Role Vs. Style Prototype- The HR Imperative
- A case study of a middle level Manager
T .Venugopal Naidu
Lecturer , Osmania University ( Secunderabad PG College ) ,
Lecturer Viveka Vardhinin PG College
venuteja@indiatimes.com
Abstract
“Role Compatibility” is the primary scale on which HR give the impression of
being more keen while selecting a prospective candidate. This article argues
furthermore for incorporating “ Style Compatibility “ to ensure valuable
contribution from the prospective candidate in the long run. Also the HR manager
must make himself abreast with different styles along with their typical traits and
have acumen to track down the “ best fit “ style(s) for their organizations and
map them and spot the right candidate. A case study of a middle manager is taken
to capture the above assertion
Key Words : Role ,Style, Compatibility, Prototypes.
Objective
This article attempts to make a conceptual and empirical contribution to HRD.
A conceptual
model of four predominant generic styles of middle level manager is provided and secondly, an
empirical study of middle level manager is undertaken using the four generic styles to test the
hypothesis : For unleashing effective performance from managers in the long run - Role
compatibility is only a necessary condition but the sufficient condition will be to identify and
ensure style compatibility . Table (1.0) details four predominant generic styles which aid HR
manager to choose from either singly or in combination to compare and assess their managers,
they are - Process Manager, People Manager, Practical Manager and Principled Manager : along
with their traits and competencies have also been identified -respectively.
Definition
Role : Clear cut written job specification and expectations from a particular job. The tasks and
code of conduct is also prescribed for each job along with the boundary limits of
reach/stretch/influence are also well defined for each job. Some companies hand over a
published format of the roles and goals of a specific job to the prospective employee and are
encouraged to stick to it at all costs ( During their induction program). Style: The job in
consideration is more focused towards the end objectives as a benchmark for effective
performance - with the method of delivery and leadership style left to the individual choice. It
may be said that only some styles are more suitable for specific jobs. There is another dimension
to style i.e. Style -Compatibility of managers with respect to the organization climate and their
subordinates.
Data collection and Method of study
The empirical study has taken 25 branch managers who are working for a company offering
computer education services over a period of two years .These managers are managing their
separate strategic business units. There are over 15 to 20 people reporting to each manager. The
data of their financial targets and turnout of manpower in their respective branches for two years
is taken as a measure of their performance. Secondly, to gauge the style of the individual
managers and their subordinates - he/she and his/her subordinates were interviewed and
administered with a questionnaire along with a battery of psychometric tests. Eventually, the
styles of the consistent performing managers (financial target achievers) vis-à-vis the average
style type of their subordinates are compared.
Result
Over a period of two years out of 25 managers ,15 were performers (Achieving their financial
targets and keeping a low turnout of manpower). Their predominant styles in ascending order is
[1] PEOPLE MANAGER (6), [2] PRINCIPLED MANAGER(5) ,[3] PRACTICAL MANAGER
(3), [4] PROCESS MANAGER (1) . Secondly, the hypothesis was validated as their is a high
degree of style compatibility of performing managers vis-à-vis their subordinates – respectively.
Perhaps this explains to a large extent for their consistent performance as managers, because they
were both “Role Compatible” and “Style Compatible”.
A case study of a middle manager:
Sr.Manager
Manager
Subordinate workers
The Critical Interface
In our model we have a relatively flat organization with Senior Manager(s) on the top followed
by middle level manager(s) and the bottom as subordinates(workers). The middle level Manager
acts as a “Critical Interface ” between the workers and the senior manager. We assume that
there are several styles and each has a unique predominant style through which the middle level
managers conduct themselves in accomplishing the outcomes or targets (Organizational
objectives and goals). The second assumption is that the senior managers are verily more
interested in the results and much less on the style adopted by middle level managers ,unless if
outcomes are going to be far from expectations or when a particular style adopted is
incomprehensible and indeterminate to meet the desired outcomes or targets .
The critical interface can be viewed from two angles – one from the middle level managers point
of view per se where he has to manage his expectations from both sides i.e. the subordinate and
the Sr. Manager and second, is the from the view point of both the senior manager and the
subordinates workers, who map their expectations based on the styles adopted by the middle
level manager. Therefore understanding the unique predominant style (among the several styles)
adopted by the middle level manager by subordinates and Sr. Managers is one of the objective of
this article.
HR Interventions:
For a HR manager two things stand out very clearly when he recruits a new manager- One is the
present – where he has to drill the role into the incumbent or understand the style of the
incumbent vis-à-vis the job and his subordinates and secondly, to find a best fit for the future –
which being so fluid and ever changing demands a trade off between role and style of the
incumbent.
Taking the analogy of a customer: the management pundits say that understanding the
customer is the key – “ Know what product a customer wants” - on the contrary it has never
being the case where the customer is coerced to buy a given product. Once we work for the
customer- thereafter the customer works for us. Similarly drilling the ROLE of the job on the
incumbent is only a necessary condition but understanding the suitability of his STYLE and
compatibility with respect to his subordinates and orienting it towards the job objectives is the
sufficient condition to ensure effective job performance. However a manager cannot be coerced
to follow a particular style .In the extreme case if the style is not suitable to a specific job: reemphasis on the role is only fallback option.
Traditionally, one of the common method adopted by HR manager to improve individual
(departmental / branch) accountability and performance is by bringing about
“ ROLE- CLARITY ” and “ ROLE- TRANSPARENCY ” (goal-clarity and goal-transparency):
which essentially means that for each job-role HR manager prepares a uniform standard
document clearly defines his, role, qualities, responsibilities, reporting structure, performance
standards, review procedure…etc These documents are then circulated and shared between all
the departments, besides, periodic performance of actual as against projected targets is also
published. It is thus assumed that eventually there will be better role compliance and enhanced
performance from individuals (departments/branches). When the above method was applied it
proved to be less sustaining in the long run- although encouraging results ensued initially. The
reason could be that there is a greater dependence on “Systemic” checks and balances and little
in form of individual identity and individual style of leadership. It is in this context a study of
their “ STYLE – SUITABILITY ” and “STYLE –COMPATIBILITY” was considered.
