Search results

This article reports the results of a study on management development practices in US service and manufacturing organizations. Data and statistical analyses from a sample of 433 middle and front‐line managers from 59 different US service and manufacturing organizations are reported which examined: What specific management development practices are most important from a manager’s perspective to improving their performance in rapidly changing organizations; and, are managers actually getting the development experiences they need to be effective in these organizations? Among the top ten important practices identified by managers as improving their performance, focus, feedback, and learning (e.g. problem solving, new communication and leadership) by experience are re‐occurring themes. The results also point to startling differences between the management development experiences they want and what they are actually getting from their organizations. Based on the data a series of lessons for improving the effectiveness of managers is provided.

This article aims to report the results of a study concerning the key performance deficiencies found in leaders in rapidly changing organizations.

A sample of 153 middle and front‐line managers from a cross‐section of US manufacturing and service organizations were asked to assemble a multisource feedback (MSF) team consisting of five people who responded to the following question: “What specific things should this individual be working on to become more effective as a leader in their rapidly changing work situation?” In turn, 765 raters rated 153 middle and front‐line managers on their leadership performance deficiencies.

Data analysis indicated the top ten leadership performance deficiencies were: ineffective communication practices, poor time and priority management skills, failing to clarify direction and performance expectations, ineffective interpersonal/teaming skills, inability in handling stress/pressure and staying poised, ineffective coaching/feedback and employee development practices, poor planning skills, ineffective problem‐solving and decision‐making activities, ego issues and disorganization.

Based on these data, a series of leadership lessons for individual business leaders, organizations they serve and those responsible for the training and development of leaders are provided.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the barriers to managerial learning in rapidly changing organizations.

The material presented in this paper is based on a focus group methodology designed to solicit the input of managers operating in dynamic organizations on the subject of factors that influence their ability to learn and develop.

The study identified ten recurring barriers that prevent managers from learning and developing that included such factors as time pressure, lack of awareness, little or no performance feedback, lack of self‐reflection, and egos, among others.

Learning is difficult for most managers in normal times, let alone when their organizations are changing at a previously unseen pace. This study identified factors that damage the ability of managers to learn. This subject matter warrants further exploration as organizational structures, levels, and industries may influence the outcome of the findings.

Key implications of these findings include: individual managers must take more responsibility for their own learning; superiors must play a larger role in management development; and senior leaders must create systems to support learning.

When organizations and societies change, people at all levels must learn and develop to operate in these new environments. Without this learning and alignment, performance will suffer.

Organizations, in many cases, wrongly assume that their leaders will acquire the new skill‐sets necessary to perform in an optimal fashion. The very factors that drive organizational change are the same factors that create barriers to managerial learning.

Organizational learning capabilities are embedded in organizational communication systems and processes related to knowledge creation and articulation. The emergence of new organizational forms (such as horizontal organizations) in rapidly‐changing environments and hyper‐competitive markets underscores the need to better understand these foundational sources of learning. In fact, the reason horizontal organizations may find success is that their structure is intended to promote communications systems and processes which enhance a knowledge‐response sequence similar to a stimulus‐response sequence associated with learning. These systems permit managers to quickly gather information, respond with agility in making decisions, and continue to make ongoing adjustments. Firms which understand the need to build their communications capabilities may be characterized as meta‐learning organizations. Resource‐based theory suggests that communications systems and processes are thus sources of competitive advantage. Future empirical research on organizational learning may progress by evaluating specific measures of communication process as proxies for learning processes.

This paper aims to determine the key criteria used by managers in rapidly changing organizations to make promotion decisions.

A survey was conducted of 311 managers from over 100 different US service and manufacturing enterprises experiencing rapid organizational change. Managers were asked to identify no more than five factors that were most critical in their organization to actually getting promoted. Results were content analyzed.

