-
* Academy ol Management Executive, 2005, Vol. 19, No. 4
Reprinted irom 1989, Vol. 3. No. 4
The role of the manager:What's really important indifferent
management jobs
Allen I. Kraut, Patricia R. Pedigo, D. Douglas McKenna, and
Marvin D. Dunnette
Can we safely assume (to paraphrase GertrudeStein) that "a
manager is a manager is a man-ager"? Should we expect the jobs of
all managersto be pretty much the same? And should managersexpect
their colleagues' jobs to be like their own?Well, "yes" and "no,"
according to the researchdescribed below. An analogy to team sports
mayhelp illustrate this answer, and suggest implica-tions for
organizational performance.
One of the signs of a successful athletic team isits almost
uncanny ability to perform as a singleunit, with the efforts of
individual members blend-ing seamlessly together. When this level
of team-work exists, unusual things happen. Ouarterbackscomplete
blind passes, throwing the ball to spotson the field where they
"know" their favorite re-ceiver will be. The point guard playing
basketballlobs a pass high above the basket, which enablesa leaping
teammate to catch it in midair and makea spectacular slam dunk.
This level of teamworkrequires a great deal of practice and natural
abil-ity, but members of the team must also have aclear
understanding of their own roles, the roles oftheir teammates, and
the way they must work to-gether to be successful.
In addition to understanding specialized rolesand assignments,
players must also recognize thethings that everyone, regardless of
his or her posi-tion, must be ready and willing to do if the team
isto win. When necessary, the quarterback mustblock like a lineman
to allow the halfback to breakfree of the defense; diminutive
kickers must tacklekick return specialists twice their size to stop
atouchdown. The point is that the demands of ateam sport call for
each participant to be both aspecialist and a generalist.
Management, we believe, is a team sport thatmakes similar
demands of its players. Unfortu-nately, many executives (the "team
captains") andmanagers do not recognize how managerial jobs
are similar and yet different across organizationallevels and
functions. This lack of mutual under-standing among management
players can make itvery difficult for them to appreciate one
another'swork and coordinate their work activities. It canmake
winning that much harder.
In addition to being able to coordinate workmore effectively,
executives who understand simi-larities and differences in
managerial jobs gainother advantages. For example, they are
betterable to:
Communicate performance expectations andfeedback to subordinate
managers.
Prepare others and themselves for transitions tohigher
organizational levels or different func-tions.
Forecast how different managers would performif promoted or
moved into a new function.
Ensure that management training and develop-ment programs are
targeted to fit the needs ofmanagers as they change positions.
Diagnose and resolve confusion regarding man-agerial roles,
responsibilities, and priorities.
For the most part, research on managerial workhas focused on the
common denominators of man-agement jobs. Indeed, a considerable
amount ofresearch has been published on this subject.i We,however,
have recently completed a study de-signed to shed light on the
differences in manage-ment roles and activities across different
levels andfunctions. We started with a sample of 1,412 man-agers^
and asked them to rate the relative impor-tance of 57 managerial
tasks to their jobs. Theirchoices included "Of utmost importance,"
"Of con-siderable importance," "Of moderate importance,""Of little
importance," "Of no importance," and "Ido not perform this task."
Almost all tasks wererated "Of moderate importance" or higher.
Using these importance ratings, we statistically
122
-
2005 Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna, and Dunnette 123
identified seven major factors or groups of man-agement
tasks:3
Managing individual performance, Instructing subordinates,
Planning and allocating resources, Coordinating interdependent
groups, Managing group performance, Monitoring the business
environment, and Representing one's staff.
We then studied how important these seven fac-tors and their
component tasks were to managersat different levels and
functions.
First-Level Managers: One-to-OneWith Subordinates
The first two factors involve supervising others.These
activities are most important to first-levelmanagers and decline in
importance as one risesin management. (See Exhibit 1.)
"Managing individual performance" was ratedthe single most
important set of activities by first-level management. Such tasks
include motivatingand disciplining subordinates, keeping track
ofperformance and providing feedback, and improv-ing communications
and individual productivity.These tasks are traditionally
associated with lower-level management. Although Exhibit 1 shows
thatmany executives continue to see these tasks as veryimportant,
it is clear that their importance drops offas one moves up the
management hierarchy.
