Organizational Leadership Concepts

Leadership and management are two essential functions in business. Leadership represents individuals involved

with balancing varying interests among managers, employees and other business stakeholders. Management

commonly is defined as the organization and coordination of various economic resources in a business. While

leaders can be managers, managers may not be leaders. Leaders often have specific character traits that lend their

skills more to directing a company than managing resources.

Facts

Organizational leadership often manifests itself in the business owner or executive directors of a company. Many owners are

seen as leaders because they start new businesses based on an idea or vision. Business owners are responsible for handling all

aspects of creating the new business venture, regardless of how many difficult situations arise. Organizational leaders may

respond to various negative business situations based on their core personality traits.

Features

Leadership traits include enthusiasm, conscientiousness, boldness, self-assurance and competitiveness. These characteristics

give individuals intangible business skills for accomplishing tasks and inspiring people to work with the leader during tough

situations. Specific organizational leadership traits may include intuitiveness, maturity, team orientation, charisma and empathy.

These may closely relate to the organizational structure of the business in which the leader works.

Function

Business owners and leaders usually develop a mission or value statement for the organization. This statement includes

information that will promote the transfer of information, knowledge and methods to individuals working in the business.

Organizational leadership often recruits individuals to help the leader fulfill his vision. Leaders also have a tendency to delegate

non-essential tasks to lower-level employees. This delegation allows leaders to maintain a singular focus on the overall goal of

their business organization.

Effects

Businesses with strong leadership usually have a better understanding of their goals and objectives. While the main goal of

many businesses is to make a profit, they also may have other goals when operating in the business environment. Leaders not

only provide these goals and objectives, but also ensure the company achieves them. Leaders can help a company return to its

original goals or objectives if the business begins to lose its way.

Warning

Organizational leadership can create some conflict in businesses. Leaders may be so focused on a single goal or objective that

they overlook other needs in the business. Managers and employees can be overlooked or seen as less important if

organizational leadership goals are placed ahead of these individuals. Organizational leadership that continually critiques and

punishes employees can create an unfavorable environment in which individuals do not feel comfortable as employees.

Organizational Leadership Theories

Leadership, as explained by successful businessman Alan Keith, is "ultimately about creating a way for people to

contribute to making something extraordinary happen." Good leaders move their followers to action and help them

realize their potential to accomplish a greater objective. While larger companies actively mine the work force for

great leaders, for small businesses, owners often need to fill this role themselves. Understanding the theories of

organizational leadership helps you grow and develop leadership skills and identify potential leaders during the

hiring process.

Trait Theory

The idea that great leadership derives from a person's individual characteristics or traits is known as trait theory. Research

identifies six personal traits that strongly relate to leadership: intelligence, adjustment, extraversion, conscientiousness,

openness to new experiences and self-efficacy. According to trait theory, individuals with these characteristics emerge as

leaders regardless of the situation.

Behavioral & Style Theory

This theory describes leadership not as a set of traits but a set of behaviors and styles. Theorists studied three main leadership

styles: authoritarian, where the leader dictates what followers must do; democratic, where the leader presides over a collective

decision process; and laissez-faire, where the leader does not participate in the decision process. The results of the studies

indicate that followers preferred the democratic approach to leadership and that performance increased when leaders used

positive reinforcement.

Functional Theory

Functional theory argues that leaders' primary responsibility is to assess what their followers need and ensure that those needs

are met. A range of studies indicate that leaders must perform five primary functions: monitor the environment, organize

subordinate activities, train and coach subordinates, motivate followers, and participate in the group's work.

Transactional Theory

Transactional theory argues that leadership arises from an individual's ability to reward or punish subordinates based on their

performance. Leaders must be given a goal, must possess the ability to train and evaluate subordinate's performance towards

that goal and must be given the authority to reward subordinates when goals are met.

Transformational Theory

Transformational leaders focus on the big picture and use communication to motivate followers to effectively and efficiently

execute their vision. Transformational leadership theory calls for leaders to be visible and accessible, and to actively seek out

new ideas to realize objectives.

Environmental Theory

The environmental theory of leadership argues that leaders use psychology and self-awareness to foster self-sustaining

environments where group members bring out the best in one another. The leader creates a culture that motivates and excites

members to complete required tasks not because they are required to but for the benefit of the group. Instead of carrying the

group, environmental leaders create a setting in which group members want to carry one another and are empowered to do so.

Situational & Contingency Theories

These theories argue that the desired traits and behaviors exhibited by a leader depend largely on the situation, and that there is

no best way to lead. Based on this theory, the authoritarian leadership style is effective during times of crisis but not for

everyday operations, the democratic leadership style is more effective when a consensus needs to be built, and the laissez-faire

leadership style is effective when subordinates are trained and experienced individuals who appreciate the freedom it provides.

The 5 Levels of Leadership by John Maxwell The 5 Levels of Leadership:

Level 1: Position

This is the lowest level of leadership—the entry level. People who make it only to Level 1 may be bosses, but they

are never leaders. They have subordinates, not team members. They rely on rules, regulations, policies, and

organization charts to control their people. Their people will only follow them within the stated boundaries of their

authority.

Position is the only level that does not require ability and effort to achieve. Anyone can be appointed to a position.

This means that position is a fine starting point, but every leader should aspire to grow beyond Level 1.

Level 2 – Permission

Making the shift from Position to Permission brings a person’s first real step into leadership. Leadership is influence,

and when a leader learns to function on the Permission level, everything changes. People do more than merely

comply with orders. They actually start to follow. And they do so because they really want to. Why? Because the

leader begins to influence people with relationship, not just position.

When people feel liked, cared for, included, valued, and trusted, they begin to work together with their leader and

each other. And that can change the entire working environment. The old saying is really true: people go along with

leaders they get along with.

Level 3: Production

Production qualifies and separates true leaders from people who merely occupy leadership positions. Good leaders

always make things happen. They get results. They can make a significant impact on an organization. Not only are

they productive individually, but they also are able to help the team produce. No one can fake Level 3. Either you’re

producing for the organization and adding to its bottom line (whatever that may be), or you’re not.

Some people never move up from Level 2 Permission to Level 3 Production. Why? They can’t seem to produce

results. When that is the case, it’s usually because they lack the self-discipline, work ethic, organization, or skills to

be productive. However, if you desire to go to higher levels of leadership, you simply have to produce. There is no

other way around it.

Level 4: People Development

On Level 3, the emphasis is on personal and corporate productivity. The ability to create a high-productivity team,

department, or organization indicates a higher level of leadership ability than most others display. But to reach the

upper levels of leadership that create elite organizations, leaders must transition from producers to developers.

Why? Because people are any organization’s most appreciable asset.

Good leaders on Level 4 invest their time, energy, money, and thinking into growing others as leaders. How does

this emphasis on people and people decisions translate into action? Leaders on the People Development level of

leadership shift their focus from the production achieved by others to the development of their potential. And they

put only 20 percent of their focus on their personal productivity while putting 80 percent of it on developing and

leading others. This can be a difficult shift for highly productive people who are used to getting their hands dirty, but

it’s a change that can revolutionize an organization and give it a much brighter future.

Level 5: The Pinnacle

Rare is the leader who reaches Level 5—the Pinnacle. Not only is leadership at this level a culmination of leading

well on the other four levels, but it also requires both a high degree of skill and some amount of natural leadership

ability. It takes a lot to be able to develop other leaders so that they reach Level 4; that’s what Level 5 leaders do.

The individuals who reach Level 5 lead so well for so long that they create a legacy of leadership in the organization

they serve.

Pinnacle leaders stand out from everyone else. They are a cut above, and they seem to bring success with them

wherever they go. Leadership at this high level lifts the entire organization and creates an environment that benefits

everyone in it, contributing to their success. Level 5 leaders often possess an influence that transcends the

organization and the industry the leader works in.

Most leaders who reach the Pinnacle do so later in their careers. But this level is not a resting place for leaders to

stop and view their success. It is a reproducing place from which they make the greatest impact of their lives. That’s

why leaders who reach the Pinnacle should make the most of it while they can. With gratitude and humility, they

should lift up as many leaders as they can, tackle as many great challenges as possible, and extend their influence

to make a positive difference beyond their own organization and industry.

What Is the Difference Between Assigned Leadership & Emergent

Leadership?

When your small business grows, you will need leaders other than yourself. You can look among your current

employees for anyone who displays leadership qualities. These are emergent leaders. You can search among job

seekers for people to hire for leadership positions. These are assigned leaders. These two types of leaders can

have different styles and different effects on your employees.

Assigned Leadership

Assigned leaders derive their authority from their positions in the company hierarchy. The titles you give them carry weight

with the employees they lead and you expect employees to show respect for the position. Eventually, however, employees must

come to respect the person. The assigned leader must demonstrate wisdom, problem-solving skills and the ability to motivate

employees in order to maintain a position of leadership and justify the assignment.

Emergent Leadership

When an employee begins taking on tasks voluntarily, helping others complete their tasks better and encouraging consensus

among coworkers, this person is an emergent leader. This type of leadership is distinguished by the leader proving herself

before being formally given a leadership title. Emergent leaders offer you the advantage of knowing in advance of a promotion

that the person can handle the job. This type of leadership can also garner the leader respect among employees who know that

the leader has shown the ability to work hard. Employees may expect emergent leadership to demonstrate more empathy for the

worker than assigned leadership.

Perception vs. Reality

Employees may perceive that assigned leaders are educated, intelligent and wise, even if they are not. This is because workers

assume that you as the owner performed some kind of screening process and found the best person for the job. This kind of

automatic authority has its pitfalls. If your assigned leader has areas in which he is incompetent, employees can begin to resent

having to follow such a person. Similarly, an emergent leader may cause resentment if she has to make decisions that help the

company instead of employees. For example, an emergent leader may come out against employee raises based on a review of

company finances. Employees can feel betrayed by an emergent leader, even though the reality is the leader may be making

wise decisions.

Two Leaders in Conflict

On occasion, you may have an assigned leader in a department when the actual leader is an employee under that person. The

emergent leader may have the ability to encourage cooperation and consensus in a way that the assigned leader does not. The

problem can become counterproductive if the emergent leader defies the assigned leader when they have different approaches or

solutions to problems. At that point, you may have to reassign one or both people.

What Is the Difference Between Assigned Leadership & Emergent Leadership?

The distinction between assigned leadership and emergent leadership is simple. Assigned leaders are appointed to

a formal management or supervisor position. Emergent leaders take on informal leadership roles based on the

perception that work team or group members have toward them. For a small-business operator, recognizing

emergent leaders and assigning them to formal openings is ideal.

Status An assigned leader is a formal leadership designation in an organization. Shift manager, assistant manager, general

manager, district manager, regional manager, vice president, president and chief executive officer are all examples

of formally assigned leadership roles. Emergent leaders sometimes have a designated leadership position. This

term is often applied to someone in a front line work group whom the other team members look to for inspiration or

direction. An emergent leader may also have a front line management role but show similar emergent leader

capabilities within the front line manager ranks.

Respect Someone assigned a leadership role without strong abilities to motivate followers typically enjoys less respect than

someone without a formal position who motivates people in a certain direction. In this way, an assigned leader is

described as a position-based leader. Without genuine respect from employees, he must rely on his title and often

fear or intimidation to direct people. An emergent leader has the respect of his colleagues or group members. If he

advocates a certain position or encourages employees to take certain actions, their respect for him and his

leadership usually causes them to follow.

Communication Communication often distinguishes formal or assigned leaders from informal, emergent leaders. Effective leaders

communicate well one on one by listening to employees and being approachable. They also articulate interest in the

employee as a person and provide task direction. In small groups, an emergent leader normally gains her status by

being a vocal, engaging communicator. The assigned leader must work to develop group rapport, but she has the

advantage of her formal role in the group, which she uses to motivate and direct workers.

Challenges The major challenge for an assigned leader is to develop a level of respect akin to that of an emergent leader. This

often requires taking the time to build bonds with employees and earning their respect with hard work and

commitment. The assigned leader may also struggle in conflict with an emergent leader in his employee ranks.

Ideally, he can get this vocal leader on his side. The emergent leader's primary challenge is lack of authority. While

he has the influence to motivate people, he doesn't necessarily have the authority to make high-level decisions or to

understand strategic motives of the business or his department.

ASSIGNED LEADERSHIP VS. EMERGENT LEADERSHIP

Northouse (2010), discusses how some people are leaders because of their formal position within an organization, such

as employees in upper management or executive leadership. Others are defined as leaders due to the way that group

members respond to them. Leadership that relies primarily on occupying a position within an organization is assigned

leadership; examples include: team leaders, managers, department heads and administrators.

On the other end, emergent leadership generally refers to an influential member of a collaborative group. No matter the

title this person holds, they exhibit emergent leadership through their behavior. They may not be assigned to a particular

position of leadership, but they emerge over a period of time. For example – let’s say you were assigned to work in a

collaborative environment at work and assigned a task, deadlines and milestones. Your co-workers are working well in the

beginning of the project, but morale decreases and tasks are left by the wayside. Seeing this, you jump at the opportunity

to communicate with each group member, discussing the areas which need to be completed, generate small tasks and

assignments so that the milestones can be reached more efficiently. This is an example of emergent leadership, when an

individual displays positive behavior, which results in the completion of a particular goal.

