Search results

Amidst calls for more research that combines the concepts of identity and strategy, particularly in a public sector context, this study explored the identity dynamics between two groups of managers within a multi-level perspective in a government department. The aim of this study is to provide a dynamic and holistic view of how middle manager identity is experienced and how best to utilise middle managers and their abilities.

Through a practice-based perspective, the study used a case study design, and 26 in-depth interviews were conducted with 2 groups, namely directors and middle managers.

Findings revealed that, whilst participating middle managers were viewed as critical strategists, there was a misalignment of expectations between directors and middle managers, and this reflected an ambiguous and complex environment where middle managers were situated. The findings also reflected tensions and power dynamics evident between middle managers and their direct supervisors, and these shaped the way in which middle managers responded to or were influenced by such tensions. Our research confirms the dynamic nature of identity at a multi-level perspective.

The findings of the current study may be useful in providing insight into how middle managers can be utilised to the best of their ability within a public sector department.

The study contributes to strategy-identity studies using a practice-oriented lens in an under-explored government context. We present a better understanding of the reciprocal tensions and inter-relationships between identity and strategy from the perspective of two levels and explore how this affects strategy practices and processes.

The plight of the middle manager has received considerable attention recently as this endangered species has been delayered, rationalised and subjected to many organisational change programmes. These changes have pushed the middle manager into an increasing number of apparently contradictory and paradoxical situations. In the postmodern world, reality is chaotic and unstable and middle managers in particular cannot rely on unambiguous models of thinking to steer them through this uncertainty. This paper identifies some of the ways in which a paradoxical perspective can illuminate the tensions faced by middle managers and the impact of culture change programmes on their ability to make decisions informed by reflective thinking. Discussion is given to considering what actions might be taken to develop a paradoxical perspective in middle managers and this framework is applied to a management development programme, General Management or Specialists, currently being run at Cranfield School of Management. This is used as a practical example of the usefulness of a paradoxical perspective in helping managers make real choices about the world in which they work.

The middle manager's role in an organization is important. The purpose of this paper is to determine how middle managers understand their roles in managing changes from the perspective of polyphonous leadership. Polyphonous leadership can be described as something that inspires decisions by listening to multiple voices within the organization.

The empirical data were collected from focus groups in the City of Tampere. Participants were middle managers (n=5) at an organization providing services for young narcotic/alcoholic families and pregnant mothers. The interviewees were selected due to their assumed ability to discuss management issues and their awareness concerning the factors affecting their workers’ capacities. The second focus group was organized for May 2010 (n=5) and the third later on in May 2010 (n=7).

In the Finnish context, middle managers understand polyphonous leadership as a process with a beginning and an end. The authors call this process the dominant narrative of polyphonous leadership, because there is a strong consensus amongst middle managers regarding it. In the first step, middle managers have to work as leaders of interaction. Second, they work as utilizers of diversity. In the third step, they act as decision makers and interpreters of polyphony. The final step gives them a role as conciliators of operating plans and personnel operations.

There is not much discussion in the extant literature of how middle managers try to act as linking persons in public services infrastructures. The model of the dominant narrative on polyphonous leadership is new in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to build on the research-supported view that interactions between top and middle management enhances effective implementation of organizational strategies by exploring the role of internal actors in driving organizational strategy at the intersection between strategy formulation and strategy implementation.

Adopting a social practice perspective, we undertook semi-structured interviews of 27 top and middle level managers drawn from a single case organization. Data collected were analysed using thematic analysis.

Differences in managerial perception of strategy has significant impact on implementation of strategic decisions as well as creating tensions in recursive communication practices between internal social actors. Furthermore, individual perceptions cannot only limit the extent of strategy awareness amongst key actors, the manifestations through social interaction between top and middle managers is a critical determinant of effective communication and realization of organizational strategy.

The research contributes to the strategy process and practice literature by exploring the dynamic interactions taking place at the intersections of strategy formulation-implementation phases of organizational strategy. It particularly highlights practical issues in top and middle manager interactions and implications for successful strategy implementation.

To examine how a manager's strategic philosophy is influenced by his or her management level in the organization.

Scales are developed to measure managers' philosophical perspectives along three key dimensions and tested with 289 managers in the United States. Refined scales are administered to 237 managers.

