International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 ISSN 2319 - 4847
1
2
1
Department of Educational administration, Mahallat Branch, Islamic Azad University, Mahallat, Iran.
2
Department of management, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
A BSTRACT
Adopting a correlational method, in this research, an attempt is made to assess factors influencing the organizational success of schoolmasters in smart schools. The statistical population comprises all schoolmasters of smart schools in Tehran. The research tools in this research comprise three questionnaires (the researcher-made questionnaire of factors influencing organizational success (α= 0.85), the researcher made questionnaire of efficient interpersonal relations (α= 0.94), and the researchermade questionnaire of the indexes of the success of schoolmasters (α= 0.89). The validity of th e questionnaires in terms of content was established by using the views of experts and professors. For data analysis, the structural equation modeling was employed. The findings generally show that of the factors influential in the organizational success of principals of smart schools, the most important ones are leadership style (0.172 direct effect)T individual control source (0.148 direct effect), comprehensive decision-making style (0.143 direct effect), and management skills (0.138 direct effect). In addition, the findings also reveal that efficient interpersonal relations mediate between the five factors and the organizational success of the managers. Besides, according to the structural equation modeling, the findings show that the GFI equals 0.96, the AGFI 0.82, the RMSEA 0.237, and Chi-square (x2) equals 253.64 which is an indication of the model's efficiency.
Keywords : Managers’ organizational success, managers, smart schools, individual-idiosyncratic factors, leadership style, decision-making styl
1.
I
NTRODUCTION
The role and the position of managers are such that the viability and sustainability of organization depends on their success and proficiency (Tosi,1993)[1]. In every organization, the main and the most fundamental issue for the authorities, planners and managers is to achieve the organization's objectives and the manpower, especially the managers, play the most important role in achieving these objectives(Dorbeheshti,1996)[2]. Therefore, the managers' success, the factors influencing their success and the priority of these factors have always been paid attention by organizations and their authorities(Ahmadi, 2002)[3].
Success generally means achieving the objectives. In fact, success depends upon the manager's achieving the organizational objectives.
Various factors influence managers' success some of which pertain to the managers' personal characteristics and idiosyncrasies on which various researchers in the area of management (e.g. Koontz, stogdill, Bentoon, etc.) have stated their views. Other factors influencing managers' success are organizational factors such as the organization's objectives and plans, the organizational structure and the organization's resources. Environmental factors and factors outside the organization are another group of influencing factors which include social-cultural and legal-political factors. According to shafiepour Motlagh etal (2011), the following factors influence managers' success in achieving organizational objectives: 1) subsidiary factors considered as the subcategory of individual factors such as the manager's personality, education and specialty, skills, management experience, motivation and interest in management, as well as intelligence;
Various factors influence managers' success some of which pertain to the managers' personal characteristics and idiosyncrasies on which various researchers in the area of management (e.g. Koontz, stogdill, Bentoon, etc.) have stated their views. Other factors influencing managers' success are organizational factors such as the organization's objectives and plans, the organizational structure and the organization's resources. Environmental factors and factors outside the organization are another group of influencing factors which include social-cultural and legal-political factors.
According to shafiepour Motlagh etal (2011), the following factors influence managers' success in achieving
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 444

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 ISSN 2319 - 4847 organizational objectives: 1) subsidiary factors considered as the subcategory of individual factors such as the manager's personality, education and specialty, skills, management experience, motivation and interest in management, as well as intelligence; 2) subsidiary factors considered as the subcategory of the performance factors such as personnel motivation by the manager, planning of the manager's activities, control and supervision of activities by the manager, conferment of authority on the employees by the manager, assessing employees' performance, and attention to the safety of the employees; 3) factors considered as the subcategory of human factors such as the organization's objectives and plans, manpower, resources and facilities at the manager's disposal, conferment of authority on the managers, managers' authority, and on-duty training for the managers; and 4) subsidiary factors considered as the subcategory of environmental factors such as economic, socio-cultural and legal-political factors[4]
2.