The tasks in the "managing individual perfor-mance" set are
listed in order of the percentage ofthe total sample who rated each
as of "utmost" or"considerable importance."
70
PERCENTAGE
Exhibit 7
Supervising Individuals*
Managing IndividualPerformance
InstructingSubordinates
First-Line Supervisor Middle Manager Executive
'Numbers refer to the percentage of managers who said thetask
was of "the utmost" or "considerable" importance.
76% Motivate subordinates to change or improvetheir
performance.
76% Provide ongoing performance feedback tosubordinates.
69% Take action to resolve performance prob-lems in your work
group.
69% Blend subordinates' goals (e.g., career goals,work
performances) with company's work re-quirements.
63% Identify ways of improving communicationsamong
subordinates.
50% Keep track of subordinates' training andspecial skills as
they relate to job assignmentsto aid their growth and
development.
48% Resolve conflicts among subordinates.40% Discipline and/or
terminate personnel.37% Review subordinates' work methods to
iden-
tify ways to increase productivity.
The cluster "instructing subordinates" includestraining,
coaching, and instructing employees inhow to do their job. Of
moderate importance tomost first-level managers, this cluster is
consider-ably less important to executives.
For the "instructing subordinates" set, the itemsare listed
below:
52% Inform subordinates about procedures andwork
assignments.
46% Explain work assignments to subordinates.44% Provide
technical expertise to help subordi-
nates resolve work problems or questions.43% Train subordinates
in new techniques or
procedures.6% Schedule daily activities of subordinates.
Middle Managers: Linking Groups
The concept of linking groups seems to drive themiddle manager's
work. Three task factors involvelinking groups. The importance of
these tasksjumps sharply (an average of 19 points) from first-to
middle-level management. Thus, managers go-ing from the lowest
level of supervision to middlemanagement need to develop skills in
several newareas if they are to link groups successfully.
Theimportance of these tasks drops slightly for exec-utives (see
Exhibit 2).
The most important tasks for middle manage-ment involve
"planning and allocating resources"among different groups. Examples
include esti-mating group resource requirements and makingdecisions
about how resources should be distrib-uted. One part of this
cluster includes translatinggeneral directives into specific plans
and commu-nicating their benefits. Middle managers and ex-ecutives
see these tasks as crucial to their jobs.
-
124 Academy of Management Executive November
xh/b/t 2Linking Croups*
70
PERCENTAGE
0
Planning andResource Allocation
61
CoordinatingInterdependent
Croups
Managing CroupPerformance
First-Line Supervisor Middle Manager Executive
*Numbers refer to the percentage of managers who said thetask
was of "the utmost" or "considerable" importance.
The relative importance of the "planning andallocating
resources" tasks is shown below:
72% Establish target dates for work products orservices.
70% Estimate resource requirements for opera-tional needs.
67% Develop evaluation criteria to measureprogress and
performance of operations.
65% Decide which programs should be providedwith resources
(e.g., manpower, materials,funds, etc.).
63% Translate general directives (e.g., strategicplans) from
superiors into specific operationalplans/schedules/procedures,
etc.
58% Communicate the benefits or opportunitiesposed by a new
idea, proposal, project, or pro-gram.
40% Distribute budgeted resources.
Both middle managers and executives also rate"coordinating
interdependent groups" as highlyimportant to their jobs. This
cluster includes re-viewing the work and plans of various groups
andhelping them set priorities as well as negotiatingand
integrating various group plans and activities.This clusterwhich
involves bringing several ef-forts together to create a final
productjumpssharply in importance when a supervisor movesinto
higher management.
The tasks in "coordinating interdependentgroups" were rated in
this way:
70% Stay informed of the goals, actions, andagendas of top
management.
60% Persuade other organizational groups toprovide the
information/products/resourcesneeded by your work group.
58% Monitor events, circumstances, or conditionsoutside your
work group that may affect itsgoals and/or performance.
53% Persuade other managers to provide supportand/or resources
for a new project or program.
51% Set priorities for responding to other groups.50% Determine
the possible effects of changes in
the activities or outputs of your work group onother
organizational groups.
45% Maintain awareness of the goals and plansof other groups
within the organization.
44% Negotiate working agreements with othergroups for the
exchange of information, prod-ucts, and/or services.
43% Ensure coordination of the activities andoutputs of
interdependent groups.
42% Integrate the plans of related organizationalgroups.