Comparison ::
Each middle level manager seek in their own way to accomplish their objectives. The role as
described by job specifications will not have any prototypes for a specific job as they are
standard, however as regards the “style”, the HR manager has to make greater effort to
understand and analyze suitability among various styles for a specific job( Style Compatibility)
The job specification of middle level manager is usually more in terms of “Outcomes”, or,
is towards achieving specific “ Targets ”. These defined outcomes or targets can then be directly
or indirectly translated into money terms. From the day one, the MANAGER becomes a
“Billable-Resource” –he is expected to generate revenues with the given resources. His
performance primarily is measured on CASH basis as against TASK basis. Thus based on the
financial targets of two years we narrow down the list of performing managers.
The performing managers are then put through psychometric tests so as to identify with
the styles of the prototypes and then compared with that of their subordinates. The outcome of
the study is already outlined.
Table : 1.0 PREDOMINANT STYLES OF MANAGER (TRAITS & COMPETENCIES)
Intelligence Quotient
IQ
1
2
3
4
5
6
Logical
Arithmetic
Computational
Speed
Geometric
Visual appreciation
Spatial Thinking
Short Term
Memory
Rote Utilization
Vocabulary
Spelling
Emotional
Quotient
EQ
Self Awareness
~ Self Regard
~ Independence
~ Self Actualization
Emotional Resilience
~ Stress Tolerance
~ Impulse Control
Assertiveness
Adaptability
~ Problem Solving
~ Reality Testing
~ Flexibility
General Knowledge Interpersonal
Relationship
~ Empathy
~ Social Responsibility
Intuition
General Mood
~ Happiness
~ Optimism
PRACTICAL
PEOPLE
MANAGER
MANAGER
Professional
Quotient
PQ
Organizational
Awareness
~ Goals and Objectives
~Mission and Vision
Organizational
Sensitivity
Organizational
Behavior
Change Management
Professional Skills &
Knowledge
Spiritual
Quotient
SQ
Sequential Unity
(Thought, Word and
deed)
Functional Skills &
Knowledge
Work is Worship
( Pride in working)
Creativity and
Innovation
~ Planning &
Organization
Effective
Communications
Health is Wealth
Spiritual/Mental/Physical
PROCESS
MANAGER
Spiritual Strength
(Concentration and
balance of mind)
Positive Thinking
(Honesty & Integrity)
Cleanliness is Godliness
~Material Uprightness
~Functioning Ethics
PRINCIPLED
MANAGER
Conclusion:
[1] The four predominant style prototypes of managers is a conceptual contribution to HRDsince, typically it is easy to find a combination of several traits in a manager but to sieve and
identify a predominant style is the key to effective HRD.
[2] Similar style prototypes can be developed for other jobs.
[3] The hypothesis is valid in the long run which implies that for consistent performance of a
manager cannot be ensured only by “ Systemic –controls” ( Role Transparency and Role
Compatibility) but also by ensuring style Compatibility which allows for individual expression
,freedom and contribution. Alternatively miss-match of Styles of the manager and his
subordinates may effect the performance of the manager in the long run.
References
Steven J Stein and Howard E Book The EQ Edge., 2000 Macmillan.(pp 32-183)
Gordon Allport ,Personality Henry Rold and Company Inc, New York ,1937. (pp 43-47)
Walter Mischel , Introduction to Personality , Holt ,Rinchart to Winston, Inc , New York , 1971
(pp 300-312 )
Calvin S.Hall and Gardner Lindzey , Theories of Personalities ,New York 1977, John Wiley
and sons( pp 30-35)
Robert M Liebert and Michael D Spigler , Personality , Homewood III , Dorsey Press ,1970 .
(pp 6-45. )
Joseph O’ Connor & John Seymoour Neuro Linguistic Programming ,Harper Collins
Publishers ,1989. (pp 15)
Stephen R Covey , Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.
Chester I Barnard , The functions of Executives , Cambridge, Haward University Press ,1938.
Glossary
Self Awareness : Ability to recognize your feelings and why you are feeling that way and the
impact your behavior has on others
Self Regard : Ability to know your strengths and weakness and feel good about yourself despite
your weaknesses.
Independence :Ability to be self directed and self controlled to stand on your own feet.
Self Actualization : Ability to recognize your potential and feel comfortable with what you
achieve at work and your personal life.
Stress Tolerance : The ability to remain calm and focused , to constructively withstand adverse
events and conflicting emotions without caving in.
Impulse Control : The ability to resist or delay a temptation to act.
Assertiveness : The ability to clearly express your thoughts and feelings, stand your ground and
defend your position.
Problem Solving : Ability to define problems-then move to generate and implement effective
solutions.
Reality Testing : Ability to see things as they actually are rather than the way you wish or fear
they might be.
Flexibility: The ability to adjust your feelings , thoughts and actions to changing conditions.
Interpersonal Relationship : concerns your people skills – ability interact and get along with
others. Forge and maintain relationship that are mutually beneficial.
Empathy :Ability to understand what others might be feeling and thinking
Social Responsibility : Ability to be cooperative and contributing member of your social group.
Happiness : The ability to feel satisfies with life , to enjoy yourself and others and to experience
zest and enthusiasm in a range of activities.
Optimism : The ability to maintain a realistically positive , particularly in the face of adversity.
Spatial Thinking : Understanding what changes will occur according to the situation.