T HEORETICAL F RAMEWORK OF THE R ESEARCH
In the success motivation theory proposed by McClelland (1971), the need for success is based upon competition, challenging goals, emphasis on performing the task and overcoming difficulties, and seeking supremacy(Kaiser etal ,1994)[5]. A person who has the motivation for achieving success always attempts to excel in performance and enjoys challenging goals and also has a perseverance and competitive mood(Quinn,1983)[6] . McClelland's findings reveal that individuals with success achieving motivation have a better performance than those whose motivation for success is low or mediocre. According to Kreintner (1995), the three factors of motivation, success and opportunity, if multiplied by one another, could yield a principle formula for the managers' success. He adds that a manager's success depends upon an appropriate blend of management motivation, proficiency and opportunity[7]. In a study entitled
'investigating factors influencing success and progress motivation of managers', Barry (as cited in Samari and
Rasoolzadeh, 2008) discusses factors such as the need for progress, management abilities, decision-making and leadership[8]. According to Aplin etal (1976), three sets of factors, i.e. individual (interior) factors, environmental
(exterior) factors and accidental (adjusting) factors determine managers' success[9]. Koontz (1955) argues that the individual characteristics influential in managers' success include: 1) interest in management; 2) interpersonal skills; 3) honesty and rectitude; and 4) past experience in management[10]. Davis etal (2010),states four main characteristics for successful leaders and managers: 1) Intelligence; 2) social maturity and horizon of thought, motivation for seeking success and achieving goal, humanitarianism[11]. Stogdill (1969)(considers six characteristics effective in the success of managers and leaders: 1) physical characteristics such as height, complexion and body language; 2) the cultural background such as education and experience; 3) Intelligence; 4) personality (e.g. extroversion); 5) professional characteristics (such as perseverance, assiduity, and innovation); and 6) social characteristics (such as social and political class)[12]. According to Koontz (1955), the individual characteristics influential in managers' success include:
1) interest in management; 2) interpersonal skills; 3) honesty and rectitude; and 4) past experience in management.
The findings from studies conducted by shafiepour Motlagh etal(2010)[13], Mirza Ghaderi (2007)[14], (House etal(2002)[15], Magliocca et al ( 2001), reveal that foresight, innovation, and supervision on organizational issues causes managers to succeed[16]. These findings also reveal that self-confidence, decisiveness, punctuality, cooperating with employees and developing rapport with subordinates increases the managers' success. Katie Simon (2007) states the 7 characteristics of the successful managers as the following: 1. They increase their self-discipline, 2. They treat their subordinates in a friendly way in every situation, 3. They develop their goals, 4. They welcome criticism, 5. They look for solutions for their problems, 6. They have great enthusiasm in their career, 7. They use their opportunities.
Stewart etal (2000), has identified the managers' abilities and skills in the 21 century as follows: social realism, professional standards, introspection, adaptability, perseverance and self-confidence[17]. Findings of studies conducted by Hedayati Katooli (2010) [18]and Malekzadeh and Kiani Nejad (2011)[19] reveal that the qualities of selfconfidence, self-control, and emotional relation between the organization members are effective in managers' success.
Structure is considered as one of the basic aspects of all organizations and managers' success in achieving organizational objectives. Patterns of discretion, responsibility and rapport dependent upon the hierarchy and the structure of the matrix are the most important issues of the formal structure which determine the amount of discretion, responsibility and independence of the manager (E'rabi, 2003, p. 49)[20]. Studies conducted by Stanic and Carin
(2004) reveal that the main cause of the success of the Malaysian Hakoiko institute was the manager's independence from factors outside the institute[21]. In a research conducted in 2004, Stanic and Caron investigate the role of independence and decision-making in some organizations which are spread internationally and supervised by a central unit. They realized that these organizations view independence in decision-making as a main necessity of success. Hal,
House and Johnson believe that the higher the position of the manager in the hierarchy of organizational authority, the higher his/her authority and this could lead to the organization's success. In fact, the amount of the manager's independence in the vertical pyramid of the organization determines his/her success(Jacobs etal ,1993)[22]. Authority increases the managers' interest in their career and allows them to apply their innovation in doing their work. Success depends upon three factors: structure, direction, and process.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 445

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
3.