42% Provide advice or assistance to managers ofother
organizational groups.
39% Disseminate information about the activi-ties of your work
group to other groups.
27% Gather information on the needs/capabili-ties/resources
(e.g., information, services) ofother groups in the company.
Of the three factors most important to middlemanagement, the
biggest shift in importance oc-curs for the factor "managing group
performance."This includes managing the performance of vari-ous
work groups and working with subordinatemanagers on this
performance.
Rated low in importance by first-level managers,"managing group
performance" increases sharply(by 26 percentage points) in
importance for those inmiddle management. It is the hallmark change
forthose going into middle management. While themiddle manager must
still monitor the perfor-mance of individual supervisors, measuring
andmanaging group-level performance indicators be-comes a
significantly more important part of his orher
responsibilities.
The items in "managing group performance,"and their level of
importance are as follows:
57% Define areas of responsibility for manage-rial
personnel.
50% Inform managers when performance intheir groups does not
meet established goalsor standards.
48% Meet with managers to discuss the likelyeffects of changes
on their groups.
44% Monitor your work group's performance by
-
2005 Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna, and Dunnette 125
reading reports, information system outputs,or other
documents.
25% Prepare production and productivity reports.23% Gather or
review information on the activi-
ties and progress of several different workgroups.
Executives; An Eye on the Outside
The activities encompassed in "monitoring thebusiness
environment" are a sharp shift in empha-sis for managers reaching
the executive ranks (seeExhibit 3). These activities require the
executive tohave an increased awareness of sales,
business,economic, and social trends.
For managers below the executive ranks, thesetasks rate the
lowest in importance. At what pointdo managers need to become aware
of and profi-cient in adopting new viewpoints for their high-level
jobs? Clearly, executives find that this ex-panded perspective is a
key requirement of theirposition.
The tasks involved in "monitoring the businessenvironment" and
their importance ratings are asfollows:
47% Develop/maintain relationships with man-agement-level
customers or clients from theoutside business community.
38% Participate in task forces to identify newbusiness
opportunities.
37% Monitor sales performance and promotionalactivities.
36% Gather information about trends outsideyour
organization.
35% Identify developing market trends.
32% Develop/maintain relationships with man-agement-level
vendors or consultants in thebusiness community.
31% Consult on company wide problems.26% Attend outside meetings
as a company rep-
resentative.20% Monitor multinational business and eco-
nomic trends.15% Release company information to the public
(e.g., the news media).
Managers at All Levels: The Ambassador
Unlike the factors discussed earlier, which riseor drop in
importance as the manager moves upthe corporate ladder,
"representing your staff" isranked equally high by all levels of
management(see Exhibit 4). This is the spokesperson role, notedin
earlier studies by Henry Mintzberg. It involvesrepresenting one's
work group to others and in-cludes communicating the needs of one's
workgroup to others, helping subordinates interact withother
groups, and acting as the work group's rep-resentative.
The importance ratings of tasks involved in "rep-resenting your
staff" are as follows:
68% Develop relationships with managers of otherorganizational
groups that may be able to pro-vide your work group with
information/products/services/resources.
59% Communicate the needs or requirements ofyour work group to
managers of other organi-zational groups.
58% Provide information on the status of workin your work group
to managers of groups
70
PERCENTAGE
0
Exhibit 3Monitoring the Business Environment*
Monitoring theEnvironment
_LFirst-Line Supervisor Middle Manager Executive
'Numbers refer to the percentage of managers who said thetask
was of "the utmost" or "considerable" importance.
70
PERCENTAGE
Exhibit 4Representing People*
53
Representing OwnWork Croup
JMiddle Manager ExecutiveFirst-Line Supervisor
'Numbers refer to the percentage of managers who said the
task was of "the utmost" or "considerable" importance.
-
126 Academy of Management Executive November
100
90
80
70
60
PERC
N 50TAGE
40
30
20
10
0
InstructSubordinates
40
Exhibit 5
The Importance of Managerial Activities*
ManageIndividuals
RepresentStaff
59*
Plan andAllocate
Resources63it.
CoordinateGroups
* . . : : :
ManageGroups
43
48
Marketing ManagersManufacturing ManagersAdministration
Managers
Monitor theOutside
Environment32
'Numbers refer to the percentage of managers who said the task
was of "the utmost" or "considerable" importance.
that depend on you for
information/products/services/resources.
