Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore how middle managers respond to the career challenges caused by environmental regulation. In particular, this paper examines whether environmental regulation strength is positively related to middle managers’ openness toward change, and whether middle managers’ openness toward change is positively related to proactive behavior. Furthermore, the moderating role of top managers’ bottom-line mentality in these two relationships is examined.

Cross-sectional survey research (n=155) was conducted. During a training program, data were collected from 155 middle managers from a listed company that manufactures primary products. With these data the authors examined the main relationship and also explored the moderating effect of top managers’ bottom-line mentality.

Analysis of the findings indicates that perceived environmental regulation strength influences middle managers’ openness toward change and consequently their proactive behavior. In addition, top managers’ bottom-line mentality moderates both the link between environmental regulation strength and openness toward change and the link between openness toward change and proactive behavior.

The findings of this study reveal how environmental regulation induces middle managers’ proactive behavior, and the influence of top managers’ mentality on how middle managers respond to environmental regulation both cognitively and behaviorally.

The aim of this paper is to investigate how political activities and processes influence sensemaking and sensegiving among top management, middle management and employees and to examine its consequences for implementing new knowledge.

Data were collected in a Norwegian bank using in-depth interviews with middle managers and financial advisers. Observations of meetings, informal conversations and verbatim notes were also used in data collection among top managers. A practice-based approach was used as an analytical lens.

Top managers' political activities of excluding others from the decision process affect their sensemaking and resulted in sensegiving contradictions between spoken intent and how to change practice. Middle managers' political activities were to accept top managers' sensegiving instead of managing themselves in their own sensemaking to help financial advisers with how to change their role and practice. As a result, middle managers' sensemaking affects their engagement in sensegiving. For financial advisers, the political processes of top and middle managers resulted in resistance and not making sense of how to change and implement new knowledge.

A total of 30 in-depth interviews, observations of five meetings and informal conversations might call for further studies. In addition, a Norwegian study does not account for other countries' cultural differences concerning leadership style, openness in decisions and employee autonomy.

To the author's knowledge, no studies identify the three-way conceptual relationship between political activities, sensemaking and sensegiving. In addition, the author believes that the originality lies in investigating these relationships using a three-level hierarchy of top management, middle management and employees.

This study aims to investigate the consequences of middle managers’ sensegiving for organisational change in neglected workplaces, where middle managers are given insufficient resources because of receiving low attention from top management.

The authors conducted a case study of three call centres in the Japanese non-life insurance industry. To collect data, the authors conducted interviews with ten stakeholders and made multiple field observations.

The authors identified the following mechanism: in neglected workplaces, middle managers initially focus on sensegiving to employees because they recognise the difficulty of eliciting support from top management. However, as a result, they see sensegiving to employees as top priority and do not try to elicit the support of top management, which is necessary for further organisational change. As a result, organisational change stops at a certain level.

The authors identified the following mechanism: in neglected workplaces, middle managers initially focus on sensegiving to employees because they recognise the difficulty of eliciting support from top management. However, as a result, they see sensegiving to employees as their top priority and do not try to elicit the support of top management, which is necessary for further organisational change. As a result, organisational change stops at a certain level.

First, this study contributes to the body of research on the effects of sensegiving on organisational change. It shows the new problems hidden behind organisational change, which existing research merely regards as independent successes. Second, this study identifies middle managers’ behaviour during organisational change in neglected workplaces. Instead of focusing on the factors necessary for successful organisational change, as in existing studies, this study extends the knowledge of the role of middle managers in organisational change by focusing on their behaviours when success factors are not aligned.

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.

Mergers are important and challenging elements in hospital reforms. The authors study the social aspects of management and the roles of middle managers in the aftermath of a hospital merger. Especially, the purpose of this paper is to investigate how professional staff and middle managers perceive their relationships with top managers several years after the merger.

A survey was conducted among the professional staff in two merging hospitals’ units six years after a merger. Based on the main findings from this survey, a follow-up interview study was done with a group of middle managers.

The management practices were diagnostic with few interactive or communicative activities. The respondents expressed that mistrust developed between the staff and the top management, and a lack of involvement and interaction lead to decoupled and parallel organizations. Social controls, based on shared norms, had not been developed to create mutual commitment and engagement.

Policy makers should be aware of the need in profound change processes not only to change the tangible elements, but to take care of changing the less tangible elements such as norms and values. Professionals in hospitals are in powerful positions, and changes in such organizations are dependent on trust-building, bottom-up initiatives and evolutionary pathways.

The paper addresses the need to understand the dynamics of the social aspect in managing hospitals as knowledge-intensive organizations when comprehensive restructuring processes are taking place over several years.