Whether you are a manager, entrepreneur, enterpriser, organizer or business person – emerging and working in a

collaborative environment for the purpose of completing goals and outcomes reflects positively upon your character and

strengthens your bond as a team. This continual effort also benefits the organization by creating systems of efficiency and

motivated behavior to get the job done.

Accountability vs. Responsibility

The main difference between responsibility and accountability is that responsibility can be shared while accountability

cannot. Being accountable not only means being responsible for something but also ultimately being answerable for

your actions. Also, accountability is something you hold a person to only after a task is done or not done. Responsibility

can be before and/or after a task.

Comparison chart

Accountability versus Responsibility comparison chart

Accountability Responsibility

Introduction In ethics and governance, accountability is

answerability, blameworthiness, liability, and the

expectation of account-giving.

Responsibility may refer to: being

in charge, being the owner of a

task or event.

Explanation

owed

Yes Not necessarily

Examples

It is Tom's responsibility to make sure there are supplies in the office room. So Tom will be aware of this task and keep bringing in more supplies before they run out. At this point, you cannot say Tom has been held accountable (answerable) for performing this task. Tom is responsible for the office supplies, but he is only held accountable — owes an explanation for his actions — if the supplies ever run out.

To cite another example, take the case of the notorious 2001 Enron scandal that led to the bankruptcy of the Enron Corporation. Members of the executive board were indicted for their illegal and unethical actions. CEO Kenneth Lay was one of the people indicted. Lay insisted that Enron's collapse was due to a conspiracy waged by short sellers, rogue executives, and the news media — implying that while he could be held accountable as the CEO and leader of the organization, he was not in any way responsible for the fraud in the company. However, a jury found Lay guilty on six counts of conspiracy and fraud, making the CEO responsible as well as accountable for the downfall of the company.

Difference Between Responsibility and Accountability

The terms responsibility and accountability are often used interchangeably by the people, due to some similarities like the flow of both of these two, is from bottom to top. Although, they are different in the sense that, in the case of responsibility, a person does what he/she is asked to do. On the other hand, in accountability, a person agrees to do, what he/she is supposed to do.

The basic difference between responsibility and accountability is that the former is assumed whereas the latter is imposed. While responsibility is understood as an obligation to perform a particular task, accountability denotes answerability, for the completion of the task assigned by the senior.

Content: Responsibility Vs Accountability

1. Comparison Chart

2. Definition

3. Key Differences

4. Conclusion

Comparison Chart

BASIS FOR COMPARISON

RESPONSIBILITY ACCOUNTABILITY

Meaning Responsibility is the state of having duty, to do whatever it takes to complete the task.

Accountability is the condition, wherein a person is expected to take ownership of one's actions or decisions.

What is it? Obligation to perform the delegated task.

Answerability for the consequence of the delegated task.

Nature Assigned Accepted

Arises from Authority Responsibility

Delegation Done but not entirely. Not possible.

Performance Not measured Measured

Definition of Responsibility

Responsibility is defined as an obligation to perform or complete the assigned task. It is the duty of the subordinate to complete the delegated task adequately. It is generated out of a superior-subordinate relationship, where the junior is bound to perform the task assigned to him by the senior. Hence, the flow of responsibility is bottom-up, as the subordinate is responsible to his/her senior. The word responsibility describes a person or group who is complete in charge of something and will ensure the work will be done properly.

Definition of Accountability

The term accountability means a sense of being answerable for the final consequences. When an authority is delegated, the employee is empowered to perform the task for his superior, but the superior would still take the ownership of the final result. The flow of accountability is bottom-up, as the subordinate would be liable to the superior for the task. When a person is accountable for something, he is supposed to explain the outcomes of his actions, decisions, and omissions. It denotes an individual or group who are ready to make good or take the blame if the work is not completed properly.

Key Differences Between Responsibility and Accountability

The following points are noteworthy so far as the difference between responsibility and accountability is concerned:

1. The state of having the duty, to do whatever it takes to complete the task, is known as responsibility. The condition, wherein a person is expected to take ownership of one’s actions or decisions, is called accountability.

2. Responsibility refers to the obligation to perform the delegated task. On the other hand, answerability for the consequence of the delegated task.

3. Responsibility is assigned whereas accountability is accepted.

4. The origin of responsibility is the assigned authority. On the contrary, accountability arises from responsibility.

5. Responsibility is delegated but not completely, but there is no such thing like delegation of accountability.

6. The performance of a person is not necessarily measured when he/she is responsible. Unlike, accountability, wherein the person’s performance is measured.

7. Responsibility is something, wherein a person is held responsible before or after task. In contrast to, accountability where a person can only be accountable after the task is performed or not performed satisfactorily.

Conclusion

After reviewing the points, it is clear that accountability makes the person accountable for the consequences of the actions or decisions made by him/her. As against this, consequences are not necessarily attached to the responsibility. Further, accountability requires a person to be liable and answerable for the things, he/she does. Conversely, responsibility expects a person to be reliable and dependable to complete the tasks assigned to him.

Leadership Vision

"The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision. It's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion." --Theodore Hesburgh, President of the University of Notre Dame

"There's nothing more demoralizing than a leader who can't clearly articulate why we're doing what we're doing." --James Kouzes and Barry Posner

"Good business leaders create a vision, articulate the vision, passionately own the vision, and relentlessly drive it to completion." --Jack Welch

Leaders have vision. They share a dream and direction that other people want to share and follow. The leadership vision goes beyond your written organizational mission statement and your vision statement.

The vision of leadership permeates the workplace and is manifested in the actions, beliefs, values and goals of your organization’s leaders.

The ReCellular Leadership Vision

ReCellular, Inc. was formerly a mid-sized company that refurbished, repaired and resold wireless phones and other electronic devices. Not only did the company keep millions of pounds of these devices out of landfills, they make thousands of products available for re-use. And, they donated thousands of dollars to charitable causes.

Now, if you were an environmentally-committed person who cared about the millions of electronic devices that can potentially reside in landfills, this leadership vision was most appealing. Indeed, many employees were attracted to the work because of the green mission and the opportunity to serve a cause that they perceived was bigger than themselves.

Additionally, the opportunity to serve many charitable and environmental causes with the profit from the sale of the phones while working simultaneously appealed to another group of vision, mission-driven people. The ReCellular leadership vision was powerful.

Why Is Leadership Vision Powerful?

The leadership vision was powerful because the senior managers and leaders believed in the vision and mission.

Not just a statement hanging on a wall, the leadership vision was even more powerful because people lived the leadership vision every single day at work.

When leaders share out a powerful vision and organize and staff the workplace to accomplish it, a powerful dynamic drives employee performance. When leaders walk their talk, it's a demonstrated motivator for people. When leaders share a strong vision, employees flock to it - even choosing the job in the company over other options.

Employees were not just processing wireless devices to make money for the company owners, they were saving the tiniest babies or providing a safe haven for abused women. They were keeping electronics out of landfills. Can a shared leadership vision get any more powerful than this?

Leadership Vision Fundamentals

While your organization may not have such an intrinsically compelling vision as ReCellular, your leaders can inspire with their own vision. In fact, most businesses were started because the founder had a vision about what he or she could create.

Employees often join organizations because of the vision and direction shared when they attend the on-site job interviews. In fact, that is part of the organization's job when interviewing superior candidates.

They need to give the best candidates, the employees that you really want, compelling reasons to choose your organization over another.

The vision may have changed along the way, but as long as the leader continuously shares the vision, employees can adapt and adjust.

Sharing that vision with others in a way that compels them to act is the secret to a successful leadership vision.

These are the fundamentals necessary for a vision that excites and motivates people to follow the leader. The vision must:

Clearly set organizational direction and purpose;

Inspire loyalty and caring through the involvement of all employees;

Display and reflect the unique strengths, culture, values, beliefsand direction of the organization;

Inspire enthusiasm, belief, commitment and excitement in company members;

Help employees believe that they are part of something bigger than themselves and their daily work;

Be regularly communicated and shared, not just through monthly announcements and reminders at the company meeting, it must permeate all communication at every level of the organization;

Serve as the reason courses of action are chosen, people are hired, markets are selected, and products are developed;

Challenge people to outdo themselves, to stretch and reach.

Want to learn more about articulating a vision, mission statement, values and the strategic framework needed by an organization? See Build a Strategic Framework: Mission Statement, Vision, Values ... and How to build an organization based on values.

Characteristics of a Successful Leadership Style

Much is written about what makes successful leaders. In these ten articles, I've focused on the characteristics, traits, and actions that, I believe, are key.

The Roles of Mission, Vision, and Values

Mission, Vision, and Values

Mission and vision both relate to an organization’s purpose and are typically communicated in some written form. Mission and vision are statements from the organization that answer questions about who we are, what do we value, and where we’re going. A study by the consulting firm Bain and Company reports that 90% of the 500 firms surveyed issue some form of mission and vision statements (Bart & Baetz, 1998). Moreover, firms with clearly communicated, widely understood, and collectively shared mission and vision have been shown to perform better than those without them, with the caveat that they related to effectiveness only when strategy and goals and objectives were aligned with them as well (Bart, et. al., 2001).

A mission statement communicates the organization’s reason for being, and how it aims to serve its key stakeholders. Customers, employees, and investors are the stakeholders most often emphasized, but other stakeholders like government or communities (i.e., in the form of social or environmental impact) can also be discussed. Mission statements are often longer than vision statements. Sometimes mission statements also include a summation of the firm’s values. Values are the beliefs of an individual or group, and in this case the organization, in which they are emotionally invested. The Starbucks mission statement describes six guiding principles that, as you can see, also communicate the organization’s values:

1. Provide a great work environment and treat each other with respect and dignity.

2. Embrace diversity as an essential component in the way we do business.

3. Apply the highest standards of excellence to the purchasing, roasting and fresh delivery of our coffee.

4. Develop enthusiastically satisfied customers all of the time.

5. Contribute positively to our communities and our environment.

6. Recognize that profitability is essential to our future success (Starbucks, 2008).

Similarly, Toyota declares its global corporate principles to be:

1. Honor the language and spirit of the law of every nation and undertake open and fair corporate activities to be a good corporate citizen of the world.

2. Respect the culture and customs of every nation and contribute to economic and social development through corporate activities in the communities.

3. Dedicate ourselves to providing clean and safe products and to enhancing the quality of life everywhere through all our activities.

4. Create and develop advanced technologies and provide outstanding products and services that fulfill the needs of customers worldwide.

5. Foster a corporate culture that enhances individual creativity and teamwork value, while honoring mutual trust and respect between labor and management.

6. Pursue growth in harmony with the global community through innovative management.

7. Work with business partners in research and creation to achieve stable, long-term growth and mutual benefits, while keeping ourselves open to new partnerships(Toyota, 2008).

A vision statement, in contrast, is a future-oriented declaration of the organization’s purpose and aspirations. In many ways, you can say that the mission statement lays out the organization’s “purpose for being,” and the vision statement then says, “based on that purpose, this is what we want to become.” The strategy should flow directly from the vision, since the strategy is intended to achieve the vision and thus satisfy the organization’s mission. Typically, vision statements are relatively brief, as in the case of Starbuck’s vision statement, which reads: “Establish Starbucks as the premier purveyor of the finest coffee in the world while maintaining our uncompromising principles as we grow (Starbucks, 2008).” Or ad firm Ogilvy & Mather, which states their vision as “an agency defined by its devotion to brands (Ogilvy, 2008).” Sometimes the vision statement is also captured in a short tag line, such as Toyota’s “moving forward” statement that appears in most communications to customers, suppliers, and employees (Toyota, 2008). Similarly, Wal-Mart’s tag-line version of its vision statement is “Save money. Live better (Walmart, 2008).”

Any casual tour of business or organization Web sites will expose you to the range of forms that mission and vision statements can take. To reiterate, mission statements are longer than vision statements, often because they convey the organizations core values. Mission statements answer the questions of “Who are we?” and “What does our organization value?” Vision statements typically take the form of relatively brief, future-oriented statements—vision statements answer the question “Where is this organization going?” Increasingly, organizations also add a values statement which either reaffirms or states outright the organization’s values that might not be evident in the mission or vision statements.

Roles Played by Mission and Vision

Mission and vision statements play three critical roles: (1) communicate the purpose of the organization to stakeholders, (2) inform strategy development, and (3) develop the measurable goals and objectives by which to gauge the success of the organization’s strategy. These interdependent, cascading roles, and the relationships among them, are summarized in the figure.

Figure 4.5 Key Roles of Mission and Vision

First, mission and vision provide a vehicle for communicating an organization’s purpose and values to all key stakeholders. Stakeholders are those key parties who have some influence over the organization or stake in its future. You will learn more about stakeholders and stakeholder analysis later in this chapter; however, for now, suffice it to say that some key stakeholders are employees, customers, investors, suppliers, and institutions such as governments. Typically, these statements would be widely circulated and discussed often so that their meaning is widely understood, shared, and internalized. The better employees understand an organization’s purpose, through its mission and vision, the better able they will be to understand the strategy and its implementation.