R ESEARCH H YPOTHESES
ISSN 2319 - 4847
There is a significant correlation between individual-idiosyncratic factors and manager's organizational success.
There is a significant correlation between organizational structure factors and the development of managers' organizational success.
There is a significant correlation between decision-making styles and the development of organizational success.
There is a significant correlation between leadership style and the development of organizational success.
Efficient interpersonal correlations mediate between the four factors and the development of organizational success.
4.
R
ESEARCH
M
ETHODOLOGY
This study is a descriptive-correlational research. The statistical population comprises all the principals of the smart school in Tehran. . The research tool in this research comprises three questionnaires (the researcher-made questionnaire of factors influencing organizational success (α= 0.85), the researcher -made questionnaire of efficient interpersonal relations (α= 0.94), and the researcher -made questionnaire of the indexes of the success of schoolmasters
(α= 0.89). The validity of the questionnaires in terms of content had been determined by using the views of experts and professors. The structural equation modeling has been employed for data analysis (SPSS 18 software) and the index of goodness of processing (including RMR, AGFI, GFI, RMSR, i.e. root mean square residual, adjusted goodness of fit index, goodness of fit index and root mean square error of approximation) has been calculated.
Table 1.
Cronbach Alpha Coefficient of research Questionnaires
Questionnaires
Factors influencing success
Efficient interpersonal relations
Indexes of the success of schoolmasters
Cronbach Alpha Coefficient
0.85
0.94
0.89
Table 2.
Descriptive and correlational indexes among research variables
**p<0.01
As the above table shows, there is a positive, significant correlation between the success of schoolmasters and efficient interpersonal relations (r= 0.422), self-control source (r= 0.462), self –confidence (r=0.463), management skills (r= 0.457), complex structure (r= 0.552), comprehensive decision-making (r= 0.467), transformational leadership (0.458), and transactional leadership (0.592). Besides, there is a significant reverse correlation between the success of schoolmasters and the formal structure (r= 0.274), focused structure (r= 0.376), limited decision-making (0.452), and non-interfering leadership (r=
0.326). There is also a significant correlation between efficient interpersonal skills and self-control source (r= 0.453), selfconfidence (0.407), management skills (r= 0.453), complex structure (r= 0.450), transformational leadership (0.568), transactional leadership (0.426) and non-interfering leadership (0.326). In addition, there is a significant correlation between self-control source and self-confidence (r= 0.437), management skills (r= 0.502), formal structure (0.494), focused structure (r=
0.384), complex structure (r= 0.415), comprehensive decision-making (r=0.450), limited decision-making (r=0.458),
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 446

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 ISSN 2319 - 4847 transformational leadership (r=0.343), and transactional leadership (r= 0.387). Besides, there is a significant, positive correlation between self-confidence and management skills (r=0.502), comprehensive decision-making (r=0.442), limited decision-making (r=0.385), transformational leadership (r=0.423), and transactional leadership (r= 0.478). In addition, there is a significant, reverse correlation between management skills and the formal structure (r=0.224). There is a significant correlation between management skills and transformational leadership (r=0.423). There is also a significant correlation between focused structure and limited decision-making and non-interfering leadership (r=0.498). There is also a significant, positive correlation between transformational leadership and transactional leadership (0.483).
Table 3.
Tested paths in the structural equation modeling
P<0.05
Figure1.
the empirical model of the correlation between individual-idiosyncratic factors, organizational structure factors, decision-making style, leadership style and the development of the success of the principals of smart schools by the mediation of efficient interpersonal relations.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 447

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
Table 4.
Indexes of the goodness of the empirical model of the research
ISSN 2319 - 4847
According to the results of the above table, GFI = 0.96, AGFI = 0.82, RMSEA = 0.237, and Chi Square ( which shows the goodness of the model. x
2
) = 253.64
5.