57% Determine the appropriate response(s) tomanagers demanding
information/products/services/other resources from your work
group.
48% Provide information or assistance to subor-dinates
interacting with other organizationalgroups.
46% Communicate capabilities and resourcesof your work group to
other managers in theorganization.
39% Serve as an intermediary between your sub-ordinates and
managers of other organiza-tional groups.
One might speculate that a big transition re-garding such
activities takes place when one isinitially promoted into
management. Until then in-dividuals may have spoken only for
themselves;thus, some adjustment is required before the man-ager
will recognize and take on the role of groupambassador.
Differences Across Organizational Functions
Most managers would argue that different func-tions present
significantly different managementchallenges. Our data permit some
tests of this hy-pothesis.
We examined the importance of managementtasks across three
functions: (1) marketing, whichincludes managers in the sales and
related sup-port organization, (2) manufacturing, which in-cludes
managers in all phases of the manufactur-ing process, and (3)
administration, which includesmanagers in finance, planning, and
related staffssuch as personnel.
As Exhibit 5 shows, the importance levels ofmanagerial task
factors are remarkably similaracross functions, although some
noteworthy differ-ences exist. (The three levels of management
are
weighted equally in each function so that no onelevel has undue
influence.) Marketing and admin-istration appear to differ most in
their rating offactors, with manufacturing falling in between.
"Instructing subordinates" is least importantamong marketing
managers (27% said it was of"the utmost" or "considerable
importance"), per-haps because so much of the training of
marketingemployees is done in corporate-sponsored pro-grams. In
administration, however, w here manyhighly specific staff jobs and
relatively little for-mal corporate training exists (at least in
this com-pany), "instructing subordinates" is a relativelymore
important management activity.
On the other hand, we suspect that a high levelof
professionalism among most administrativestaff reduces the emphasis
that their managersplace on "managing individual performance"(50%).
This factor, by contrast, is considerably moreimportant in
marketing (59%).
"Representation" is rated highest in importanceby managers in
marketing (59%). Obviously, thesemanagers represent the company's
products to oth-ers, mainly customers. By contrast, the demand
forrepresenting one's staff is 11 points lower amongmanagers in
administration. These relative differ-ences apply also for
"planning and allocating re-sources," which is rated highest by
marketing(63%) and manufacturing (59%), and lowest by
ad-ministration (52%). The activities involved in coor-dinating
interdependent work groups is equallyimportant for all three
functions (47%).
"Managing group performance" is of somewhathigher importance to
the managers in manufactur-ing (43%) and somewhat lower to managers
in ad-ministration (32%). Presumably the administrationfunction is
made up of more specialists and pro-fessionals who work alone.
The activities involved in "monitoring the out-side business
environment" take on the highest
-
2005 Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna, and Dunnette 127
importance for managers in marketing (32%). Thisexternal
orientation, which results from their inter-action with customers
and need to remain currenton competitors' products and marketing
strategies,should not be too surprising.
Overall, our data suggest there are indeed dif-ferences in the
importance of various managerialtasks across functions.
Nevertheless, the similari-ties across the entire spectrum of
functions areclearly more striking. (Such conclusions are
alsosuggested in the findings of Cynthia M. Pavett andAlan W. Lau
in their extension of Mintzberg'swork. ) This suggests that a
common approach toselecting, training, and developing managers
maybe both feasible and desirable for many functionsin an
organization.
Where significant differences do exist acrossfunctions, a common
management developmentprogram or cross-functional work
assignmentsmay make managers more aware of different func-tions'
perspectives, and help them avoid seeing allmanagers' jobs as
either the same or unique. AsJohn Kotter has noted in his work on
executivebehavior, people with narrow functional back-grounds who
are promoted into general manage-ment positions may face a very
difficult transition.^
Appropriate preparation may minimize suchhardships.
Theorefica/ Implications
While we think this study has a number of prac-tical
implications that can help organizationsmake more effective use of
their managerial re-sources, it is important to consider its
limitationsas well. First, the data are based on managers'own
perceptions of the importance of varioustasks. Certainly their
bosses, peers, and subordi-nates may have a different view of
things.^ Second,because we took a "snapshot" of managers at
dif-ferent levels, rather than following a group of man-agers over
time, we cannot be certain that manag-ers will experience the
differences we describe asthey move to higher-level management
jobs; how-ever, because the company whose managers wesurveyed
strictly follows a "promote from within"policy, it seems likely
that the differences we noteare indeed changes accompanying upward
moves.