Second, mission and vision create a target for strategy development. That is, one criterion of a good strategy is how well it helps the firm achieve its mission and vision. To better understand the relationship among mission, vision, and strategy, it is sometimes helpful to visualize them collectively as a funnel. At the broadest part of the funnel, you find the inputs into the mission statement. Toward the narrower part of the funnel, you find the vision statement, which has distilled down the mission in a way that it can guide the development of the strategy. In the narrowest part of the funnel you find the strategy —it is clear and explicit about what the firm will do, and not do, to achieve the vision. Vision statements also provide a bridge between the mission and the strategy. In that sense the best vision statements create a tension and restlessness with regard to the status quo—that is, they should foster a spirit of continuous innovation and improvement. For instance, in the case of Toyota, its “moving forward” vision urges managers to find newer and more environmentally friendly ways of delighting the purchaser of their cars. London Business School professors Gary Hamel and C. K. Prahalad describe this tense relationship between vision and strategy as stretch and ambition. Indeed, in a study of such able competitors as CNN, British Airways, and Sony, they found that these firms displaced competitors with stronger reputations and deeper pockets through their ambition to stretch their organizations in more innovative ways (Hamel & Prahalad, 1993).

Third, mission and vision provide a high-level guide, and the strategy provides a specific guide, to the goals and objectives showing success or failure of the strategy and satisfaction of the larger set of objectives stated in the mission. In the cases of both Starbucks and Toyota, you would expect to see profitability goals, in addition to metrics on customer and employee satisfaction, and social and environmental responsibility.

The term effectiveness ought to be equated with „getting things done‟ „achieving results,‟ „making things happen‟ and „being output oriented‟ (Analoui, 1997, p. 6). The context in which effectiveness is explored influences the behaviour however the behaviours speak for themselves. They relate to both personal and organisational life. What makes effective behaviour or the effective manager noticeable is the way these behaviours are employed in order to achieve what is important to them. 24 Whilst these behaviours can occur in different contexts, what gives them especial meaning are their occurrence and their impact in the organisational setting. It is argued that they make all the difference to the development and success of the organisation. The development of the managerial thoughts has been made up of the contributions of many researchers and writers attempting to answer essential questions including; what is nature of managerial work and what do managers do? First, there are those writers who have theorized about the nature of the managers‟ job and have made general statements about their functions (Fayol, 1911; Taylor 1916; Barnard 1938; and Drucker, 1974). Second, there are those who have focused on a more substantial, tangible and observable aspect of what managers actually do (Carlson, 1951; Stewart 1967; Mintzberg, 1973; Kakabades, 1987; Blunt (1992), Analoui, (2002, 2010). Of course, the most important issue to bear in mind is the context in which these theories have been developed. As contextual aspects influence the way these theories are or can be implemented, their implications for the developing countries, such Lebanon are many. Certainly, middle and senior managers tend to shape their organisations through employing goal orientated behaviours and actions. This chapter will address these fundamental questions in an attempt to gain a deeper understanding of the core issues related to the present research: the understanding of the middle and senior managers‟ parameters for their effectiveness and what categories of skills and knowledge managers actually need for their increased effectiveness at work. Therefore, the main objective is first, understand the underlying issues, concepts and theories which have formed the main developmental efforts and mile stones in the field of management. Here the classical, human relations and system theory as the basis for 25 the contemporary attempts towards gaining a deeper understanding of management, managers and their behaviours at work will be emphasized. Second, to capture a comprehensive picture of what managers actually do, the nature of managerial work and what managers do including their assumed roles and their perception of their own and others‟ managerial effectiveness will be discussed. Third, to establish the basis for competencies and abilities required by managers which results in their effective performance at work. And finally, fourth, to closely analyze the recent development in the field of managerial effectiveness and create a framework of analysis that could be used for application in so far as middle and senior management of the UNRWA, Education Programme and their development is concerned. 2.2 The Major Management Schools of Thought During the past century, contributions have been made by scholars and researchers alike in developing the science and art of management, especially concerning the best methods of managing an organisation. Although there were numerous schools and models of management, Stoner and Wankel (1986) and Steers et al. (1996) had defined three major models (perspectives) in the order in which they evolved. These models are the „Traditional Model‟, the „Human Relations Model‟, and the „Human Resources Model‟. In the following section, these models and their influences will be briefly discussed. 2.2.1 The traditional perspective This perspective is related to the scientific management that evolved at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century. It is associated with the era of the industrial revolution, characterized by large-scale factories and high 26 production capacity which created the necessity of setting scientific methods for the management process inside different organisations. This perspective included a group of different schools with one standpoint which was “the economic rationality of management” (Daft, 2003, p. 56). In other words, the dominating idea in this period was that workers can only be motivated by financial rewards, and that effectiveness can be ensured through meeting their psychological needs. Little was said about making a choice of behaviour towards achieving the desired results. Workers main goal was to satisfy the materialistic needs and basic existence (Kakabadse, et al, 1986). Two schools of thought dominated this traditional perspective on management; the „Scientific Management‟, and the „Administrative Management‟. 2.2.1.1 The Scientific Management Frederick Taylor and his followers, namely Henry Gantt, Frank and Lillian Gilberth, and Harrington Emerson are recognized as the founders of the scientific management (Baron and Greenberg, 1990). Raising the efficiency of organisations through adopting the „one best way‟ for accomplishing tasks and concern for replication of the work methods were the main preoccupation of Taylor (Analoui, 1999). However, it was the concern for standardization and output that brought fame for Taylor (Hartley, 2006). Taylor‟s contribution is notably the emphasis on the human motivation and the different ways of maximizing the output in the work settings. He adopted the concepts of the classical economic theory, which viewed the individuals only by their desire for economic rewards (Baron and Greenberg, 1990). Moreover, he believed that Man is a rational being who makes choices based on economic

decisions, thus, managers could use the monetary reward to motivate the workers and ensure that the employee‟s 27 attitude to work is controlled and subsequently their output is optimized. It simply meant that performance and productivity can be increased by associating these to financial rewards. In order to achieve this, Taylor suggested that employees should be provided with a clear, specific work quota, and contended that the more information the workers have about the target to be achieved the more it would enhance their motivation (Thompson and McHugh, 2002). In short, Taylor viewed that effectiveness as resulting from provision of proper economic incentive, redesigning the job, and a methodical approach to work, as main components of the piecework system. Despite its notoriety and excessive focus on “rationality” and “economic” incentives Taylor has been credited for his contribution to the science of management and work. Drucker (1989), the father of managerial effectiveness, saw Taylor as being the first to analyze work as an important element of achieving productivity. Moreover, Baron and Greenberg (1990) commented that it was Taylor who established the link between job performance and motivation. Overall, scientific management was an important step forward in establishing the ground rules for adopting a systematic and scientific approach to work, performance, and productivity by emphasizing the importance of the human element in the production equation (Baron and Greenberg, 1990). Taylor‟s work has had a profound impact on the way management was developed, especially the way workers were to be motivated and their output and productivity controlled (Bedeian, 1989).Gantt, one of the Taylor‟s proponents, concentrated on the 28 importance of workers‟ morale in work settings. Gantt designed a payment scheme that guaranteed minimum payment and a bonus system for employees with fixed payment. In addition, he initiated another motivation for supervisors for every subordinate who managed to finish his required daily workload, plus an extra bonus if all workers finished the set daily work (Pindur et al., 1995). The major contribution of Frank and Lillian Gilbreth to scientific management is known as “time and motion studies” (Pindur et al., 1995). They analyzed the work movements and selected the simplest ones to carry out the work. Their experiment was meant to a) it make it easier for the worker to carry out his job and this positively influences his morale, and b), it gave the impression that the management cared about the employees‟ welfare. They concluded that this approach will in turn, creates good relations between management and workers. This school of thought, like any other management theory has been the subject of severe criticism. It has been suggested that it did not care about the psychological and social needs of people in the workplace. As Herzberg (1976) contends, „Taylorism‟ might have worked efficiently in the past, but nowadays human needs have become complicated and they clash with scientific management principles. Moreover, at the present time it is hard to believe that Man is entirely an „economic man‟. Human‟s behaviour is not only determined by financial incentives but also it is shaped by socialpsychological needs. Moreover, many researchers such as Hertzberg (1964) believed that financial incentives are not strong enough, can only act as hygiene factors and cannot motivate workers. Other motivators such as a sense responsibility, nature of work, and achievement play a greater role in determining the motivation of the people at 29 work. Others argue that higher needs like social and esteem needs play an even more important role in shaping the attitude of people towards work and are therefore more realistic ones. Therefore, it is impossible to claim that economic incentives have enough power to efficiently motivate employees (Stoner and Freeman, 1989; Daft, 2003). In addition, Sridhar (2007) argued that there is no „one best way‟ in performing work, people‟s perceptions are different and what one person may perceive as the best way may not necessarily be the best way for another person. More importantly, another issue raised by the exponent of the scientific management is that the whole notion of work division and specialization would reduce the need for a professional workforce and the need for only less-skilled operators. This will have an adverse affect on the selfesteem of workers simply because there is no need for skill development on the part of the workers (Daft, 2003). 2.2.1.2 Administrative Management Henri Fayol (1841-1925), an important figure in the history of management, is the founder of modern management, because he was arguably the first to develop a framework for studying managerial activities. He is known for attempting to „systematise management‟ (Bedeian, 1989; Analoui, 1999). The difference between the scientific and administrative management can be best illustrated by suggesting that while the former concentrated on identifying the „one best way of accomplishing work‟, the latter focused on establishing „the best way to run an organisation‟. This Bedeian (1989) argues is an important distinction between the two. More importantly, the contribution of Fayol‟s work was to create a sense of effectiveness and harmony by providing principles that were suitable for both large and 30 small organisations, as he developed some managerial concepts that can be applied to all managerial levels. Fayol‟s ideas are still considered valid and applicable, and it is firmly believed by many that his principles are effective. It has been pointed out that a part of Japan‟s success could be attributed to its adherence to Fayol‟s ideas. Some examples of the techniques that Japan adopted are Fayol‟s principles such as “Just in Time Management”, “”Matching

Production and Quality”, “Use of “Quality Circles” and concept of “Participation and use of Inititive” (Archer, 1990, p. 20). Moreover, according to Fayol‟s principles, employees in an organisation will tend to direct their orientation towards their units and departments and not to the organisation as a whole. Finally, applying this concept will hinder the employee‟s self-realization due to his dependency on his direct superior. In hierarchical organisations the supervisors and line managers may act as a barrier for the workers career development and his or her self esteem (Luthans et al. 1985). To summaries the significance of the traditional perspective, management is largely due to emphasis on the concept of work and management of organisations. However, the underlying assumption about the nature of human beings was less than satisfactory it assumed that workers “were […] being typically lazy, often dishonest, aimless, dull, and, most of all, mercenary. To get them into the factories and to keep them there an organisation had to pay a „decent‟ wage, thus outbidding alternative forms of livelihood” (Stoner, 1995, p. 26). These notions and ideas can not be wholly implemented in today‟s work situation. Even in developing countries it has been 31 confirmed that “content factors”, such as recognition, responsibility and advancement, seemed to significantly shape the attitude and behaviour of the people in the workplace. Analoui‟s (1997) study of senior managers in Romania clearly shows that content factors are the motivating forces for senior managers towards their increased effectiveness. Middle and senior managers‟ effectiveness is bound up with a host of factors which each influence the behaviour of managers and therefore their effectiveness in different ways. 2.2.2 The Human Relations A major reaction to the traditional model and the neglect of the people at work was illustrated in the work of industrial psychologists who had been persistently looking for a more comprehensive approach to the management of people, organisations and the importance of human relationships at work. The linkage between workplace attitudes and productivity appeared at the beginning of the last century as a consequence of the Hawthorne‟s studies (Judge et al. 2001),. In 1920, Elton Mayo, a professor from Harvard University, with his colleagues conducted a series of studies on human behaviour at the Western Electric Company plant in Cicero, Illinois between 1924 and 1933 (Carrell et al., 1997). The core of these studies was to place more importance on the human side of management, as they tried to balance between the humanistic aspects (people related) and the technical aspects (task related aspects) of scientific management. The people related aspects placed more emphasis on the individuals‟ differences and the impact on the ways by which people and work can be effectively managed (Analoui, 2002). 32 Elton Mayo (1945) rejected the notion of economic man and he believed that management should focus on the human and social aspects of the workplace (Bedeian, 1989; Greenberg and Baron, 1997; Analoui, 2002). These studies pointed to the importance of the formation of the work groups and their dynamics in relation to leadership, communications, motivation, conflict resolution and work design. In 1970‟s the external influences such as legislation, employment law and other protective elements led to the recognition of the need for the emergence of a group of professionals, namely personnel managers, who could deal with complex people related issues and needs that managers were not able to (Mullins, 2005; Analoui, 2007). According to Steers et al. (1996), the aspect of human relations greatly affected the relationships at work as it produced a collection of motivation strategies which could be employed by managers at all level for moving towards increased effectiveness. Managers, especially line managers, were charged with the responsibility for making workers feel that they matter and felt obliged to provide them with feedback, recognition, and generally attempt to satisfy their socio- psychological needs. Second, management focused on the importance of encouraging communication, including interpersonal one, between employees and management by opening vertical communication channels. Third, employees have the chance to make routine decisions which satisfy their feeling of autonomy (Mullins, 2005). Maybe the most important development, as mentioned earlier, is the recognition of the formation of work groups and its undeniable affect on the satisfaction of the employees and their productivity. Managers realized that the formation of groups, norms and prescriptive behaviours, all regulated the behaviour of the people at work and naturally led to better output and productivity. The notion of self regulation and autonomy desired by work groups helped 33 the managers especially the senior manages to achieve more and become even more effective. Mayo (1945) saw managers‟ main responsibility as meeting employees‟ psychological needs and he believed that happy workforce will be more productive. The relationship between social interaction and improved performance means that managers need to deal with people related issues differently to ensure their own effectiveness (Boone and Bowen, 1987; Analoui, 1999). Moreover, according to Mayo (1945), managers ought to make more effort to create a workplace environment conducive to better interaction. Also, it was thought that it would be desirable to involve employees in all aspects of their work and ensure that supervisors ask workers about their opinions and keep them informed about all changes that are made (Boone and Bowen, 1987). Therefore, the humanitarian view of the human relations‟ school of thought required a