A manager's level in the organization influences his or her strategic philosophy. As compared to middle‐and lower‐level managers, top managers were more likely to view strategy formulation as an art, to emphasize strategic flexibility as opposed to strategic consistency, and to see strategy as top‐down process.

No single strategic philosophy is suggested as the optimal perspective. In addition, there are multiple possible explanations for the findings. Additional research is needed. Recognizing differences in strategic philosophy can also enhance training and development efforts at the lower and middle management levels.

Findings lend support to the notion that one's strategic philosophy is not independent of one's management position and suggests that managers at each level may adopt perspectives that facilitate the managerial responsibilities at that level.

This paper provides empirical evidence for a nexus between management level and strategic philosophy, a stream of research that received only limited research interest to date.

Few definitions in the HRM literature have reached as much consensus as the term “devolution”. However, devolution is a phenomenon that has been defined from the perspective of HRM specialists, with little or no contribution from middle managers. This paper seeks to explore what is behind the commonly shared definition of devolution, by examining not only the actual tasks that are being devolved, but also by trying to establish different degrees of devolution according to a number of dimensions.

An approach that facilitated the exploration of the extent of devolution and impact on middle managers' perceptions was required. A qualitative approach was adopted. Specifically, a case study of a hospital in Spain was undertaken. The research methods included in‐depth interviews, participant observation and internal documentation.

The findings emphasize the importance of reflecting on the reality and the rhetoric of devolution. The results indicate that it is worthwhile to break down the concept of devolution into dimensions (tasks and responsibilities, decision‐making power, financial power and expertise power) and to specify what dimensions are devolved.

There is a clear difference between the rhetoric of devolution and what actually happens in practice. In order to distinguish between those organisations that go beyond the rhetoric of devolution, it is important to differentiate between the devolution of tasks and the devolution of decision‐making power and autonomy in order to undertake these tasks. This differentiation facilitates the identification of those companies which display superficial levels of devolution and take steps to advance the process.

This paper questions the traditional definition of devolution. It proposes a new definition of devolution based on the identification of various dimensions and incorporates the perspectives of all the actors involved in the process.

Extant research suggests that managing strategic change has become a key managerial function and this duty encompasses changes in organizational product-market boundaries and organizational structure among many related organizational activities. The need to achieve strategic change arises because of major shifts in the external environment and the subsequent need for the organization to remain viable and competitive in the changed environment. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to investigate if middle managers are likely to adopt authoritative style while implementing strategic change when they sense organizational survival.

“Sensemaking” literature led to development of the authors’ hypotheses and these were tested using the responses of 117 middle managers. The authors used survey-based instrument to collect data and used regression analysis to explicate the responses of the middle managers.

Results indicate that when middle managers sense that the survival of the organization is at stake, they are likely to choose an authoritative style. The authors also investigated the moderating role of organizational commitment, strategic posture of the top management team, and hostile business environment on the relationship between perception of survival urgency and the choice of authoritative implementation style. Only organizational commitment moderates this relationship.

The authors’ data collection was survey based and the authors used a single source for each questionnaire and this process may lead to possibilities of mono-method bias. However, steps were taken to reduce the resultant mono-method bias. The respondents are from a variety of industries and future research may focus on one specific industry.

The first implication of this study allows us to expand research focus on the adoption of authoritative style, a research area that is not explored very much. The second implication of the study is that middle managers tend to focus on their emotions when it comes to implementing strategic changes. Using arguments from sensemaking the authors show that the perception of need for survival or the perception that business environment is hostile will determine how strategic change could be implemented. Middle managers must be treated as more than just the implementers of the directives/fiats/orders/edicts that originate from the top.

Role of middle managers in strategic change management is critical and the authors suggest that the perception of organizational survival at risk leads to choice managerial style by middle managers.

The authors have combined ideas from both the strategic management and organizational development fields to understand successfully the implementation of strategic change in a survival urgency situation. In the past, the strategic management literature focused primarily on understanding strategy formulation process, and the process of implementation was generally neglected. The respondents are from a variety of industries. The analysis indicate that membership to any one firm was not impacting the results obtained by the authors and as such allows for results to generalized.

