Understanding Management Performance

Abstract

This paper attempts to provide some insight into the individual attributes underlying managerial performance. Managerial performance, like all aspects of human behaviour, is a function of both the personal attributes of the actor and the situation in which he or she exists. Managers work in a wide variety of situations and it is clear that job demands, job role, colleagues, organization systems and other situational factors will exert an influence on the behaviour of any individual manager. It is also reasonable to expect, on the basis of everyday experience and research evidence, that the individual attributes of a manager will influence his or her behaviour. The theoretical basis for this paper recognizes that behaviour is a result of the complex, reciprocating interplay of situational, personal and behavioural factors (Bandura, 1982;Robertson, 1993). Even a complete understanding of the specific personal factors involved in determining managerial behaviour would provide an incomplete model for understanding and predicting managerial performance, since situational factors also have a clear role to play in determining behaviour. Nevertheless, a clear grasp of these personal attributes should provide some help in seeking to unravel the complex interplay of behavioural, situational and personal factors.The empirical focus for this paper is on the personal, psychological attributes associated with managerial behaviour. In the past decade or so there has been considerable interest in the identification of the competencies associated with successful managerial performance (Boam and Sparrow, 1992;Boyatzis, 1982;Dulevwicz, 1989;Thornton and Byham, 1982). The competency approach provides a useful framework for examining managerial effectiveness but it has not yet been developed to the point where there is agreement on the key competencies involved in managerial performance. In fact, definitions of competencies are often poor and contradictory. Although some authors have proposed sets of competencies with broad applicability (e.g. Cockerill, Current models of the factors underlying management performance make use of a variety of variables at different levels of analysis. A framework is presented in which variables of three different types are linked together. Using data from a sample (n = 437) of British managers this article explores relationships between personality factors (using the big-five factors), work competencies and managerial performance. Results from the analyses reveal a set of underlying competency factors, which show different patterns of correlation with two facets of performance: current proficiency and promotability. In turn, these factors and the facets of performance show relationships with the big-five personality factors. Current proficiency is more closely related to competencies of organization, specialization and analysis -competencies more likely to be displayed by people who are conscientious and introverted. Promotability is linked more closely to competencies concerning action/motivation, fl...

The Five-Factor model of personality and work behaviour in Greece

“…Salgado and Rumbo (1997) found that neuroticism, conscientiousness, and a composite of all Big-Five factors were valid predictors of the criteria of job-problem ability, job motivation and overall job performance in a sample of Spanish financial services managers. Recent work carried out in the United Kingdom by Ferguson et al (2000), Robertson, Baron, Gibbons, MacIver, and Nyfield (2000) and Robertson, Gibbons, Baron, MacIver, and Nyfield (1999), provided further support on the validity of personality scales, as expressed by the FFM, questioning however the universal validity of conscientiousness across occupations and job levels (Robertson et al, , 2000. The present study will also serve as an exploration of the criterion-related validity of the FFM in a nonEnglish culture and language.…”

“…The present measure was successfully used in a number of studies (e.g., Robertson et al, 1999Robertson et al, , 2000 as an overall job performance score eliciting internal consistency reliability of .86. It consists of six items where the supervisor has to indicate whether she/he agrees or disagrees with the behaviour described in a 5-point scale.…”

Development and Content Validation of a "Hyperdimensional" Taxonomy of Managerial Competence

“…To the degree that the targeted job requires both types of planning, combining them in measurement under the more general heading of "Planning and Organizing" will obscure understanding of how and to what degree creativity contributes to managerial success. Along those lines, Robertson, Gibbons, Baron, MacIver, and Nyfield (1999) found that Conscientiousness predicts distinct managerial competencies in opposite directions. Similar results obtained for Extraversion.…”

What We Trade At Work As Employees And How We Do It. Using Multi-Trait Multi-Method Procedure to Validate a Dual-Content Approach of Employee Performance on a Romanian Sample

“…For the measurements of in role and extra-role performance two instruments were used: Robertson"s performance scale (Robertson et al, 1999;Robertson et al, 2000),and Smith"s extra-role performance scale (1983). Robertson's performance scale offers a global score for the individual formal job performance.…”