new set of managerial strategies to improve the people related skills of managers and supervisors and to replace the individual reward plans with the group reward plans. As will be illustrated later, the above proposed areas of improvement correspond with two important parameters of the managerial effectiveness (Analoui, 1999, 2007). Hence managers, especially senior managers are expected to concentrate on the effectiveness of themselves and other employees rather than being preoccupied with managerial functions. The change from technical to social managers brought a new range of responsibilities. Also as Roth (1993) commented, managers became aware that their effectiveness is very much linked to their employees‟ satisfaction, self esteem and overall competences to get the job done. 34 A great deal of criticism has been directed to Hawthorne‟s studies. This is mainly concerned with the methodology they employed in conducting the study. The criticisms were centred round the use of a small sample and the lack of control over the study, the instability of the incentive plans, and the changing of participant numbers while conducting the experiments (Sonnenfeld, 1985). Furthermore, it has been argued that human relations has exaggerated the human aspects as compared to the interest of the organisation as a whole, as the theory concentrated on fulfilling the needs of each worker hence neglected the formal work groups, and the organisation as the whole. Moreover, the concept of the social man on which the theory was based has also been criticized (Stoner and Freeman, 1989). From their point of view, the concept failed to give a complete description of the members inside the workplace and concentrated only on the psychological rather than the social aspects. It is also argued that the techniques of the human relation theory gave workers a false sense of happiness and were not actually concerned with their interests. 2.2.3 Contemporary management approaches As stated earlier, neither of the above management perspectives replaced an earlier perspective nor did any cease to exist after the introduction of new perspectives. Both traditional and human relations perspectives are still in use in different shapes and forms. Of course, the most prevalent is the Human Resource Perspective. This has also been undergoing some changes in recent times (Daft, 1998). There have been some extensions of the Human Resource Perspective and two such extensions are the Systems Theory and the Contingency Theory. 2.2.3.1 The system theory 35 The Systems Theory was an attempt to resolve the dilemma associated with management problems. It was mainly influenced by the changing environment, mainly the technological advancements which brought the people and organisations closer to one another. Analoui contends that this perspective attempts to reconcile the assumptions of the Classical and the Human Relations approaches and to unify many fields of knowledge such as physics, biology, social sciences (Analoui, 1998). It focuses on the total work organisation and the interrelationships of structure and behaviour, and the range of variables within the organisation (Analoui and Inamori, 2010; Johnson and Scholes, 2007; von Bertalanffy, 1950). The Systems approach is premised on the assumption that organisations have similar characteristics to other living organisms and views the organisation as a complex system made up of subsystems with a single objective (Hanna, 1997). Writers in this field supported the notion that as a system, the organisation functions by acquiring various inputs from its external environment, transforming them as output and discharging the output into the environment (Terry and Franklin, 1982; Terry, 1977; Miller and Rice, 1967; Trist, 1963). All the elements must receive sufficient and appropriate inputs in order to provide sufficient output (Kakabadse et. al., 1987; Stewarts, 1982). Similarly, in order to attain cost-effectiveness and survive, the system needs to be opened both internally and externally, and to interact with its environment by changing its structure and internal processes (Analoui, 1999, 2007). The view that the organisation is made up of interdependent parts and that a change in one part affects the others suggests that in solving problems within the organisation, managers must view the organisation as a dynamic whole and attempt to anticipate both the intended and unintended effects of their actions on other parts of the system. The managers 36 therefore need to employ their management functions of planning, organizing and controlling effectively. From the Systems Theory point of view the effectiveness of middle and senior managers and the leadership of the organisation will be largely determined by the factors which may or may not be in their control (Analoui, et al., 2010). The ever changing environment will have special relevance for their effectiveness and the way they approach their tasks strategically (Analoui, 2007; Martinez and Martineau, 2001). Research has shown that senior managers who show awareness of the open system in which they perform are likely to be more effective that those who don‟t (Analoui, 1999). 2.2.3.2 The contingency approach The term „Contingency Approach‟ was suggested by two American academics, Lawrence and Lorsch (1967). In using the term, the authors such as Burns and Stralker (1966); Woodward (1965); Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) and Pugh and Hickson (1976) state that evidence suggests that variables in organisations are so volatile that only a „Contingency Approach‟ can prove practicable. The Contingency Approach is not in opposition to the earlier approaches, it however adopts them as part of a „mix‟ which could be applied to an organisation in a particular set of situations (Cole, 1994). It does not seek to produce universal prescriptions or principles of

behaviour. It, however, deals in relativities rather than absolutes fashion. It is therefore a situational approach to management (Mullins, 2005; Daft, 1998; Cole, 1994). The Contingency Approach postulates that the successful resolution of organisational problems depends on the ability of a manager to identify the key variables in the situations at hand. Researches, 37 so far, have demonstrated that there is no „one best way‟ of designing organisations to meet their current needs as suggested by the scientific managers (Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967; Woodward, 1965). Originally the Contingency Approach was developed within sociology under the name Structural Functionalism (Armstrong, 1996; Gluckman, 1964). In its crude, deterministic form, it implies that the internal structure and its system are a direct function of the environment (Burns and Stalkers, 1961). The approach highlights possible means of differentiating between alternative forms of organisation structures and systems of management. The contingency approach argues that there is „no optimum state‟ (Mullins, 2005). For example, the structure of the organisation and it‟s „success‟ are dependent upon the nature of tasks with which it is designed to deal and the nature of the environmental influence. The most appropriate structure and system of management therefore, will depend on the contingencies of the situation for each particular organisation. Even though the works of the proponents of the Contingency Approach have been criticised as being based on a very small sample, relying on rather subjective information and employing unreliable measures, Cole contends the contingency theory “represents a most important step forward in the search for a theory of organisations that could take account of the variables affecting the structure of successful organisations” (1994, p. 80). 2.2.4 Modern approaches to management theory Modern organisations and management theorists are facing a number of key issues originating from today‟s ever changing environment. However with their work, they are helping practicing managers to deal with such important issues (Analoui and Karami, 38 2003). The search for better, and more effective and efficient ways of providing goods and services as well as the desire to understand the external world of the organisation and learning how to cope with the changes in the environment are now stronger than before (Cole, 1994). In addition, the appreciation of the importance of human skills, ingenuity and motivation has grown with the arrival of new technologies. These, in addition to the expanding economic activities throughout the globe, have raised some management issues. Cole (2000) has listed about fourteen key management issues that have been identified by modern exponents of management theory. He has however argued that these issues need not be considered in isolation as they are interrelated in a way. For example, the mission or goals of the organisation will influence the kind of organisational structure it should develop. Hence, modern management theorists can be grouped into two: i) Those who reflect on the work and insights of others with the view to producing new ways of seeing and acting on problems they might be facing (theorists), and, ii) Those who have to meet the real challenges of managing their organisations and therefore look up to the „experts‟ for help and advice (Practitioners). Most of the theorists are academics with a strong research background, while most of the practitioners are practicing management consultants, some of whom hold academic positions throughout the world. 2.2.5 Changing paradigm of management: Towards learning organisations The world of organisations and management is also changing (Analoui and Karami, 2003). Rapid environmental changes are the cause of fundamental transformations with a dramatic impact on the managers‟ job (Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2000; Dimmock, 39 1999; Stoner et al, 1995). These transformations, in turn represent a shift from a traditional to a new paradigm of management (see Table 2.1). A paradigm is a shared mind-set that represents a fundamental way of thinking about, perceiving and understanding the world (Analoui and Karami, 2003). Traditionally, the whole organisation has been coordinated and controlled through the vertical hierarchy, with decision making authority residing with upper-level managers. Within the new paradigm, the primary responsibility of managers is not solely defined as making decisions, but rather to create learning capability throughout the organisation (Jordan and Jones, 1997). Managers are no longer seen being responsible for functions and operatives, in the learning organisation, top managers are leaders who play a special role in forming the organisation, with their vision for the future that is widely understood and imprinted throughout the organisation. It has been commented that „learning organisations are capable of learning, and not only learning but also disseminating and applying the learning individually and collectively‟ (Analoui, 2007, p. 304). Employees are empowered to identify and solve problems because they understand the vision and long-term goals of the organisation (Pfeffer, 1995). Table 2.1: The changing paradigm of management

Old paradigm New paradigm (Vertical organisation) (Learning organisation) Forces on organisations Markets

Local, Domestic Global Workforce Homogeneous Diverse Technology Mechanical Electronic Values Stability,

Efficiency Change, Chaos Management competencies Focus Profit Customers, Employees Leadership Autocratic

Dispersed, Empowering Doing work By individuals By teams Relationship Conflict, Competition Collaboration 40 Source: Adopted from Analoui and Karami (2003) The most striking change now affecting organisations and

management is globalization. Taking a global view of the world has become a necessity for virtually every company and manager (Chimerine, 1997; Kakabadse et al, 1996). The emergence of the new theme, namely globalization, has meant competition and the need for becoming competitive. This has also triggered a need for new management approaches that emphasize the empowerment of workers and involvement of employees. Today managers, especially the senior managers, whether in the private or public sectors, have to understand cross-cultural patterns and often work with team members from many different countries. Diversity of the workforce has become a fact and a necessity of life for all organisations, even those that do not operate globally (Analoui and Lampart, 2011; Analoui, 2007; Schluer, 1992). The major change in technology is concerned with its nature. This has created a significant shift in management paradigm; today technology is electronic rather than mechanical. Information technology facilitates new ways of working, such as virtual teams and telecommunicating that challenge traditional methods of management and control (Analoui and Karami, 2003; Kakabadse, et al, 1987). In the face of these rapid transformations, organisations are learning to value change over stability. The fundamental assumption during much of the twentieth century was a belief that things can be stable and efficient. In contrast, the new paradigm is based on the presence of 41 change and chaos as the natural order of things (Tattenbaum, 1998). The change to the new paradigm of management means that managers now must rethink their approach to organizing, directing and motivating workers (Analoui and Karami, 2003). 2.2.5.1 What Do Managers Do? A main difficulty in describing the managerial job is that there is no certain definition of what managers actually do. Managers are involved in a great deal of activities and fulfil different roles (Analoui, et al, 2010). Levitt (1991) points out that, „managers do many different things, but there are three things they must do well. They must: (1) think about the purpose of the organisation and the direction in which it should be going; (2) foster, promote and manage change; and (3) conduct operations in an effective and efficient manner‟. These activities are important. But how do managers accomplish these demanding tasks? Mintzberg (1973) is a major figure in answering the above question. Indeed, attempts have been made to study managers and hereby gain insights into what managers actually do and how the managerial tasks are actually achieved. One of the most comprehensive summaries of these finding is that of Hales (1986). In this review several fundamental issues have been discussed. One of the contentious issues raised is, to what extent does what managers do match what managers ought to do in order to maximize organisational performance? Hales‟ (1986) study was particularly comprehensive because an attempt was made not just to look at the activities managers perform but to “shed light on five major areas … about

managerial work” (Hales, 1986, p. 90). These areas are: 42 The elements of managerial work (what managers do)