Despite these limitations, the study provides acarefully
gathered record of the role and task per-ceptions of a large sample
of real managers work-ing in a diverse array of positions. As we
noted atthe beginning of this article, the results can
beinterpreted as supportive of Mintzberg's view thatmanagerial jobs
involve essentially the samemanagerial roles^ as well as Katz and
Kahn's ar-
gument that managers do different things at dif-ferent
levels.^
In support of Mintzberg, we found that managersat all levels
rated most of the tasks on the ques-tionnaire of some importance.
The differences weobserved were typically differences in the
degreeof importance of the tasks, not differences inwhether the
tasks were important at all. Yet, asKatz and Kahn would maintain,
these differencesare significant. Considering the costs of a
manag-er's time, the difference between outstanding andaverage
performance may well depend on the pri-ority he or she assigns to
each of the many tasksthat are basically important.^
Practical Implications
How should we prepare our managers to meetthe various demands
that different managerialroles place on them? Who should we select
to moveup the management hierarchy? What training canwe provide?
How can we develop the skills essen-tial for the manager's and
team's success? Thefindings of this study provide some clues as to
howa winning team can be fostered by training, devel-opment, and
selection.
Training
Typically, management training has empha-sized the basics of
management: individually fo-cused supervision, motivation, career
planning,and performance feedback. All of these aspectsshould
clearly be a central focus in the training offirst-level managers.
Given that managers con-tinue to use these skills as they move up
the hier-archy, periodic reinforcement also seems appropri-ate. Our
study, however, indicates that training formanagers above the first
level must cover morethan these one-to-one skills.
To help middle managers deal successfully withtheir
responsibilities for managing and linkinggroups, training at this
level should focus on skillsneeded for designing and implementing
effectivegroup and intergroup work and information sys-tems;
defining and monitoring group-level perfor-mance indicators;
diagnosing and resolving prob-lems within and among work groups;
negotiatingwith peers and superiors; and designing and
im-plementing reward systems that support coopera-tive behavior. As
these topics suggest, the psychol-ogy of the individual, so
important to the first-levelmanager, gives way to social psychology
and so-ciology when one reaches middle management.Since the latter
topics are generally less wellknown and more abstract than the
former, it is not
-
128 Academy of Managemenf Executive November
surprising that the transition to middle manage-ment can be very
confusing and disorienting.
The executive's need to emphasize the externalenvironment can
also be partially addressedthrough training. The curriculum should
focus onbroadening the executive's understanding of
theorganization's competition, world economies, poli-tics, and
social trends. A number of executive train-ing institutes and
university-based programs aregeared toward providing these
broadening experi-ences; however, we think it is a serious mistake
towait until a person becomes an executive beforeteaching him or
her to recognize the importance ofattending to the relationship
between the businessand its environment. Consider the potential
advan-tages of having middle and lower-level managerswho understand
the nature and strategic directionof their organization's business
and are constantlyon the lookout for opportunities and threats in
theenvironment. We think this perspective should re-ceive
continuous attention in management train-ing and development
efforts at all levels.
Deveiopmenf
Planned development programs can also con-tribute to expanding
the skill base of managers. Atthe first level, experiences such as
filling in for themiddle manager during vacation times, acting asa
liaison between linked functions, or representingthe entire
function at important meetings can buildgroup management and
coordination skills.
For the middle manager, increased customercontact, visits to
other organizations, and subscrip-tions to important business and
trade publicationscan help impart the skills necessary for the
exec-utive ranks.
Seiecfion
The results of this study also have implicationsfor the
selection of managers. Given our findings,it should not be
surprising that executives are of-ten chosen from the marketing
function; these peo-ple have had their eyes on the outside
environmentfor the majority of their careers. Yet through
planneddevelopment, employees and managers from otherfunctions can
also acquire the skills required in ex-ecutive management, and
their contribution to over-all decision making can be
significant.
A Winning Team
The results of this study clearly identify the dif-ferent roles
that managers play and can provideorganizations with the framework
for building
management training and development programs.By understanding
the common and different rolesplayed by managers as they move up
the manage-ment hierarchy, we can develop programs that en-sure
that these managers have the skills needed toput together a winning
team.