D ISCUSSION AND R ESULTS
The findings of the present research reveal that, according to the structural equation modeling, the direct impact of efficient interpersonal skills on the development of organizational success of the principals of smart schools (0.193) has been significant. As regards the first research hypothesis that there is a significant correlation between individualidiosyncratic factors and managers' organizational success, the findings reveal that self-control source has 0.148 direct effect, self confidence 0.121 direct effect, and management skills has 0.138 significant direct effect. The findings of this research correspond to the findings of researches conducted by Atafar et al. (1996), Hedayati Katouli (2010), and
Malekzadeh and Kiyaninejad (2011). They came to the conclusion that individual factors such as the manager's personality, self-control source, and management skills play an important role in the managers' success. According to
John Aplin and Harold Koontz, factors influencing managers' success include individual (internal) factors which determine the dagree of their success. As regards the second research hypothesis that there is a significant correlation between the organizational structure factors and the development of organizational success of the managers, the findings reveal that formal structure has 0.119 direct effect, focused structure 0.104 direct effect, and complex structure has 0.166 direct and significant effect. According to Stanic and Caron (2004), the main reason for managers' success must be sought in the hierarchy of authority. Independence in decision-making is a main necessity for success. Hall,
House, and Johnson believe that the higher the position of management in the hierarchy of organizational authority, the more authority it has and this could lead to the organization's success. E'rabi (2003) believes that models of authority and responsibility are the most important issues of the formal structure and determine the degree of the manager's authority, responsibility and independence. As regards the third research hypothesis that there is a significant correlation between the decision-making style and the development of organizational success, the findings of the present study reveal that the comprehensive decision-making style has 0.143 direct and significant effect but the limited decision-making style has 0.098 direct style which is insignificant in P < 0.05 level. According to Douglas Barry (as cited in Samari and Rasoolzadeh(2008) concludes that management skills, decision-making and leadership are very influential in success of organization managers. In addition, studies conducted by Tatium et al. (2003) reveal that the comprehensive decision-making style and the use of cooperative method in making organizational decisions lead to manager's success. Beside, as regards the fourth research hypothesis that there is a significant correlation between leadership style and the development of managers' organizational success, the findings reveal that the transformational leadership style has 0.172 direct effect and the transactional leadership style has 0.132 direct effect which is significant.
However, the non-interference leadership style has 0.080 direct effect which is insignificant in P < 0.05 level.
According to Shafiepour Motlagh et al. (2011), there is a significant correlation between the manager's leadership style and the degree of employee's trust and as long as the employees have confidence in their manager, they cooperate with him and therefore, the manager is able to achieve organizational objectives. Shafiepour Motlagh et al. (2010) and
(2011) show that there is a considerable significant correlation between the transformational and transactional leadership styles and the achievement of organizational objectives by the managers. As regards the fifth research hypothesis that efficient interpersonal relations mediate between the five factors and the development of organizational success, the findings indicate that the self-control source has 0.030 indirect effect, self-confidence 0.41 indirect effect, management skills 0.033 indirect effect, formal structure 0.022 indirect effect, focused structure 0.013 indirect effect, complex structure 0.023 indirect effect, comprehensive decision-making style 0.044 indirect effect, limited decisionmaking style 0.019 indirect effect, transformational leadership style 0.052 indirect effect, transactional leadership style
0.034 indirect effect, and non-interference leadership style has 0.016 indirect effect and are significant on P <0.05 level. Based on the structural equation modeling, the research findings indicate that GFI=0.96, AGFI=0.82,
2
RMSEA=0.237, and Chi Square ( x
) =253.64 which indicate the goodness of the model.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 448

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013
R EFERENCES
ISSN 2319 - 4847
[1]Tosi, M.(1993). “Participation in Management “, Public Management Instruction Cente.
[2]Dorbeheshti, A.(1996). “Stability and Competency in Management “, Management of Education Quarterly,4,No14,
Summer,P.74.
[3]Ahmadi. M.(2002). “ Fondimental of Organization and Management”,Tehran,Publieshed by Virayesh.