The distribution of a manager‟s time between work elements (how managers work) The interactions of

managers (with whom managers work) The informal elements of managerial work (what else managers do) The themes that pervade managerial work (the qualities or characteristics of managerial work) The review of the modern management literature revealed the presence of a body of knowledge. First, management work combines managerial elements with specialty and professional elements. Managers almost always perform some non-managerial functions in the course of doing their jobs. Second, the substantive elements of management work entail providing connections, managerial human behaviour, and assuming responsibility for getting work done. Next, the nature of a manager‟s work varies by duration, time span, and unexpectedness. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, to predict the variety of a manager‟s work during a given period. Managers spend a great deal of time with everyday troubleshooting and solving ad hoc problems (Mulline, 2005; Kakabadse, et al, 1976). Managers are engaged in persuading others using face-to-face communication encounters. As a result, there is little time to spend on any particular activity or in the formulation of systematic plans. A great deal of the manager‟s time is spent accounting for and explaining what they want, and engaging in informal „politicking‟ and in conflict resolution. It was also noted that managers are able to exercise considerable 43 choice in terms of what they do and how they do it. These generalisations summarise much of the research on managerial behaviour and work (Duncan, 1999, p. 28; Kakabadse, 1997). However, other writers have suggested different ways of looking at what managers do (Mintzberg, 1973). 2.2.5.2 Roles Managers Perform The most notable study which formed a mile stone in management theory is that management scholar Mintzberg (1973; 1980), who followed several managers around for one week each and recorded everything that they did (Mintzberg 1980). Despite the extremely small sample, his view of the manager‟s job has been quoted often in the management literature (Analoui, 1999). In documenting their activities, Mintzberg reached some interesting conclusions about the manager‟s work methods and about several major roles that managers play. Mintzberg viewed the manager‟s job as a series of roles assumed throughout the process of achieving organisational goals (Karami et al., 2006; Mintzberg, 1993). Three major categories of roles were identified. Each had a series of subcategories. The three main categories included

interpersonal, informational, and decisional roles. 2.2.5.3 The Interpersonal Roles As the name implies, the interpersonal roles, involve the manager in developing relationships with other people and groups. This category of roles directly influences the status and the authority of the manager. Frequently managers are called on to perform as figureheads and to render ceremonial and symbolic acts. It is reported that on a 5-day trip to India and South Africa, for example, Microsoft‟s Bill Gates spent much of his 44 16-hour days holding press interviews, submitting to photo sessions, and making speeches (Schlender, 1997, pp 72- 81). Managers, in their interpersonal relations, are also expected to function as leaders and to motivate others as well as providing for effective staffing and training activities (Analoui, 2007). 2.2.5.4 The Informational Roles of Managers Sometimes the manager is seen as the monitor or nerve centre of information flow in the organisation. The informational roles of managers involve receiving and transmitting information. In this role the manager is a dispatcher, routing information to different internal and external groups. Sometimes the role is more that of the disseminator of information. Once the manager receives the information, it must be selectively shared with people in the organisation, and choices must be made about who will benefit from the sharing of information most directly. In High Output Management, Grove (1985) provides a diary of “a day in his life” as the chief executive of Intel. One 2-hour block of time in Grove‟s day was spent lecturing to the employee orientation programme. This programme was designed to afford senior managers an opportunity to provide new professional employees with information on company objectives, history, and expectations. Information is disseminated in this way to a select group of employees (Duncan, 1999, p. 29). Mintzberg‟s (1973) research presented the first real attempt at defining the management roles in a comprehensive way and with relevance at all levels. Not surprisingly, he has been seen as the founder of classical management theory, which has been criticized for 45 being too general for current complex organisations and unable to deal with the more rapidly changing organisational environments of today (Stoner and Freeman, 1989). 2.2.5.5 Decisional Roles The third category of Mintzberg‟s classification of roles is that of „decisional roles‟. These roles are diverse and far ranging. They can include everything from scheduling one‟s own time to negotiating with the labour union. When the manager acts as an entrepreneur, they search the environment for new and challenging opportunities. The entrepreneurial role involves taking the risks necessary to succeed in a competitive industry. The role of disturbance handler is assumed as the manager attempts to correct or fine-tune the organisation‟s progress toward goals when things knock the operations off course. Frequently managers are expected to function as resource allocators and make decisions concerning whether or not to commit organisational resources to alternative uses. In one case, Grove (1985) made a decision not to grant a manager a pay increase that would have placed him outside the normal salary range for such a job. This was a resource-allocating decision. Finally, managers assume the role of negotiator when they bargain with employees, their bosses, or outside groups such as the labour union. 46 Figure 2.1 Fayol‟s Distinction of Organisation Activities Sources: Stoner and Freeman, 1989, p. 25 As shown in figure 2.1 the original classification of management functions, Gullick and Urwick (1954) has been introduced. Other writers such as Apply (1965) also included planning, executing and controlling in this analysis of managerial work. Prasad (1985), in this review of the writers on the functions of management, summarizes that Davies (1951) included planning, organising and controlling as the functions of top management. Brech (1972), on the other hand, added motivating to the functions of Technical Financial Accounting Managerial Activities Organising Coordinating Planning Commanding Control Operating Activities Commercial Security Overall Organisation 47 planning, organising, co-ordinating and controlling. Breck‟s work can be compared with that of Koontz and O‟Donnell‟s (1976), how in addition to planning, organising, directing and staffing also treat evaluation and representation as important managerial functions (Analoui 1997). Dale (1965) has gone further and treats innovation and presentation also as important managerial functions. Drucker (1974) adds even more functions to this list namely: motivation, communication, measurement and the development of people including the managers themselves. The latter is an interesting addition particularly in the context of the present study, since it highlights the fact that effective management not only requires the development of task and people, but also it requires the development of the manager‟s own skills and competences (Analoui, 1999, 2007). Kakabadse; et al (1988), has developed a schematic model of managerial activities in which a distinction is made between 'people' and 'task' related aspects of managerial work (See Figure 2.2). Indeed, according to Levitt (1991), he argued that the work of managers is much less structured than visualized by Henry Fayol. He states that managers do many different things, but there are three things they must do well. They must: (1) think about the purpose of the organisation and the direction in which it should be going; (2) promote, foster and manage change; and (3) conduct operations in an effective and efficient manner. These activities are important. But how do managers accomplish these demanding tasks? In this respect, the main question is how to gain insights into what managers actually do and how the

managerial tasks are actually achieved. However, it 48 can be criticised in the accounts provided by the proponents of the managerial skills who advocate the need for development of self and analytical skills and competences. Figure 2.2: Wheel of Managerial Functions Source: Kakabadse et al., (1988, p. 10), Working In Organisations, Penguin Books. It can be concluded from the foregone discussion that, first, management work combines managerial elements with specialty and professional elements. Managers almost always perform some non-managerial functions in the course of doing their jobs. Second, the substantive elements of management work entail providing connections, managing human behaviour, and assuming responsibility for getting work done. Next, the nature of a manager‟s work varies by duration, time span, and unexpectedness. It is difficult, perhaps impossible, to predict the variety of a manager‟s work during a given period. Managers spend a great deal of time with every-day troubleshooting and solving ad-hoc problems. 49 Moreover, managers play different roles in the organisation. It is therefore recognised that managers who perform at the various hierarchical levels might require not only different skills – concerned with people rather than with operation - but also more of one than the other (Analoui, 1999, Kakabadse, et al., 1988). The recent studies by Analoui (1993, 2002) and Labbaf (1996) have also pointed out that while the above two categories of skills, namely task and people, are essential for the increased effectiveness of the senior managers, there are also other skills which have been largely overlooked mainly because managers have been perceived and distinguished as being passive rather than capable of recognising their own need for self-development. This is partly seen as an unintended consequence of adopting a prescriptive rather than descriptive approach towards the study and explanation of managerial behaviour and their notion of their job (Analoui, 2003). In nutshell, it can be agreed that classical definition of a manager‟s job in terms of a set of functions is not entirely a suitable way of viewing managerial work, simply because its main shortcoming is that it does not identify the various skills and knowledge that are required to perform these functions effectively. 2.2.6 The Nature of Managerial Works: Empirical Studies Arguably the development of the management literature has been based on the assumption that a useful generalisation can be made about the nature of managerial 50 work. The answer to the question, what constitutes the nature of managerial work? Is indeed closely related to our understanding of what managers are for and what they do when they are at work. Once their functions (Fayol, 1911), major responsibilities (Drucker, 1974), activities, demands and constraints placed on them, their choices (Stewart, 1963; Drucker, 1974), the major roles which they perform (Mintzberg, 1975), the aspects of their work and their major concerns (Analoui, 2003) are understood, then it would be feasible to determine the characteristics or basic components of their job and ultimately what they need to learn in order to do their job effectively. Therefore, the „universal‟ principles‟ of managerial actions were emphasised and promoted widely, first in western and technologically advanced economies and later exported to developing and less developed countries. Empirical studies on the work of managers so far have provided answers to five underlying questions about managerial work; (1) what do managers do? (2) How do managers work? (3) With whom do managers work? (4) What else do managers do? and (5) what quality does managerial work have? Therefore, in this context it is expected that the following review provides the kind of answers with proven implications for management training and development as a whole and the training and development of the senior managers in particular (Hales, 1986). A new approach dominated the traditional approach to the search for „universal principles‟. This is based on the supposition that a useful generalization about the nature of managerial work could be made, of managerial action, and emphasized on a thorough examination of managerial jobs. Carlson launched the first study of the managerial (executive) behaviour of one French and nine Swedish managing directors. Carlson 51 (1951) used a mixed methodology mainly a diary technique, checklist, and questionnaire in an attempt to investigate working time, communication patterns and work content of Swedish directors. However, he concluded that 'the managers' working day to a large extent was determined by what was written in their diaries (Carlson, 1951, p. 73) Carlson used the phrase „diary complex‟ to describe the way in which the executives in his study used their appointments diaries in an attempt to control the apparent randomness and unpredictability of their working days. He found that the managing directors spent most of their total working times in contact with other people. It was Carlson who first reported that the executive‟s time was repeatedly disrupted and they had to deal with varied issues on a less planned basis. He defined communication as the methods used in contacting other people. Carlson‟s pioneering study, (1951) and contribution revealed for the first time some of the things that were involved in the „work content‟ of top management and paved the way for observational studies into the actual work of executives and senior managers. As Willis (1984) aptly points out, Carlson had the development of managers in mind when he reviewed the point of his study to obtain material for selecting and training top executives. Indeed, Carlson‟s study set a new pattern that rested on a direct approach to research into management and shifted attention from

abstract and generalized statements of what managers ought to do, to a more precise notion of what they actually do in carrying out their daily responsibilities (Mumford, 1984; Willis, 1984). However, due to the limitation of the technique used in data collection it could not draw a comprehensive picture of the work involved in every day of the executive‟s life and was the subject of a great deal of criticism (Hughes, 1988). 52 Following the direct approach to research into what it is that managers actually do, a study was launched by Burns (1957) to investigate the work of managers by surveying 76 executives in eight English firms and focused his attention on how these managers spend their time at work. Because of the inherent limitations of the diary method, he used time sheets instead and asked managers to mark one of the pre-arranged categories. He reported that the average respondent in his survey worked 41.5 hours per week, of which six hours were spent away from the firm. Burns also suggested that managers spend comparatively small proportions of their time with their direct subordinates (Burns, 1957, p. 47). The studies carried out by Labbaf (1996) and Sayles (1964) point to the fragmented nature of the executives work and the need for skills for dealing with people. According to Mintzberg (1973), one of the most significant descriptions of managerial work behaviour is that of Sayles (1964), which was based on a field experience of several years‟ research on the behaviour of lower and middle-level managers in one division of a large American corporation. Sayles also confirmed the findings of Burn, Copman and Luijk that managers had a wide variety of contacts and relationships other than those with their subordinates (Analoui, 1997, p. 18). He asserts that a typical manager is „an enormously active person and he or she works with and through people. Sayles viewed the managerial work behaviour as a series of roles which are played by managers especially at lower levels, irrespective of the differences of their activities in the jobs. These roles included monitoring, maintaining relationships, negotiating, disturbance handling and leading which were performed by the lower and middle-level managers. These roles also appeared in the list of managerial behaviour reported by (Mintzberg, 1973). 53 2.2.6.1 Patterns of Managerial Work The nature of the managerial work has been described clearly, as has the nature of the manager‟s job based on some commonly known features drawn from both the theories and demonstrated facts. A distinction has been made in the manager‟s functions between deciding what to do and arranging for it to be done. She suggests a simple and practical definition and broadly defines the manager‟s job as, 'deciding what should be done and then getting other people to do it' (Stewart, 1963, p. 65). She further explains how these two tasks, which are actually overlapping in practice, demand different sets of capabilities from managers. The first task she explains; demands that the manager should be capable of setting objectives, planning, making decisions, and organizing the work organisation. The second task requires the manager‟s ability of motivation, communication, measurement, and control as well as the development of other people. Managerial jobs, are best viewed as a combination of 'thinking' and 'doing' in the form of 'judgment and decision' leading to the achievement of effective performance. Therefore, a significant feature of this role must lie in the accountability that it entails. By virtue of its responsibilities, it is the job of management to get things done through other people, and thereby to manage both the work and the people involved. It is important to note that Stewart‟s work has the advantage of simplicity and focuses on what in reality is at the heart of effective management. Stewart (1963) contends that functional analysis of management is limited in the selection and the training of managers. The diversity that features managerial jobs 54 reduces the value of generalization about manager‟s functions. Therefore, it is argued that lists of management functions “ignore the diversity of management: that the job of a top manager bears little resemblance to that of the junior manager, or that being a coke-oven manager in a steel mill is hardly comparable with being an advertising manager to a popular shoe manufacture” (Stewart, 1963, p. 66) . Stewarts adds that the manager‟s job varies considerably with respect to three main factors: functions of the job, level of the job, and the situation of the firms and that the rate of change associated to these factors can transform the nature of managerial jobs. Campbell et al., (1970) also concurs with Stewart and holds that managerial jobs differ substantially from one to another and that the work of particular managers differs greatly because of differences in individual characteristics, situational variables, and organisational contexts. These differences have also been highlighted by Analoui (2002, 2010). It is also argued, that one aspect of the managers‟ job is „task-related‟ while this aspect of the managers‟ behaviour and concern varies according to the level of seniority in which he or she operates, the organisational context and even the nature of the business. Yet, the fact remains that all managerial works, regardless of the diversity and differences in the above factors, do share a task-related aspect as part of the overall picture of their features (Analoui, 1993, 1995; Labbaf and Analoui, 2003; Analoui, 2007). Thus, it is argued that most theorist concentrate on the similarities in managers‟ job. There are similarities in the activities of the specialists in that they all „manage people and get things done‟, and there are differences in terms of the knowledge and skills which they apparently require, as well as the problems which they may encounter 55 during the course of their daily activities. Differences