Approximately 5 per cent of the non‐farm work force in the United States falls into the category of middle managers. The variations in titles and responsibilities in organizations make it difficult precisely to define middle managers; but they can generally be regarded as those who manage other managers and supervisors, and groups of primarily exempt employees. Thus at the lower limit for classification as a middle manager we would exclude first line supervisors of salaried clerical and hourly production employees. At the upper limit for classification as a middle manager we would exclude managers of business components who have profit and loss responsibility, functional and staff vice presidents, and all other executives in the hierarchy above those categories.

Do managers at different hierarchical levels in a firm perceive the effectiveness of a lean program differently, and does it matter for their commitment to it and the resulting lean implementation? This study answers these questions by analyzing the perceptions and behaviors of top and middle managers in a manufacturer deploying a global lean program.

The authors hypothesize that managers at different levels perceive lean programs differently, which, in turn, should affect their commitment to lean and the resulting implementation. To test these relationships empirically, the authors collect survey data from a global manufacturer in the process industry and analyze them using hierarchical linear regression and structural equation modeling.

The findings show that middle managers perceive lean programs as more effective than top managers do. They further show that higher commitment from the top and middle managers to the lean program is positively related to building the organizational infrastructure needed for lean implementation.

This research is conducted in one global company. Although the research setting implicitly controls for many possible confounding variables, such as the product and process complexity or organizational culture, future research can explore and test the findings in other organizational contexts.

This study is the first to empirically study the relations between perceptions of and commitment to lean programs across different hierarchical levels and what it means for program implementation. The paper contributes new plausible explanations for why many lean programs slow down.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of strategy messages emanating from both top and middle/supervisory managers regarding five different aspects of strategy on strategic awareness among boundary personnel.

The results come from a survey of bank tellers and customer service representatives within a single large regional bank.

The findings support a differential main effect on strategic awareness among boundary personnel depending on the source of messages, whether top management or middle management. More interestingly, there appears to be an interaction effect between the two sources regarding which will be the dominant information source for boundary personnel.

The survey data were collected within a single banking institution at one time point.

The results provide useful information concerning the efficacy of messages concerning strategy from middle and top management in organizations.

The paper extends past research by investigating different levels of strategic understanding within the firm across different levels and determining information dissemination strategies for increasing the level of strategic awareness among boundary personnel.

Lean implementations in hospitals tend to be lengthy or lack the desired results. In addressing the question, how can lean be implemented effectively in a hospital-wide setting, this paper aims to examine two opposing approaches.

The authors studied two Dutch university hospitals which engaged in different lean implementation approaches during the same four-year period: top-down vs bottom-up. Inductive qualitative analyses were made of 49 interviews; numerous documents; field notes; 13 frontline meeting observations; and objective hospital performance data. Longitudinally, the authors depict how the sequential events unfolded in both hospitals.

During the six implementation stages, the roles played by top, middle and frontline managers stood out. While the top managers of one hospital initiated the organization-wide implementation and then delegated it to others, the top managers of the other similar hospital merely tolerated the bottom-up lean activities. Eventually, only the hospital with the top-down approach achieved high organization-wide performance gains, but only in its fourth year after the top managers embraced lean in their own daily work practices and had started to co-create lean themselves. Then, the earlier developed lean infrastructure at the middle- and frontline ranks led to the desired hospital-wide lean implementation results.

Change-management insights, including basic tenets of social learning and goal-setting theory, are shown to advance the knowledge of effective lean implementation in hospitals. The authors found lean implementation “best-oiled” through role-modeling by top managers who use a phase-based process and engage in close cross-hierarchical or co-creative collaboration with middle and frontline managerial members.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate consensus formation among the top and middle managers during the strategy process. Specifically, the paper seeks to gain insight into the role of strategic consensus during the transition between strategy formulation and implementation.

Adopting a social practice perspective and a single case study approach, we undertook semi-structured interviews of twenty-seven managers working in a Kuwaiti Ministry. Data collected were analyzed using thematic analysis.

We found that social interaction among individuals with similar characteristics and shared understanding fosters consensus. Factors such as alignment of strategic priorities, managerial flux and centralized control contribute to the extent to which strategic consensus is achievable. Additionally, managerial turnover and lack of empowerment hamper the development of shared understanding. Finally, that consensus on strategy content is insufficient for effective intergroup communications.

The research contributes to the strategic consensus literature from a social practice perspective as it provides new insights into the dynamics between top managers and middle managers. Significantly, it highlights the importance and need for common understanding, as well as communications prioritization among managers for consensus development and successful implementation of organization strategy.