MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 1 of 13
SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
AS SI G N M EN T C O VER SH E ET
FILL IN ALL DETAILS ON THIS FORM
USE ONE FORM FOR EACH ASSIGNMENT
PLEASE KEEP A HARD COPY OF THIS
ASSIGNMENT FOR YOUR OWN RECORDS
Your Name/s
Unit Name
Student No/s
PHAN CAM TU
Management Principles and Practices 560
Lecturer’s Name
Unit Index No.
13785882
5275
Dr. SUBRAMANIAM ANANTHRAM
Assignment Title (where applicable)
2 Critical Reading Reports
Word count
1,000 words per report
Don’t forget to date stamp
Students comments to Lecturer/Tutor (if any)
Please read the following and sign where indicated
DECLARATION: I/We declare the attached assignment is my/our own work and has not previously been submitted
for assessment. This work complies with Curtin University of Technology rules concerning plagiarism and
copyright. [Refer to www.policies.curtin.edu.au/documents/unit_outlines_plagiarism_state.doc for plagiarism and copyright
information.] I/We have retained a copy of this assignment for my own records.
Signed:
PHAN CAM TU
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 2 of 13
THIS SECTION IS TO BE COMPLETED BY LECTURER/TUTOR: COMMENTS TO STUDENT
Recorded Mark
PHAN CAM TU
Lecturer/Tutor
Date
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 3 of 13
REPORT 1: KRAUT ET AL., 1989
Whenever mentioning a certain organization, its key figures or managers are the first
concerns. However, actually who are they, what are levels of managers and what are their
roles or functions? A manager is defined as “a person is an organization who directly
supports and helps activate the work efforts and performance accomplishments of others”. In
order words, a manager has a set of responsibilities to make sure that his/her subordinates’
work and outcomes aiming to achieving the utmost goals of the company in the most
effective and efficient ways (Reh). As for levels of the management, typically they consist of
top managers, senior management or executives (setting general goals, directing the
organization to obtain them and being responsible for the performance/results generically),
middle managers (specifying the goals, disseminating objectives into departments/business
units), first level managers, supervisors or first-line managers (being in charge of daily
management, controlling and interacting directly with staffs) (Management Levels) (Stoner
and Freeman 1992, 10). Mainly, there are four functions of a manager including the planning
(devising performance objectives and building up holistic strategies), organizing (arranging
resources to accomplish the work), leading (inspiring, guiding and overseeing staffs to ensure
the result attainment), and controlling (measuring, verifying actual outcomes matching with
the plan’s goals) (Managerial Functions).
The purposes of the study (Kraut, Pedigo, McKenna and Dunnette 1989, 286-293)
are to examine the correlation between three management levels (first-line, middle and top
managers) and seven managerial tasks (managing individual performance, instructing
subordinates, planning and allocating resources, coordinating interdependent groups,
managing group performance, monitoring the business environment and representing one’s
staff), and the relationship between the management levels and three organizational functions
(marketing, manufacturing and administrating). In the case that managers would be aware of
similarities and differences in their managerial jobs, they are supposed to coordinate and
collaborate more efficiently and effectively.
The methodology of this research complied with the quantitative approach. That is,
the questionnaire issued to 1,412 managers. These managers were asked to “rate the relative
importance of 57 managerial tasks to their jobs” following the continuum from “utmost
importance” to “no importance” or “I do not perform this task”. Based on these importance
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 4 of 13
ratings, seven major managerial tasks were sorted out. Then, these tasks were studied in three
management levels and three organizational functions, respectively.
In the overview, the differences in levels and functions led to the varied importance
rankings. For instance, the first task (managing individual performance) was the most
important activity from the perspectives of first-line and marketing managers and the least
important to executives and administrating managers. The second task (instructing
subordinates) was considered as the most valuable from point of view of first-line managers
and administrating managers, and the least significant from the angle of executives and
marketing managers. In succession, the third task (planning and allocating resources) was the
most important to middle managers, and marketing and manufacturing managers and the least
important to executives and administrating managers. However, according to an observation
of the synthesized data table (see the Appendix), there were similarities or common points.