are also found at different levels in which the managers perform: the higher the position of a manager in the hierarchy of the organisation, the more he or she will be involved in policy-making and the greater their responsibility will become. The situational factors such as size, structure, outputs, and the organisation‟s position in industry can account for the performance variation. It is concluded that, the application of universal description of managerial functions in selection and training is so limited therefore the need is for specific descriptions based on what managers actually do or how they do it. The researcher believes that this concluding remark is central to any in-depth study of management development, since it incorporates this main idea that management is a grouping of people fulfilling similar roles in terms of four functions of planning organizing, motivating, and controlling. These functions are at the same time engaged in jobs that in many cases are bound to be different with respect to their contextual factors. It is therefore suggested that managers‟ jobs need to be analyzed in both behavioural and functional terms (Stewarts, 1963; Kakabadse, 1986; Analoui, 2002). 2.3 Management Development: Education and Training Nowadays, in both developed and developing countries, training and development of the human resources is considered as a cultural, social, economic and political development strategy (Analoui, 2007). In other words, education, training and development make up the „human resource function‟ of the „Human Resource Management‟ and at the same time have different objectives. Economically, the education and training of human resources is considered a long-term strategy whose benefits have always been significant (Machlup, 1982). 56 This study also holds that training and development of the middle and senior managers of the UNRWA is important and should be considered in any study which attempts to unravel the nature of managerial effectiveness. The education and training of managers, on one hand, is the most important means for development, on the other hand, it provides the substructure of development of all including development goals. Therefore, today, the role and importance of education of human resources is emphasised as a means to increase and hasten the speed of economic development (Analoui, 2002; 2007). Understandably, this requires a large portion of the LDCs' annual increase to be allocated for the purpose. „In 1988, the United Nation Centre for Development and Education made a comprehensive study of the policies of education and training, and occupational education. In this study, the researchers of forty-five countries considered work force education as the first and most necessary factor in economic development. One of the other significant findings of this research was that occupational education and the learning of special occupational skills, are the most important and necessary educational requirement of LDCs‟ (UNDP, 1989, p. 52). The experiences of Japan and Korea and their success in increasing the economic growth and advances in human resources are in agreement with these views. These two countries, diligently and responsibly, have put much emphasis on the training of the work force, eventually leading to their economic growth and an increase in all aspects of development (World Bank, 1991, p. 52). 2.3.1 The Importance of Management Development 57 The prerequisite to development is not only the socio-political and economic development, rather the presence of the efficient and responsible managers who manage these organisations (Kiggundo, 1989, p. 294; Analoui and Almadhoun, 2002). Almost all organisations have a strategic goal and managers are expected to achieve them via directing the integrated human and material resources towards these strategic goals (Mullins, 1993). Today, it has been understood that economic stability is not enough and more emphasis then ever has to be placed on organisations and their management. Management, together with other traditional production factors, provides a key factor in stable development and the quality of management on various levels of a country and, expresses the real situation of the process of economic and social development of the country (Ndegwa, 1987). „In the past, most economists believed that economic development depends on the multitude of capital, human and material resources‟ (Drucker, 1974, p. 20). This traditional viewpoint has been challenged in recent years. It has been believed that only via the adjusting role of efficient managers can these economic resources bear fruit. Drucker (1974), one of the prominent writers in management, argues that economic and social development mostly reflects better management. He claims that wherever only economic factors of production have been utilised, development has not really occurred. But where creative management forces are present and their education have been utilised, rapid development has occurred. He believes that 'development is not caused by wealth, but it is caused by fruitful efforts of humans on all the activity scenes of the society'. He believes that management is the most important factor of economic and social development and that correct management makes comprehensive development possible (Drucker, 1974, p. 35). However, he does not consider the LDCs as underdeveloped, but considers them as trapped by bad management. 58 Two obvious examples of Asian countries are Japan and Indonesia; they proved the central role of management in any countries' development. Among the Asian countries, Indonesia is one of the richest in natural resources, but Japan is among the poorest. However, Japan is one of the most successful countries of the world, and Indonesia has

just emerged from the list of backward countries. The Netherlands is another example in Europe for effective management in the whole society. Large parts of this country in the not so far away past were covered by water, but due to good management, it is one of the most successful countries of the world (Patil, 1979). Management makes a vital connection among economic development, organisational fruitfulness and the functions of humans. Because, on one hand, the functions of management and guidance of managers affect the quality of efforts of humans, and on the other hand, the quality of the function of the human resources of an organisation is the most important factor in determining the fruitfulness of the activities of that organisation. Thus, managers are among the high-level human resources of a country, and they are usually held responsible for the strategic aspect of their organisations (Harbison and Myers, 1965; Analoui, 2002). Management is a determining factor in how to use other resources, and how to integrate and harmonise them. Therefore, management has a double effect on the production process of an institute, and thus the quality of the management of an organisation is its most important weak or strong point. Therefore, the quality of management is the most important factor in the realisation of the social, economic and political goals of the country (Narayansuwami,1991, p. 155). Managers are the most important factors in success or failure of organisations, so many managerial theorists believe that 59 management at all levels, especially higher levels, affects the productivity of an organisation (Robbins, 1997). Drucker (1974), believes that managers are the basic resource and valuable elements in any organisation, but they also wear most rapidly and need regular training and development most of all. He believes that 'it takes years to train a group of efficient managers, and that unfortunately this resource wears in a short time due to mishandling'. That is the quality of management and guidance of an organisation determines how to direct its work force (Drucker, 1974, p. 379). The personal function of a manager reflects his abilities, capabilities and motives. The range of effects of the managers in the job environment is more than from other personnel; therefore, the benefits from a proficient manager are more than the benefits from any other people within the organisation. Therefore, putting emphasis on the training of managers is believed to bring about more benefits than emphasising on the training of others in the organisations (Jkenney and Donneld, 1972). Management education is usually referred to as a formal educational programme that is designed to lead to formal academic qualifications and the earning of a university degree (Kerrigan and Luke 1987). Its objective however, is to improve managerial abilities with respect to knowledge, skills and attitudes. Unlike training, management education does not concentrate on a certain task in the organisation, but focuses on a wider area that is more of academic interest. Peddler et al. (1986) when discussing management development objectives add five more to the list as relevant domains that need to be considered. These are; 60 1. Cognitive: knowledge. 2. Affective: attitudes and feelings. 3. Psychomotor: mainly manual skill. 4. Interpersonal: person-to-person skills, blending specific cognitive, affective, and psychomotor skills in face-to-face interactions. 5. Self-knowledge: personal growth and an expanded awareness of one‟s strengths and weaknesses As Gage and Berliner (1979) noted, the domains of management development and training, and education are so overlapping that in reality it is difficult to isolate the specific behaviour from the other. However, they provide a useful framework for understanding management education objectives. As explained in chapter one, the aim of the present study is to explore the managerial effectiveness of the middle and senior managers in the Educational Programme UNRWA in Lebanon. Amongst the benefits of this study, it is hoped that the results will allow the researcher to recommend a set of management development skills and competencies that can improve the effectiveness of the senior managers in the future. Hence, the framework of the analysis will be concerned with exploring the extent to which the parameters of “managerial effectiveness” identified in the literature will be relevant to the study of management development of the middle and senior managers in Lebanon. 61 2.4 Eight Parameters of Managerial Effectiveness: An Exploratory Framework With the recent concern for reform and adoption of new leadership and management within the UN much attention has been given to the effectiveness of the middle and senior managers, as leaders and their performance by theorists, management researchers, developers and practitioners in developed, developing countries (DCs) and traditional economies (TEs) (Margerison et al, 1987; Kakabadse, 1983; Kotter, 1982). This organisational phenomenon, illusive in nature, has been known and labelled as a concept which is difficult to quantify (Bennet and Brodie, 1979), and even more difficult to measure (Analoui, 1994), yet it is often talked about and has attracted much interest from lateral and multi-lateral agencies, and has also been acknowledged by serious researchers such as and Mintzberg (1973), Margerison et al (1987) and Analoui (1998), Managerial effectiveness within DCs and Tes, however, has hitherto evolved mainly around, not the managers, but the organisational setting (Mullins, 2005), social, cultural and political contexts (Analoui 1995; 1997), and has been debated within the boundaries of an open system theory (Willcocks, 1992). The recent surge of interest from academia points to the managers‟ own choices, and the contentious issue that

managers‟ performance is inevitably contingent upon and affected by the casual and behavioural influences within their immediate and wider socio-economic and cultural setting (Mullins, 2005). This includes their perception and understanding of what constitutes effectiveness in a particular context (Analoui and Karami, 2003). 62 Middle and senior managers are believed to make a major contribution towards the well-being and development of their nations in a particular economy (Blunt, 1992). The questions and issues which have not been adequately addressed, especially within DCs‟ and TCs‟ contexts, concern the causes and sources of influences, including the managers‟ own perception, which influence the degree of effectiveness of the individual senior managers and executives, and arguably their organisations and nations as a whole. Analoui (1999) argues that despite the considerable attention given to managers and their effectiveness in the last few decades, a great deal of confusion, misunderstanding and concern still surrounds the subject. He continued that recently, attention has been drawn to the importance of the role of the public sector to the realization of the growth and development of the developing world. Analoui‟s (1999) research in managerial effectiveness is a major contribution to the study of management and leadership effectiveness in the public sector. He identified eight managerial/leadership parameters. These parameters are based on the findings of a research project carried out by Analoui (1999) in the Ministry of Environment and Science and Technology in Ghana and which led to the emergence of the model „Eight Parameters of Managerial Effectiveness‟. The study aimed to identify the casual and behavioural influences which determine the managerial effectiveness of senior managers in the public sector. The results point to the presence of factors which constitute „parameters‟ of effectiveness at work. The eight major clusters of influences, referred to here as „parameters‟, of managerial effectiveness, namely: the senior managers‟ perception; skills and knowledge; 63 organisational criteria; motivation for effectiveness; constraints and difficulties; choices and opportunities; inter-organisational relationships, and finally dominant managerial philosophy are discussed briefly (Analoui, 1995). Based on the above, relevant conclusions are reached and the need for further research and the adoption of a holistic approach to public sector reform as a means of achieving increased managerial effectiveness are emphasized. In this respect, the researcher intends to explore the relevance of eight parameters of managerial effectiveness in the Education Programme UNWRA, Lebanon. These parameters will be discussed below. 2.4.1 Managerial perception and awareness (first parameter) The senior managers and officials are asked to consider the question, “How would you describe an effective manager?” This query is aimed at exploring the perception of the senior managers of their own effectiveness and at discovering what characteristics and qualities they think an effective manager should possess. The responses provided ranged from „ability to supervise‟, „being a good leader‟, to being concerned with „deadlines‟, „honest‟, „experienced‟ and „able to deliver goods on time‟. The description provided also varied according the type of organisation the managers belonged to. Such perceptions also represent the characteristics of a manager whom they often refer to as „ideal‟. In this respect the question is; do managers say something about themselves or do they describe an ideal manager? The analysis indicates that on the whole, managers have in mind an image of the effective manager they aspire to be or, more importantly, that they wish their superior to be. It is particularly interesting to discover that in situations where the managerial control is complete and which leaves 64 little room for expression of discontent, the managers will use such occasions (of using questionnaires or interviews) to describe how they feel about their organisations and their immediate superiors. In terms of perceived status, it is suggested that the more senior the managers, the easier they will find it to provide a description of who and what they think an effective manager should be. Analoui, in exploring this phase (first parameter) of the study concludes that, “the impression given is that it is not enough to be able to get the job done, simply because managerial positions also require the ability to work with people. The fact that most managers were critical of the way they were being managed or the way things are in their organisation is indicative of their frustration and dismay with the present system within the public sector” (1999, p. 41) 2.4.2 Managerial skills and competencies (second parameter) Senior managers and executives are asked to suggest between three and five managerial skills in order of priority to them, which in their view are essential for ensuring increase in effectiveness. Analoui points out that, “the responses collected were weighted according to their corresponding order of priority and a total of 32 levels of skills and competencies were identified” (Analoui, 1999, p. 369). Analoui‟s work reveals the different descriptions of skills, these skills depending on the priority assigned to them by the senior participants, are then divided into five major skill categories for each organisation. Further analysis shows that from among the numerous skills, knowledge and abilities which were reported to be essential for increased managerial effectiveness, the most important ones are associated with the people-related and analytical categories and not the task-related ones. Other skills such as delegation, being a good planner, organizing ability, good human relations and leadership skills indicate that, as expected, senior managers are more in need of