Top ten factors influencing promotion decisions included: getting desired results/strong performance track record; possessing strong business networks; interpersonal/communication skills; strong knowledge‐experience base; demonstrating a strong work ethic; ability to build teams and being a team player; personality, attitude, and ego factors; solving a major problem or getting a “big hit;” demonstrating character, integrity, and trustworthiness; and, preparation and being in the right place at the right time.

Results indicate what organizations are currently using to make decisions but it does not provide a normative guide for what organizations should be using. Also, further research should attempt to differentiate dimensions used at each level of management.

The results provide a useful guide for managers who are looking for a leg up in the competitive fight for promotions. Results also suggest criteria to be considered when organizations update management assessment tools to better reflect the demands on managers working in the new global business environment.

The study focuses on promotions in rapidly changing organizations and uses a sample that is very familiar with how organizations actually make promotion decisions.

To investigate the impact of performance measurement in strategic planning process.

A large scale survey was conducted online with Warwick Business School alumni. The questionnaire was based on the Strategic Development Process model by Dyson. The questionnaire was designed to map the current practice of strategic planning and to determine its most influential factors on the effectiveness of the process. All questions were close ended and a seven‐point Likert scale used. The independent variables were grouped into four meaningful factors by factor analysis (Varimax, coefficient of rotation 0.4). The factors produced were used to build regression models (stepwise) for the five assessments of strategic planning process. Regression models were developed for the totality of the responses, comparing SMEs and large organizations and comparing organizations operating in slowly and rapidly changing environments.

The results indicate that performance measurement stands as one of the four main factors characterising the current practice of strategic planning. This research has determined that complexity coming from organizational size and rate of change in the sector creates variation in the impact of performance measurement in strategic planning. Large organizations and organizations operating in rapidly changing environments make greater use of performance measurement.

This research is based on subjective data, therefore the conclusions do not concern the impact of strategic planning process' elements on the organizational performance achievements, but on the success/effectiveness of the strategic planning process itself.

This research raises a series of questions about the use and potential impact of performance measurement, especially in the categories of organizations that are not significantly influenced by its utilisation. It contributes to the field of performance measurement impact.

This research fills in the gap literature concerning the lack of large scale surveys on strategic development processes and performance measurement. It also contributes in the literature of this field by providing empirical evidences on the impact of performance measurement upon the strategic planning process.

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.

In the global marketplace of the twenty‐first century, we know that managers are being called upon to lead their organization forward in new and creative ways and that improving their performance is no longer optional, but rather an imperative. Unfortunately, most management development activity has continued to emphasize a traditional organization‐oriented approach that is inconsistent with the emerging employer‐employee psychological contract. We propose that management development decisions should include the voice of practicing managers. To that end, 524 front‐line managers from the USA were surveyed to identify what they considered to be the most important factors/practices for improving their performance in the context of rapidly changing organizations. A discussion of the practical implications are offered for organizations and individual managers seeking to improve performance through management development.

Though to stay competitive is important for an organization's survival, today's organizations need to deal with various challenges. For example, organizations need to deal with the future uncertainty; need to know when to embrace change; need to recruit the right talent; need to keep abreast with the rapidly changing technology; need to remain ethical in doing business; and need to deal with increasing competition in the market. Thus, good strategies are needed if they want to stay competitive. Organizations must be able to know the competition and be different; update the organization's image; look after the existing customers; target new markets; be the best employers; be able to foresee the future; exemplify and position strengths from weaknesses; take into consideration the local context; use data and analytics to support strategies; prioritize creativity and innovation; utilize the data; remain relevant; and explore partnership opportunities. As for Malaysia, various strategies have been developed to support organization sustainability. These include transforming the school system in order to produce high-skilled and semi-skilled workers; strengthen Technical Vocational Education and Training (TVET) and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education activities; digitalize Malaysian employment landscape; and create good networking and collaboration with other countries. Malaysia also introduces various initiatives to support business sustainability such as awarding Sustainable Business Awards Malaysia to any Malaysian company that has shown a balance between making profit and acting sustainably; come out with competitive fiscal and monetary policy; and strengthen the human capital development.