This means that in some tasks, despite differences in levels and functions, managers had the
same voice or considered the similarities in importance attributes. For example, in the fourth
task (coordinating interdependent groups), irrespective of unlike functions, most of the
managers appreciated highly this task as such. These are the main findings of this study
indeed.
The pivotal conclusion is that irrespective of these differences, as discussed above,
the “common approach” in training, developing and selecting managers possibly work out in
practice. As for training process, for first-line managers, basic skills such as the supervision,
motivation and the like should be emphasized on. With respect to middle managers,
managing and linking group skill development (designing and implementing group and
intergroup work effectiveness, diagnosing and resolving within and amid groups) play a very
important role. With regard to executives, the training should focus on the external
environment factors or externalities (politics, economies); especially for first-line and middle
managers before they hold that of higher positions. Referring to the development process,
some suggestions for first-line managers (temporary taking roles as middle managers in
vacation times) and middle managers (customer contact increment) are more likely realistic.
Lastly, the selection should not be limited from marketing function promotion; in fact, other
function managers could take executive positions through appropriately planned development.
Overall, based on the required, desired and expected skills and tasks of current and future
positions, this study shed a light on how to train, develop and select managers in the most
feasible and effective ways.
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 5 of 13
The contributions of this research center on two points. Firstly, by clarifying the
differences and similarities in roles taking by managers, it paves the way of a common
approach in training, developing and selecting managers. Finally, in preparation for moving
up to higher levels in the management hierarchy in a company, it also shows a clear-cut and
transparent way to get there, regardless of the current function holding. In sum, this is a
practical study; that is, from theories and research results, it in essence discloses the succinct,
specific and apprehensive training, development and selection strategies and methodologies
to apply right away in reality.
The limitations are covered in two points. Firstly, this hinged on the own
perspectives of managers or their subjective ideas. This leads to the fact that other people
(peers, subordinates) maybe have different opinions from theirs. It did not embrace a variety
of positions of people in corporations and their points of view. Secondly, this is a “snapshot”
study; hence, it could not observe possible changes of managers once they would be
promoted in higher positions.
In general observation, this is a good study, in terms of well-done and well-prepared
format of the survey, data analysis and particularly interpreted results. From the picture of the
successful athletic team, it went straight to the research process and outcome explanations. At
the end, it reached to a valuable conclusion is that to be a winning team, a company should
follow its definite advices or the path it sketched.
In the first reading (Parnell 2005, 157), the three levels did not share the same
philosophies views of strategic process due to differences in job experiences, responsibilities
and organizational perspectives. For instance, middle managers (level) usually viewed
strategies as the art, consistency emphasis and bottom-up decision making process (strategic
philosophies); on the contrary, top managers regarded them as the science, flexibility and topdown decision making process. This proposed more in-depth researches of related factors
influencing these philosophies of managers (ages, cultures, and working industries) to find
out a link between levels and strategic philosophies in quest of moderate solutions.
The second reading (Barlett and Ghoshal 1997, 92) on the one side concreted over the values
of traditionally constant roles of three levels of managers, on the other side it proposed the
rethinking of a more flexible structure, and bottom-up or upside down pyramid. To survive
and grow sustainably in a very dynamic environment in the present time, any corporate needs
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 6 of 13
to modify its selecting, developing and coaching process as soon as possible, as discussed in
more detail in the paper.
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 7 of 13
REFERENCES
Barlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. 1997. The Myth Of The Generic Manager: New Personal
Competencies For New Management. California Management Review, 40 (1): 92
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=77&did=24034642&S
rchMode=1&sid=9&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQ
D&TS=1219065888&clientId=22212(accessed August 22, 2008)
Kraut, A.I., Pedigo, P.R., McKenna, D.D., and Dunnette, M.D. 1989. The Role Of The
Manager: What’s Really Important In Different Management Jobs. The Academy Of
Management Executive, 2 (4): 286-293.