„interpersonal‟ and „analytical skills‟ rather than 65 „informational‟ and „decisional‟ as has previously been described in the available literature. Analoui (1999) discovered that, „three important issues emerged from his

data.‟ These are: There seems to be a similarity between the characteristics attributed to an effective manager and the skills and competencies which are required to remain effective. This consistency in the responses given has

important implications for the way managers perceive themselves and others, and in particular their superiors. People-related and analytical skills seem to be the most important skills required by managers for their effectiveness at work. While most skills tend to equip the managers to become more successful in their interaction with others, the selfrelated skills seem to be needed in order to compensate for the lack of attention and

supervision expected by them. Again the responses were partly expressing the senior managers‟ expectation of others, in particular the leadership of the organisation, and partly providing what they thought were the main ingredients for being effective. Data generated through interviews indicated that in most cases respondents felt that possession of these skills would „hopefully‟ lead to more effectiveness at work but in reality they felt that the situation may never change. In many cases the list of skills provided seems to be a projection rather than accurate self-assessment. 66 Analoui (1999) in his discussion of the second parameter for effectiveness, came to the conclusion that, „the responses provided largely concur with the findings of previous studies of the senior managers in developed and developing countries. Senior managers become more and more aware of the need and necessity for possession of skills which enable them to work with people; simply because the awareness is gained that one cannot be effective unless one can work with or through people, namely colleagues, peers and subordinates. It is probably not surprising to report that senior managers require as much if not more „management development‟ than „management‟. 2.4.3 Organisational criteria (third parameter) This parameter refers to criteria for effectiveness by the organisation. It is concerned with the way the organisation determines whether or not senior managers are effective - this changes from one organisation to another. In the case of senior managers in the Ministry of Environment in Ghana, senior managers were specifically asked to comment on what they felt to be the criteria for their effectiveness (Analoui, 2002). Since the Ministry is comprised of a number organisations, as expected, different lists of factors were reported. Evidently, each organisation because of its unshared cultural specifications, which is derived from the nature of the work, its history, size and the like, tends to implicitly and explicitly support a particular way of working and standards (Handy, 1985) with which the effectiveness of the members will be measured. Analoui‟s (1999) analysis shows that, „from a list of 38 criteria used to determine effectiveness, the ten most widely used criteria throughout the Ministry, ranged from „meeting targets‟, the most important one, to „increased productivity‟ the least in the list of the priorities. In organisations such as the EPA, (Environment Protection Agency), research institutes such as the CSIR (Council for Scientific and Industrial Research) and 67 GAEC (Ghana Atomic Energy Commission), periodically projects were discussed and targets were set. Most senior and executive managers expressed the opinion that the most important indicator to them for their effectiveness was that their staff were achieving targets. However, it became clear that targets were often „set‟ for the subordinates, with little degree of involvement in the setting of those targets on the part of the employees concerned (Analoui, 1999, p. 371). As shown in the review of the literature, there is usually a tendency on the part of the senior managers and executives to identify with the core values of the organisation (Analoui, et al., 2010; Analoui and Karami, 2003; Kakabadse, et al.,1987; Handy, 1985). 2.4.4 Motivation (fourth parameter) As suggested earlier, in order to understand effectiveness, attention has to be paid to all parameters of the phenomenon, particularly the motives behind the actions undertaken by managers (Analoui, 2000). The analysis of the quantitative data revealed, not surprisingly, that the motivators were those factors which were not already present at work. According to Analoui „all managers reported that their effectiveness is adversely affected by the low level of remuneration since they had to „think about‟ how to compensate for the lack of it, and/or spend time outside of the organisation, often on „projects of some sort to feed their family‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 374). This reveals that top management show deep dissatisfaction with the „worsening situation‟. “How can we [senior managers] motivate our employees? We have no control over it at all” It is therefore understood that employees from time to time need to „earn some money‟; therefore, their absence from the organisation is not complained about seriously (Analoui, 1999, p. 374). This however is not unique to Ghana but common across the 68 public sector organisations across the developing countries. The situation in UNRWA is similar to that of the public sector in developing worlds. It is reported that on average the monthly salary of a manager will only “take care of a third of their monthly expenses”. Almost all managers will have to supplement their monthly remuneration with some sort of second earning, which in many cases will take them away from their workplace and even periodically their country (Analoui, 1999, p. 374). Although salaries are reasonable higher for middle and senior officials in the public

sector, still because of high inflation, they are not adequate to meet their needs. The most interesting point of the study in Ghana however, is one which goes beyond „remuneration‟ or in this case the lack of it. Motivators, such as „recognition from superiors‟, „job satisfaction‟ and „training and self-development‟ were reported as the main motivating factors towards senior managers‟ effectiveness. Thus, these and other factors such as „promotion‟ and

„good teamwork‟ seemed to be symptomatic of the following issues. The reward system within the public sector

acts as a de-motivator and adversely affects their effectiveness at work. Managers feel that they do not receive

recognition for work well done. The managerial style adopted by the top management is responsible for this. Job satisfaction, especially among scientists, seems to be the most important motivator for remaining in their

posts. Achievement of targets set also adds to a sense of job satisfaction and thus acts as a motivator in their work. Those managers who were responsible for 69 challenging work found the challenge to be motivating and the

main reason for their effectiveness at work. Provision of resources and teamwork are suggested to work as motivators. Analoui (1999) points out that, „it was interesting to note that what was expressed as the motivators were indeed the problem areas and the main sources of discontent and frustration on the part of the senior managers. Restructuring, inflation, a substantial decline in the purchasing power of the managers together with organisational structural reform adds to the worsening situation as far as the motivation for effectiveness is concerned‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 374). 2.4.5 The degree of ‘demands’ and ‘constraints’ (fifth parameter) Analoui (1999), states that, it is difficult if not impossible to deal with the issue of effectiveness at work without considering the „constraints and demands‟ with which managers are faced. Realistically, managers are not free floating agents, allowed to do what they desire. In almost all organisations, there are inhibiting forces which slow down the progress and need to be managed, removed or negotiated. In line with an open system approach towards understanding managers, their works and effectiveness, the managers are asked to report the obstacles, difficulties, demands and constraints at work. In this respect, Analoui points out that, “analysis of the data provided a list of factors which were reported as having an adverse effect on the effectiveness of the managers, though managers in each organisation naturally experienced different sets of difficulties” (Analoui, 1999, p. 376). These difficulties are: inappropriate resources, shortage of appropriate staff and lack of/or inappropriate training, poor remuneration, lack of motivation, lack of teamwork. 70 The constraints and demands, whether those identified and briefly introduced or those which will be never mentioned, such clusters of demands at an individual, organisational or wider social level, leave the managers with very little chance to determine their own level of effectiveness. It is probably not surprising to see that similar problems have been reported by the middle and senior managers in UNRWA. 2.4.6 ‘Choices’ and ‘opportunities’ for effectiveness (sixth parameter) Stewart (1991; 1982) suggests that the choices open to managers in order to be effective at work are primarily determined by the degree of demand placed on them and the constraints in their job. According to Analoui (1999, p. 380), „a total of 35 factors related to the choices available have been identified, from which the ten most important ones are listed: (1) training (self), (2) on-the-job training, (3) part-time study, (4) necessary resources/equipment, (5) teamwork/co-operation, (6) better remuneration, (7) funding, (8) more appropriate staff, (9) visit other units/establishments, and (10) effective/regular communication. The responses of the senior managers point to solutions and ways of dealing with their individual situation in order to become more effective. The opportunities will be in a sense related to demands and constraints. It appears that the presence of the constraints and demands force senior managers to think of a „way out‟. Unfortunately, in most cases and only in interviews, middle and senior managers of UNRWA revealed that training, part-time study and full-time secondment, visits abroad including attending seminars, conferences and other scientific venues are seen as ultimately enabling the senior managers to move up or move away. 71 2.4.7 Nature of inter-organisational relationships (seventh parameter) Implicit and explicit remarks are frequently made where the overall subject of managerial effectiveness is being discussed. In this respect, Analoui states that „all respondents saw their effectiveness as being affected, if not determined, by the overall effectiveness of the organisation‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 382). Furthermore he adds „it was evident that the respondents were aware that there is a two-way relationship between their effectiveness and the organisation that was determined partly by their organisation‟s relationship with other organisations and agencies, both nationally and internationally‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 383). 2.4.8 Dominant managerial philosophy (eighth parameter) It has been established that the dominant managerial philosophy in an organisation does influence the operations which are carried out in it and the roles performed, and generally it influences the flow of information, and the informal and structured relationships among the people in the organisation (Analoui, 2002; Analoui, et al., 2010. The leadership of the organisation provides the standard for the patterns of behaviour and therefore has proven to be a decisive factor in determining the effectiveness of the managers in the organisation. Analoui (1999) states that „the data,

whether in qualitative or quantitative form, have been tainted by the presence of this influence of the managerial philosophy and style of top executives and its related agencies‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 386). The traditional preference for „politically correct administration‟ as opposed to management has resulted in many instances in the ineffectiveness of the individual managers and the organisation as a whole. 72 Ultimately, the degree to which the executives and senior managers adhere to traditional management, or to correct administration principles varies from one organisation to another. In this respect, Analoui reports that, „apart from a few top senior managers and executives who did feel that there is a need for change of attitude and policy, the others seemed to remain insistent that being at the top justifies the lack of need for management training and the adoption of participatory approaches to their management of task and people at work‟ (Analoui, 1999, p. 386). 2.4.9 Contextual influences on managerial/leadership effectiveness Analoui (1999, 2007) contends that senior managers/leadership effectiveness does not occur in a vacuum. It should be considered in context. According to him, while the effectiveness of the senior managers (leaders) is being influences by the presence of the eight parameters, it is important to bear in mind that effectiveness as the whole, in some ways, to a greater or lesser extent, is being determined by the contextual factors. He goes on to suggest three main contexts in which effectiveness occurs.

These are; Personal, Organisational (internal), and External (environmental) contexts 2.4.9.1 Personal Context The emerging literature proposes that effective leaders are differentiated from other leaders through the exercise of a relatively small range of skill or competence areas (Goffee and Jones, 2000; Kakabadse and Kakabades, 2000; Analoui, 1999). The way in which leadership skills and competencies are exercised is not prescribed, but is the function of the underlying personality of the leader (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005; Hogan, 73 2002). As Collingwood, (2001) and Dulewicz and Higgs (2005) argued, it is becoming evident that leadership is personal. This important issue relates very much to their perception of their own and others effectiveness. The literature, as illustrated, supports the above propositions. The personality of the manager, his or her attributes, plays an important part in the exercise of leadership (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005; Collingwood, 2001). The eight mentioned parameters for effectiveness need to be considered in a way which is congruent with the underlying personality of the leader. From a „sense making‟ paradigm, it can be argued that competences such as envisioning, engaging, enabling, enquiring and developing (Kakabadse and kakabadse, 2000), and categories of managerial skills such as task, people, and self and analytical ones (Analoui, 1993) reflect the reality of leadership, that a leader‟s personal and cognitive state do matter and indeed are determinants of the success the leadership. Indeed, the literature on leadership has consistently ignored cognitive elements for the last few decades. These findings may suggest that a leadership framework based on combining cognitive, behavioural, personality and learning factors may be a useful one within which to study leadership. 2.4.9.2 Organisation Context As stated earlier it is clear that there is a dynamic relationship between the leaders and the organisational context. Analoui proposes (1999, 2007) that in order to appreciate the effectiveness of senior managers‟, their efforts and styles ought to be considered in context of the organisation in which they work. He goes on to contend that the organisation and the nature of work production, public or private, do have an affect on the degree of the effectiveness of the leadership (Analoui and Karami, 2003; Analoui, 2002). 74 Within the developing world, organisations such as the UNRWA are confronted with different needs, expectations and priorities. Such an organisation is one of the frontrunners of development and as such their leadership effectiveness is a crucial consideration. Therefore, as suggested in the present research, it may be reasonable to include organisational factors such as strategy, culture, policies and practices, and its ability to learn as an organisation (Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005; Senge et al, 2000; Analoui, 1999) in the analysis of the leadership effectiveness. Thus, it is important to bear in mind that the relationship between manager as leader and organisation is potentially a dynamic one. 2.4.9.3 External Context There is an abundance of support for the view that the overall external context in which both the actors and organisation operate has an important influence on the effectiveness of the organisation as a whole and the degree of the effectiveness of its senior management (Karami et al, 2006; Analoui, 2002; Kakabadse and Kakabadse, 2000). The contemporary literature on leadership and strategic management points to the various methods senior managers and policy makers use to analyze the environment. It is argued that differences in culture, politics, education and even regional characteristics do impact on the effectiveness of the organisations (Analoui, and Karami, 2003). Studies of the managerial effectiveness in Ghana, Iran Romania (Analoui, 1997) and Oman (Analoui, et. al, 2010), illustrate the need for inclusion of the external forces in the analysis of the organisational and senior management effectiveness. Analoui (2007) in his analysis of the effectiveness of the board of directors suggests that external factors such as geographical position, cultural, technology, politics, legislation and international 75 stakeholders, to name a few, all influence the formulation and consequently the nature of the organisational policies. The impact of globalization is no longer

