of ineffective training programs.

Seasoned managers (278) working in rapidly changing organizations were surveyed on issues related to management training.

Content analyses revealed a number of specific benefits associated with management training. Conversely, managers identified a series of problems caused by ineffective management training.

Generalization of these findings to non‐rapidly changing organizations is unclear.

Findings suggest that the effectiveness of management training has a significant impact on managerial and organizational performance.

This paper voices the concerns and observations about managerial training from seasoned managers in rapidly changing organizations.

The purpose of this two-part paper is to explore the current practices being employed in the formal performance appraisal process in a cross-section of US service and manufacturing organizations. In this paper, the authors identify the current trends that emerged from this research study and the improvement opportunities that exist for organizations that currently engage in the practice of formally appraising their personnel.

The formal performance appraisal process, procedure, and rating form from 183 US organizations were reviewed by a three-person review panel and were content analyzed to identify current trends and opportunities for improvement.

This qualitative analysis revealed that the average rating procedure had been in place for 5.5 years, to serve a wide variety of purposes, identified critical gaps in training, made it clear that organizations employ a wide variety of performance criteria in assessing their people.

The biggest limitation of this research is the fact that a convenience sample of 183 organizations was employed as the basis for this study.

Data on the actual formal performance appraisal process of organizations is rather limited and this research provides critical insight into current practice limiting potential generalizability.

The social implications of this research suggests that organizations can do a much better job of equipping their leaders/employees to more effectively reap the organizational benefits of this key practice.

Research in this area is not prevalent so this is a descriptive research study that both researchers and organizations can use to further their knowledge in formal performance appraisals.

The purpose of this study was to determine how top‐level managers continue their development/performance improvement, once they have reached the highest levels of their organizations.

Interviews were conducted with 106 of senior‐level managers who were asked to identify the specific things they did to continue their development.

The top ten practices identified by executives included: seeking out honest/accurate performance feedback from a wide variety of sources; reading relevant material; self‐reflection/self‐appraisal; recruiting, hiring, and promoting talented people attending formal continuing education programs, workshops and/or seminars; membership in professional/trade organization associations; mentoring and coaching others; benchmarking and observing the practices of other leaders/organizations; working at knowing the current needs of your own organization and the demands of your job; always knowing the current needs of your own organization and the demands of your job; and having a mentor and/or coach.

The research limitations of this study include a limited executive sample from large US organizations that makes generalizing these finding difficult. Future research should focus on the barriers that prevent executive development and whether these same development techniques are used by executives all over the world.

The practical implications of this research make it clear that executive development is a complex and critical organizational/personal process.

Most research has focused on management development techniques of middle and lower‐level managers. This study determines how top‐level managers continue their development once they have reached the highest levels of their organizations.

We explore the significance of social ontology and its capacity to inform the specification of organizational status, architecture and capacities. We consider how different conceptions of social ontology are critical for explicating a range of epistemological and socio-economic questions concerning organizations and develop a research agenda oriented to studying these issues from the perspective of management and organization studies.

Firms operate in a market for their corporate assets, wherein important assets being bought and sold are business units. This market is therefore a primary mechanism for firm reconfiguration, and offers the opportunity for firms to gain performance advantage as they prepare for and engage in their boundary-changing moves. This paper focuses on resource reconfiguration between firms, and examines internally and externally driven sources of performance heterogeneity in firms’ use of the market for firm reconfiguration. Viewing between-firm resource reconfiguration through three theoretical lenses surfaces several potential avenues for firm differentiation. For one, the necessity of firms’ possessing capabilities to execute both sides of the external resource reconfiguration transaction – acquisition and divestiture capabilities – is revealed. For another, the institutional prerequisites that are needed in the operating environment for a firm to build a sustainable resource reconfiguration strategy are brought to the fore, and are well illustrated by the private equity industry. Lastly, the potential benefits of using the transactional view of firm scope to animate the study of external resource reconfiguration are raised. Taken together, these elements lead to a research agenda around resource reconfiguration across firm boundaries.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the specific steps organizations can take to create value-added appraisal systems.

The authors synthesize 30 years of their research, including countless focus groups and surveys with managers at all levels, to identify the specific steps organizations can take to create value-added appraisal systems.

The paper explains ten key lessons for improving any organization’s performance appraisal system.

The authors believe that the lessons described in this paper can be applied in all organizations, and not to apply these lessons invites ineffective and potentially destructive appraisal practices.

The paper provides a unique set of lessons that organizations can use to design or re-design their performance appraisal systems and practices.

For decades, managers around the globe assumed that “crisis management” referred to the sudden appearance of a television reporter enquiring about an impropriety at company headquarters. The decade now ending has witnessed a broader definition of crisis management, as public expectations of corporate behaviour on each continent has given rise to the need for proactive crisis management planning, an attribute some companies have sought too late and others too hurriedly. “Rules” of crisis management have little scholarly value, but some suggestions are offered.