Managerial and leadership effectiveness as perceived by managers and non-managerial employees in Mexico

Abstract

Using the critical incident technique, concrete examples of effective and ineffective managerial behaviour (critical incidents-CIs) were collected from managers and non-managerial employees within private and public sector organizations situated in the North and South East regions of Mexico. The CIs were content analyzed using open, axial, and selective coding to identify a smaller number of thematic categories. A total of 38 'manager' and 35 'non-managerial employee' behavioural categories were identified respectively, of which 82.19% (n=60) were found to be either convergent or polar opposite in meaning. The findings suggest that what behaviourally differentiates effective managers from ineffective managers is perceived, described, and defined by Mexican managers and non-managerial employees in much the same way. The study provides new insights on the issue of perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness in Mexico, and is a rare example of indigenous managerial behaviour research in a non-Anglo country.

Perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness in Argentina and Mexico: a comparative study of effective and ineffective managerial behaviour

“…However, as we have discussed elsewhere (see Ruiz et al, 2016), although US management research is assumed by many researchers to be universally applicable, its relevance and transferability to non-US cultures has been brought into question by numerous writers including Tsui et al (2007). Echoing their views, we have also suggested elsewhere that there have been strong arguments for indigenous studies of management and leadership in non-Western countries, and for cross-case and cross-nation organisational behaviour and managerial behaviour research (see Ruiz et al, 2014). However, since the 1980s there has been a dearth of managerial behaviour research in general, and of specific studies into the issue of 'managerial effectiveness' and 'leadership effectiveness' in particular (Cammock et al, 1995;Noordegraaf and Stewart, 2000;Yukl et al, 2002).…”

“…However, since the 1980s there has been a dearth of managerial behaviour research in general, and of specific studies into the issue of 'managerial effectiveness' and 'leadership effectiveness' in particular (Cammock et al, 1995;Noordegraaf and Stewart, 2000;Yukl et al, 2002). Author 2 has previously addressed some of these gaps: (i) by conducting with various co-researchers a cumulative series of emic replication studies of perceived managerial and leadership effectiveness within public and private sector organisations in the United Kingdom (see for example Hamlin and Bassi, 2008;Hamlin and Sawyer, 2007;Hamlin and Serventi, 2008), and (ii) by conducting with Author 1 equivalent indigenous emic replication studies in Argentina (Ruiz et al, 2016) and Mexico (Ruiz et al, 2013;Ruiz et al, 2014), respectively.…”

Enhancing employee performance using selected leadership styles of middle-line managers in the hospitality industry in Mid-Western Uganda

“…Consequently, mid-line managers in the hospitality industry seldom thought about the quality of employee performance as long as revenue was generated. It can be highlighted that while middle-line Hotel managers in the cohort were conscious of the importance of Ruiz et al (2014) call unproductive managerial conduct which also proves that shortage of commitment to the principles of scientific management reveals that a number of Hotels did not have objective strategic plans. This also suggests that if Hotel managers in midwestern Uganda had strategic planning, autocratic style of leadership would have been frustrated.…”

Linking resilience and organizational commitment: does happiness matter?

“…In addition, with growing interest in understanding cultural differences in employee commitment (Meyer et al , 2012), our research context ‒ India ‒ represents an interesting non-Western culture for this study, as differential bases for commitment might be prevalent in such a set-up (Wasti and Önder, 2009). In this regard, it is important to acknowledge that theoretical accounts of knowledge may be transformed while transferring an idea or concept from one (national) context to another (Ruiz et al , 2014) due to cultural and organizational differences. Indian culture, characterized by high power distance, collectivism, long-term orientation and restraint, is in substantial contrast with many western cultures (Hofstede et al , 2010), and thus the study presents India-based evidence and new insights into the nature of differential relationships between the study variables.…”