limited to the private sector in the developed world, third world countries and transitional economies too are affected (Huzynski and Buchanan, 2007). Continual funds from the UN have enabled the UNRWA to maintain the operation in many schools across Lebanon, Jordon, Syria, Gaza Strip and West Bank. It is argued that middle and senior managers are aware of the environment and the changes in all aspects of socio economic, cultural and political environment (Analoui and Karami, 2003). What probably makes the difference between the degree of effectiveness of middle and senior managers in the Educational department of the UNRWA in Lebanon is therefore not solely their perception but also their awareness of the opportunities and constraints present within the environment (Storey, 2004; Analoui, 2002). 2.4.10 Exploration of managerial effectiveness in the Educational Programme, UNRWA, Lebanon As stated in chapter one, the main aim and objectives of the present study are to explore the dimensions of managerial effectiveness of middle and senior managers in context of the Education Programme, UNRWA in Lebanon. To achieve the objectives of this first time study in Lebanon, it is proposed that Analoui‟s model (1999) for analysis of managerial effectiveness will be adopted in order to explore and identify the relevance of the eight identified parameters, as well as the contextual factors for the middle and senior managers of the UNRWA. The intention is to better understand how these parameters influence the effectiveness of managers, who are, as mentioned earlier, charged with the leadership of large educational projects and programmes. 76 As explained, the inclusion of the contextual factors by Analoui (1999, 2002, 2007), is found to be particularly potent and relevant for the present analysis. Lebanon is a developing country and the UNRWA Educational Programme, draws similarities with contemporary research carried out in this field. It is believed that, the parameters of the effectiveness of middle and senior managers ought to be explored to contextualize the relevance of Analoui‟s model for UNRWA Lebanon. It is believed that this first time exploration will further add to our existing knowledge of causal behaviour, cognitive abilities and the choices that middle and senior managers make on daily basis when deploying their effectiveness in their educational work organisations. Identifying the major effectiveness dimensions for the improved performance of the middle and senior managers of the Educational wing of the UNRWA will have relevance and implications for the improved performance of the managers not only in the UN in Lebanon but also in Jordon, Syria and Palestine as the whole. In this respect, the question posed is, do the middle and senior managers have different development needs because of their position as middle and senior managers in the organisation? It also seeks to explore what range of personal attributes, and organisational and environment factors (contextual) are considered as important to their increased effectiveness and to find out what are the main obstacles to the development of senior managers in their organisations. Moreover, it looks at the degree of importance attached to different categories of managerial skills and competencies believed to be required for the increased effectiveness of senior managers at different levels of seniority. 77 As the concept of managerial effectiveness is defined within the framework, any attempt at measuring this concept is rather inappropriate, or as Machine et al., (1981) asserts, the purpose must not be measurement of managerial effectiveness, but helping to improve whereby managers seek to be more effective no matter how they themselves define effectiveness. In this study no attempt is thus made to make such measurement. The concern is to identify; What factors contribute to the effectiveness of the middle and senior managers in UNRWA, Education Programme? 2.4.10.1 Managerial Effectiveness: Empirical Evidence The study of the middle and senior managers within UNRWA sets out to empirically examine Analoui‟s model (Eight Parameters of Managerial Effectiveness) within the conceptual framework presented above (1999, 2007). It is interesting to note that recent literature mostly considers senior managers as a homogenous group especially with respect to their training and management development needs. Thus, no significant attempts have been made to examine how various levels of senior management perceive the importance of parameters of the effectiveness. For example, how the need for skills and competencies for their managerial development may vary in accordance with positions of middle and senior managers on the hierarchy of the organisation . Few empirical studies have been carried out and documented in the literature about the importance of managerial effectiveness and managerial skills, (Reddin, 1970, 1974). According to Redding (1970) effectiveness is the degree to which a manager achieve 78 the output requirement of the job. Reddin (1997), later argued that effectiveness is choosing the appropriate goals and achieve them, thus organising the presence of myriad of choices available to managers. “Redding fails to consider the parameters of effectiveness and the contexts in which effectiveness occurs ” (Analoui, et al., 2010, p. 58). Langford, 1979; Willcocks, 1992; and Labbaf, 1996, they all considered the process but failed to acknowledge the factors which determine the degree of the effectiveness of the individual managers. In nutshell there are relatively few empirical studies which consider the real needs of managers for increasing their effectiveness. There other empirical models and frameworks such as “Nature of the managerial work” (Mintzberg, 1976), and “Managers Job”

(Stuarts, 1991), and Kakabades, et al, (1976) which attempted to understand the nature of the managerial work rather than “Effectiveness” of the managers. These frame works have been considered for adoption in this research however, it is evident that they cannot provide a clear and holistic frame work for studying the managerial effectiveness as perceived by the managers involved. Managers‟ perception and interpretation of their role also is a reflection of their cognitive state which influences, in part, their decisions. Two recent empirical work, namely study of the senior managers in Oman (Analoui, et al. 2010), concentrated on one single parameter of the effectiveness namely the leadership and dominant managerial style of the management within the Oman Municipality. The recent, attempt by Bao (2010) in application of the Analoui‟s framework in Chinese private and public sector organisation, was also based on the Analoui‟s model. Both showed the importance of considering the context and culture 79 (Bao, 2010). Both above studies and one which is still in progress in Iran Universities, attempt to understand the effect of changing contexts (namely organisational and wider environment) on the degree of effectiveness of the managers. This study will be based on the concept of “parameters of effectiveness” originally developed by Analoui (1999, 2002 and 2007). It is in line with the above recent development in the field. It attempts to contextualise the above theory in context of UNRWA, Lebanon. Theoretically this research builds on the assumptions and findings of above imperial studies within public and private sector organisations in developing countries and attempts to explore the implications of his model for middle and senior managers‟ development and increased effectiveness in UNRWA, Education Programme in Lebanon. 2. 5 Summary Conclusion In this chapter it has been demonstrated that managerial effectiveness is a complex multifaced organisational phenomenon. The “awareness” shown and the required abilities and competencies alone cannot sufficiently explain the nature of managerial effectiveness. However, when the middle and senior managers are under careful study and consideration what is actually needed by them becomes the focal point. Prior to reviewing the literature on managerial effectiveness, an attempt has been made to explore the process of the development of the management from traditional model to Human Relations and the behaviour Schools and contingency approaches to management. 80 It was contended that middle and senior managers are generally well aware of the importance of their own and others management effectiveness and amongst other factors, development training and the acquisition of managerial skills as the most appropriate means for intensifying their managerial effectiveness. It was illustrated that the classical view in this context is mostly concerned with the nature of management skills and the profession considers forecast, organisation, motivation, coordination and control as the main characteristics of this accomplishment. In other words, by looking at the nature of managerial work from different standpoints, it appears to be a series of functions, various sets of knowledge or skills to increase effectiveness and efficiency. This approach seems to be more functional than those which attempt to understand the nature of the work which managers, especially senior managers, undertake. In spite of the fact that, managerial functions, roles, demands, constraints and choices are the major parts towards a better understanding of managers‟ behaviour at work, their awareness of their own need for effectiveness and ways to achieve this, requires careful consideration. The work of Carlson (1967) and Mintzberg (1973) showed that the ways in which traditional concepts have been conceived and applied were unrealistic and unhelpful. It has become evident that generalisation about managerial activities was likely to be partially, or substantially incorrect for any particular manager or group of managers. Substantial variation in required managerial behaviour and skills were found. Despite the similarities in the activities and the functions of management, managerial jobs have shown to differ widely with respect to individuals, organisational and development 81 changes. Empirical studies suggest that managerial jobs are subject to dynamic changes. The analysis of the managerial job therefore, must take into consideration the diversity of the nature of jobs and account for such differences. A review of the literature showed that managerial work is multifaceted and requires the senior manager and more commonly the general managers, to deal effectively with work, people and themselves. Middle and senior managers consider self and career development as aspects of their job. The conventionally designed and structured management training and development programmes, with emphasis on the task-related aspects of the job, appear to be not so beneficial as they might be for those who are located in the middle, upper and senior positions. Needless to add, the level of awareness and attention paid to these aspects may vary from one organisation or industry to another. However, to ensure improved effectiveness, one must bear in mind that the senior managers‟ effectiveness is a function of personal, organisational and external factors. Management development can best be seen as a learning process, closely related to management training and education. Management development relies on a variety of methods for its implementation. The effectiveness of methods in turn depends on the nature of the skill, knowledge or attitude to be imparted, and the preferred learning style of the individual managers. It is concluded therefore, that managerial effectiveness can be improved

through effective management development programmes, which provide their participants with the appropriate knowledge, and skills that are required for creating a certain kind of attitudes and behaviour. What can be attributed largely to developing 82 countries is that management development is and must be viewed as a learning process aimed at endowing managers with the right kind of knowledge and skills. In addition, it must be employed as a means by which managers abilities are developed in the context of the required knowledge and skills with which to confront the continual changes and challenges that they face in their jobs and more importantly, as a strategy to enhance and increase the pace of socio-economic development. The concept of managerial effectiveness specifically remains one of the essential topics that continue to interest management scholars and researchers. However, one reality persists and because there is no general agreement on a certain concept for effectiveness whether from managers who are looking for it or management scholars and researchers who are researching into it. Managers have become the centre of analysis in recent studies. The literature review highlights different literary evidence that suggest that, personal and career development skills are increasingly important for the effectiveness of senior managers. Despite the considerable attention given to managers and their effectiveness in the last few decades, a great deal of confusion and concern still surrounds the subject. Recently, attention has been drawn to the importance of the role of the public sector to the realization of the growth and development of the developing world. The aim and analysis of the eight parameters of managerial effectiveness is to identify the causal and behavioural influences which determine the managerial effectiveness of senior managers in the public sector. The results point to the presence of factors which constitute “parameters” of effectiveness at work. The primary purposes of the eight parameter study are to identify the different behavioural and causal variables necessary to determine the 83 effectiveness of managers/officials within DCs‟ institutions and organisations; and to elaborate on the construction and future use of appropriate methods to be used for the collection and generation of relevant data concerning the managerial effectiveness in different cultural contexts. There is also a need for consideration of other parameters such as individual and organisational criteria, the motivation and the constraints and demands which determine the choices of behaviours and degree of effectiveness in a particular context. The eight parameters of effectiveness within public sector organisations also point to a mirror image of the characteristics of each dimension. That is to suggest, what forms the motivation for greater effectiveness is also indicative of what the constraints and demands are which control, inhabit or completely paralyse the individual concerned. The perception of the individual managers of their own and their colleagues‟ effectiveness is also related to the skills and abilities attributed to the effective managers. And, most important of all, the organisation‟s expectation of its managers is reflected in the nature of the criteria for effectiveness which is held by the organisation. It concludes that better understanding of the subject requires attention to the senior managers‟ “choice” and “meaningful action”, within an open system context. The identification of the causal and behavioural influences will pave the way for the planned comparative work within DCs and/or in a number of transitional economies in the near future. What makes this research almost unique is that the study of the behavioural influences and casual influences for middle and senior managers‟ effectiveness in the UN, especially in Lebanon and in context of Refugees Work Agency have not been 84 systematically studied and the result may contribute towards understanding the way senior managers perceive their effectiveness and what are the determinants for their effectiveness at work. The experiences accumulated from the empirical research into managerial effectiveness of the public sector within developing countries, makes Analoui‟s model suitable for application in this study. Indeed, consideration of the contextual (personal, organisational and external factors), as well as behavioural influences (the eight parameters) enabled the researcher to explore and assess the effectiveness of middle and senior managers in charge of the Educational Programme in UNRWA from a multifaceted dimension. Hence, contextualising the theory in order to make a contribution, albeit modest, to the theoretical development of the field. This is certainly very much related to the core of the research that seeks explanation for the development of senior managers. The explanatory framework is discussed in detail in the last section of this chapter and is in line with the above recent empirical studies and theoretical development in this field. In the next chapter, attempts will be made to present the background to the research namely the study of the UNRWA, especially the Educational Programmes in context of Lebanon.