Endnotes
' The questionnaire used in this study was based on anextensive
review of research on managerial activities, A classicwork in this
area is Management Behavior, Performance, andEffectiveness, by J,
P, Campbell, M, D, Dunnette, E, E, Lawler,and K, Weick, New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1970, Another work thatstrongly influenced the
questionnaire because of its depictionof the dynamic quality of
managerial work, is L, Sayles's Lead-ership, New York: McGraw-Hill,
1979, aptly subtitled "What Ef-fective Managers Really Do and How
They Do It."
^ This study was conducted by the authors in a large
U.S.business enterprise, A random sample, designed to
overrepre-sent higher-strata managers, resulted in 1,412
respondents: 658first-line managers, 553 middle managers, and 201
executives.After extensive pretesting, a list of 65 activities was
used on thefinal survey questionnaire. Through statistical
analyses, theseactivities were "factored," or grouped, into seven
sets, whichcomprised 57 activities, (Eight activities fit poorly
into the sevensets and were dropped.)
Despite, or perhaps because, we used a literature search asthe
basis for our list of activities, some activities valued in thisand
other organizations may not have appeared in our survey.In passing
we might mention that the importance placed onvarious activities is
not necessarily related to "good" perfor-mance. The correlation
between importance and effectivenesshas simply not been examined in
this study. By the same token,these activities are not necessarily
the "correct" or "best" onesfor any particular position. It remains
to be determined whichactivities are desirable or appropriate,
especially for the future,
^ Other investigators have studied pattems of managementtasks.
For example, James MacDonald and his colleagues(Charles Youngblood
and Kerry Glum) report their comprehen-sive effort to determine
training needs of first- and second-levelsupervisors working at
AT&T in their book Performance BasedSupervisory Development,
Amherst, MA: Human Resource De-velopment Press, 1982, Since they
were concerned specificallywith developing training guidelines,
their categories of man-agement (listed below) are much more
focused on knowledgeand skill development than are the seven
behavioral factorsdeveloped in our investigation. Their categories
of supervisioninclude the following:
Planning the jobControlling the jobProviding performance
feedbackManaging timeDecision makingProblem solvingMaintaining
upward communicationsMaintaining downward communicationsMaintaining
peer communicationsCreating a motivating atmosphereDeveloping
subordinatesSelf-developmentProviding written
communicationsInvolvement with meetingsCommunity relationsOf more
direct relevance to our work is the recent work
-
2005 Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna, and Dunnette 129
reported by Fred Luthans, Stuart Rosenkrantz, and Harry
Hen-nessey in "What Do Successful Managers Really Do? An
Obser-vation Study of Managerial Activities," The Journal of
AppliedBehavioral Science, 21(2), 1985, 255-270, See also Fred
Luthans,"Successful vs. Effective Real Managers," The Academy of
Man-agement Executive, May 1988, 127-132, Luthans and his
col-leagues observed and recorded the actual activities of
manag-ers at all management levels and in many types
oforganizations. Observations were recorded according to
fourcategories: communicafion, consisting of exchanging
informa-tion and processing paperwork: traditional management,
con-sisting of planning, decision making, and controlling;
humanresource managemenf, consisting of motivating,
disciplining,managing conflict, staffing, and training/developing;
and nef-worting, consisting of socializing, politicking, and
interactingwith outsiders.
It should be noted that the seven factors developed from
ourinvestigation encompass all the categories studied by Mac-Donald
and Luthans in their earlier investigations,
'See C, M, Pavett and A, W, Lau, "Managerial Work: Theinfluence
of Hierarchical Level and Functional Speciality,"Academy of
Management Journal, 26(1), 1983, 170-177,
^See J. P, Kotter, The General Managers, New York: FreePress,
1982,
^ An excellent review of the pro's and con's of various meansto
study managerial work is the report "Studies of ManagerialWork:
Results and Methods," by M, W, McCall, A, M, Morrison,and R, L,
Kaplan, Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leader-ship, 1975,
' A well-known book on this subject, Henry Mintzberg's TheNature
of Managerial Work, New York, Harper, 1973, is based onobservations
of a dozen chief executive officers. His work has beenreplicated by
others, such as L, B, Kurke and H, E, Aldrich, "Mint-zberg Was
Right!: A Replication and Extension of the Nature ofManagerial
Work," Management Science, 29, 8, 1983, 975-984,
^ D. Katz and R. L, Kahn's Sociai Psychology of
Organizations(2nd Ed,), New York: Wiley, 1978, presents a view of
very differ-ent demands, cognitive and emotional, on managers at
variouslevels in an organization,
^ Finally, some further support for the argument that manag-ers
do some things differently at various levels was shown inone of
Luthans' earlier investigations based on observations ofsome 53
managers (see Endnote 3), Comparisons between topexecutives and
front-line supervisors revealed that executivesengaged in much more
networking, considerably more plan-ning and decision making, and
less staffing than front-linesupervisors. These results are
certainly compatible with ours.