[4]Shafiepour Motlagh, F., Yarmohammadian, M.(2011).”Designing a Model for Examining in perceived Responding
Curriculums Developing “, Research in Curriculum Planning Quarterly 8year,Period 2,Spring & Summer.
[5]Kaiser, Kate M.; Ross, Jeanne W. (1994). “Technology management and control over resources: An application of strategic contingencies theory”. The Journal of High Technology Management Research. Vol. 5. Issue 2.
(Autumn): Pages 299-321. [Online]. Available at: www.srlst.com.
[6]Quinn, Robert E.; Rohrbaugh, John. (1983). “A Spatial model of effectiveness criteria: toward a competing values approach to organizational analysis”. Management Science. 29. P. 363- 377.
[7]Kreitner, R. (1995).” Management (6th ed)”, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
[8]Samari,E., Rasoolzadeh, B.( 2008).” The study of Efficiency Variables on increasing Achievement Motivation and
Success Attainment in Coorporation’s Managers “, Public Management Quarterly,No 1,Full & Winter,PP33-50.
[9]Aplin Jr., John C.; Schoderbek, Peter P.(1976).” Public Personnel Management”; Mar/Apr76, Vol. 5 Issue 2, p88.
[10] Koontz, Harold, and Cyril O'Donnell. (1955).”Principles of Management: An Analysis of Managerial Functions”.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
[11]Davis, M. H., Capobianco, S., & Kraus, L. A. (2010). “Gender differences in responding to conflict in theworkplace: evidence from a large sample of working adults”. Sex Roles, 63, 500-
514.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9828-9.
[12]Stogdill, R. M. (1969). “Leadership, Membership, Organization. Leadership”, Gibb, C.A., Baltimore, & Maryland
(Ed): Penguin Books.
[13]Shafiepour Motlagh, F & Yarmohamadian, M.(2011), "The Organizational Climate,Job Involvment and
Organizational Trust with Knowledge Management Culture: Educational Systems in iran", Eleven International conference on Knowledge, Culture and Change in Organizations, San Pablo CEU University, Madrid, Spain, 15-
17 June
[14]Mirza Ghaderi, A.(2007).”The study of Relationship between Managerial styles( communicatal & Criteria of managers and Morale in Bokan city “,Tesis of Master of art.Tabriz Baranch, Islamic Azad Univer.
[15] House, R.J., Javidan, M., Hanges, P.J., & Dorfman, P.W. (2002)."Understanding Cultures & Implicit Leadership
Theories Acrossthe Globe: An Introduction to Project GLOBE". Journal of World Business, 37, 3-10.
[16] Magliocca ,L . A. , Christakis , A. N (2001) , “Creating transforming leadership for organizational change: the cogniscope system approach, System Research and Behavioral Science , Vol 18 , pp 259- 277. sity.
[17]Stewart, G. L. and M. R. Barrick . (2000).” Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type”. The Academy of Management Journal 43(2): 135-148.
[18]Hedayati Katooli,H. (2010). “The study of Efficiency Variables on increasing Achievement Motivation and Success
Attainment in Coorporation’s Managers’ Golestan Province “, The first International Conference of Innovation and Management.
[19]Malekzadeh, GH., and Kiani Nejad , A.(2011).”The study of Individual Indicators influencing on New
Technological Corporations (Case study; Khorason technology & Science Corporations “, Growth of Technology
Quarterly ,Spring,(27),pp25-33.
[20] E'rabi , M, (2003). “Comparative Research “,Theran: Cultural researches office.
[21]Stanic, Ana; Caron, David D. (2004). "Removal of the head of a multilateral organization—independence of international organizations and their secretariats—political interference by member states in the operation of... ".
American Journal of International Law; Oct., Vol. 98, Issue 4, p810-814, 5p.
[22]Jacobs, D. ; Singell, L. (1993). “Leadership and Organizational Performance: Isolating Links between Managers and Collective Success”. Social Science Research. Vol. 22. Issue 2. ( June): Pages 165-189: [Online]. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com.
Volume 2, Issue 3, March 2013 Page 449