The second major step in the development of the balanced scorecard was the introduction of strategy maps. Although much has been written about the benefits of strategy maps, there have been relatively few empirical studies that explore their use in a real-world setting. Additionally, the studies that have been done do not focus on the perspective of middle managers and employees who execute the strategy on a daily basis. This study addresses these gaps through observing the construction of strategy maps in two main business lines of a commercial bank. The participating managers are then asked if they agree that the resulting strategic performance measurement system assist organizations in the three ways most discussed in the literature: translating and operationalizing strategy, communicating the strategy and measuring the strategy. This study also provides some additional insights regarding the construction and use of strategy maps in organizations. The findings provide evidence to management that strategy maps are beneficial and guidance on how these could be implemented. The purpose of this study is to examine the implementation of strategy maps in a real-world setting. Strategy maps are an extension of the well-known and adopted balanced scorecard, but have received little attention in empirical studies.

The researcher introduced middle managers and operational staff to strategy maps and assisted them in the construction of a map for their business unit. The participants were then interviewed as to whether they agree with the benefits outlined in literature.

Participants agreed with the three main benefits outlined in literature and also provided additional feedback on the use of strategy maps from the perspective of their role as middle managers and those who had not used strategy maps in the past.

This study should be replicated in a larger setting. It would be particularly helpful to involve multiple departments across one organization or replicate the research in different organizations in the industry.

It would be helpful to guide business units through the construction of strategy maps and then survey employees at different levels throughout the business units to obtain their feedback concerning the resulting product.

Because this study involves middle managers and operational level employees, it provides insight on the use of strategy maps, which could be extrapolated to other strategic performance management tools. This is a level of management that has not been involved to a large extent in previous research.

This paper is the first to observe middle managers in their development of a strategy map, which puts it in the unique position to note the opinions of this group on the benefits of the tool.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how middle managers utilize performance measurement information in their work. More specifically, the study gives understanding on the impact of performance measurement, policies and procedures (formal controls), and individual intuition and experiential knowledge (informal controls) on strategy implementation and decision making. The study also identifies hindrances to the use of measurement information.

The study is carried out as a semi-structured interview study in Finnish companies representing five industries and 29 interviewees. Empirical data were analyzed deductively according to the research framework combining informal and formal management controls with two managerial processes.

The work of middle managers is clearly affected by informal controls. Much of the managerial work relies on individual intuition and judgment based on experience instead of performance information or formal instructions. The study also unveiled that top management sees the status of utilizing performance measurement information in a more positive light than do middle managers. This is the case especially in strategy implementation. Deficiency of measurement information was found to be a key factor hindering the use of measurement information but improper analysis of results is also a challenge.

This study examined the work of middle managers widely in different positions and industries which means that the findings are rather explorative. Simplification was required in order to operationalize the complex tasks of strategy implementation and decision making. Further, more contextually focused research is required in order to understand better the contextual causes of the findings and to provide more understanding on the appropriate ways of improving the utilization of performance measurement information.

The practical contribution of this study lies in the detailed description of strategy implementation and decision-making processes based on observations in several large companies representing different industries. The study also suggests areas to which development efforts should be concentrated on in order to improve the use of performance information among middle managers.

This study contributes to the earlier literature by highlighting the usage of performance measurement information as opposed to developing new measures. In addition, the novelty value of the paper relates to the focus in the work of middle managers which has gained less attention in the previous research.

Today, long-term success requires firms to sense changes in their environments early and react efficiently to them. Increasing middle managers’ participation in decision-making about market-related and product-related questions has been suggested as one way of enhancing this strategic responsiveness; abandoning formal planning, such as annual budgets, has been another. Yet, empirical evidence on the matter is scarce and conflicting. Drawing on data from Denmark’s 500 largest firms, we show that participation of middle managers in decision-making about new products and markets to serve, in-deed, increases firms’ strategic responsiveness as assessed by a reduction in firms’ downside risk. However, this effect is not a direct one. Nor does it interact positively or negatively with the emphasis put on formal planning as submitted in literature. Our evidence suggests that emphasis on planning mediates the relation between stronger participation of middle managers in decision-making and the increase in firms’ strategic responsiveness. This has implications for ongoing theory building and practice.