Allen L Kraut is professor of management at Baruch College,City
University of New York, For most of his professional career,he has
been involved in personnel research at the IBM Corpo-ration, Until
his recent move to academia, Dr, Kraut was man-ager of personnel
research studies in IBM's Corporate Staff,conducting strategically
oriented personnel research. He alsospent several years at IBM's
World Trade Corporation, where hewas responsible for personnel
research and management de-velopment worldwide.
His interests in management have been expressed in re-search and
consulting on executive succession planning andmanagement
development, and in several other studies on theuse of peer
ratings, management assessment centers, and ex-ecutive selection.
He has also done many employee attitude
surveys, some of which have focused on executives' opinions,Dr,
Kraut is a Fellow of the American Psychological Associa-
tion and a Diplomate of the American Board of
ProfessionalPsychologists, He received an M,A, from Columbia
Universityand his Ph.D. from the University of Michigan.
Dr. Patricia R. Pedigo conducts marketplace and business
part-ner research for the marketing and services organization of
IBM,In addition to studying these topics and the management
issuesreported here, her research has covered attitudes toward
finan-cial planning, retirement, performance appraisal systems,
ben-efit programs, corporate culture, management potential,
suc-cession planning, and personnel selection.
Before assuming her current position, Dr, Pedigo has
heldmanagement and personnel generalist positions within IBM,She
received a B,S, from the University of Washington, and anM,A, and
Ph,D, in industrial/organizational psychology from theUniversity of
South Florida, She has consulted in public andprivate
organizations, including AT&T, PepsiCo, and GTE, Shehas also
taught personnel administration and organizationalbehavior at the
Graduate Business School at Pace University,
D. Douglas McKenna is an associate professor and chair of
theManagement Department in the School of Business and Eco-nomics
at Seattle Pacific University, teaching courses in humanresource
management, organization design, and organizationdevelopment. He is
currently writing a chapter (with Louis W,Fry) entitled
"Organization Analysis and Design" for the up-coming second edition
of Marvin Dunnette's Handbook of In-dustrial/Organizational
Psychology,
His current research interests focus on the question of how
todesign and implement human resource systems in differenttypes of
organizations, particularly high-tech and knowledge-delivery firms.
He has an active consulting practice and worksregularly with
Microsoft, Boeing, and other companies in thePacific Northwest,
During the time in which the research re-ported in this article was
conducted, he was senior researchpsychologist at Personnel
Decisions Research Institute, Inc, inMinneapolis.
Marvin D. Dunnette is professor of psychology at the
Universityof Minnesota and chairman and CEO of Personnel
DecisionsResearch Institute, Inc, of Minneapolis, He also is one of
thefounders and continues to serve on the board of
PersonnelDecisions Research Institute, Inc,
Dr, Dunnette has been influential in industrial and
organiza-tional psychology through both teaching and publication.
Hehas served as academic advisor to 50 students who have re-ceived
Ph,D. degrees in the fields of industrial/organizationalpsychology
and counseling psychology. He is editor of theHandbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, pub-lished in 1976
(Chicago: Rand McNally), and a co-author (withJohn Campbell, Edward
E, Lawler, and Karl Weick) of Manage-rial Behavior, Performance,
and Effectiveness, New York:McGraw-Hill, 1970, A second edition of
the I/O Handbook is nowin preparation,
Dr, Dunnette is a Fellow of the American Psychological
As-sociation (APA) and holds the Diplomate in Industrial
Psychol-ogy He served as president of APA's Division of Industrial
andOrganizational Psychology during the 1966-67 year and wasthe
1985 recipient of that division's Award for OutstandingScientific
Contributions,