Management Levels
http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Log-Mar/ManagementLevels.html(accessed August 24, 2008)
Managerial Functions
http://ollie.dcccd.edu/MGMT1374/book_contents/1overview/managerial_functions/m
grl_functions.htm(accessed August 24, 2008)
Parnell, J.A. 2005. Strategic Philosophy And Management Level. Management Decision 43
(2): 157.
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=30&did=828881881&
SrchMode=1&sid=9&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQ
D&TS=1219065248&clientId=22212(accessed August 22, 2008)
Reh, F.J. Manager.
http://management.about.com/od/policiesandprocedures/g/manager1.htm(accessed
August 24, 2008)
Stoner, J.A.F. and Freeman, R.E. 1992. Management. United States of America: PrenticeHall, Inc.
PHAN CAM TU
MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES 560
Page 8 of 13
APPENDIX: THE CORRELATIONS AMONG MANAGERIAL TASKS, LEVELS AND FUNCTIONS
Level
No.
Function
Task
First-line
1 Managing individual performance
2 Instructing subordinates
3 Planning and allocating resources
4 Coordinating interdependent groups
5 Managing group performance
6 Monitoring the business environment
7 Representing one’s staff
N.B.
Yellow column
Most important
Ograne column
Equally important
Blue column
Least important
PHAN CAM TU
Middle Executive Marketing Manufacturing Administrating
Management Principles and Practices 560
Page 9 of 13
REPORT 2: PEARSON AND CHATTERJEE, 2003
The definition of the management is not brand-new in the world; instead, it has been
existed in China, India, Egypt, Israel, Greece and Rome long time ago (Hickson & Pugh 2001,
3). It was defined as “the process of coordinating work activities so that they are completed
efficiently and effectively with and through other people”. Along with the Industrial
Revolution derived from England and Western Europe, it has been classified into four main
branches including the scientific management (F. Taylor), administrative principles (H.
Fayol), bureaucratic organization (M. Weber) and human relations movement (E. Mayo, A.
Maslow) (McNamara, 2008). Nevertheless, three big questions raised to be discussed are that
playing roles as managers, in fact, what, how and why they do (The Nature Of Managerial
Work by Henry Mintzberg)? In order words, at the work place what they do, what is the
impetus forcing them to do and which means they do it. These fundamental queries were
defined and clarified in Mintzberg’s book first published in 1973. He grouped ten managerial
roles into three major roles consisting of the interpersonal, informational and decisional
(Mintzberg: The Managerial Roles). As for the interpersonal role, it is evolved from formal
authority and status and supports the information and decision making process (Managerial
Roles). That is, it is the way how managers interact with each other in an organization. In turn,
it is divided into three subordinate or sub-roles including the figurehead (performing social
and legal duties, representing a company), leader (motivating, interacting, selecting and
training employees) and liaison (establishing contacts with other managers or networking)
(Managerial Roles According To Henry Mintzberg). With respect to the informational role,
it is regarded as the information and knowledge receipt and transfer process of managers
inside and outside organizations. Accordingly, it embraces the monitor (collecting data
inherent in work/tasks), disseminator (transmitting information from external sources and
employees to interested or relevant people) and spokesperson (transmitting inside information
to outsiders). Lastly, with reference to the decisional role, it referred to significant and
influential decisions made by managers. It is fallen into four associated roles including
entrepreneur (seeking new opportunities for organization development and initiate
innovations), disturbance handler (taking care of an organization issues), resource allocation
(distributing resources) and negotiator (representing the company to negotiate) (The Ten
Management Roles Of A Manager Identified By Mintzberg!).
PHAN CAM TU
Management Principles and Practices 560
Page 10 of 13
The study of Pearson and Chatterjee (2003, 694-707) challenged the thesis of
Mintzberg. Despite accepted generally in the Western context, especially in eminent bodies
such as UN, WB and IMF, two authors raised a question that wonder whether it could be
implemented in South-East Asia, notably in Brunei, Malaysia, Japan and Thailand business
communities or not? In order words, the purpose of this study is to find out the relevance of
Minztberg’s ten managerial roles based on the Western context vis-à-vis the non-Western
context implementations.
This study followed the quantitative methodology. The questionnaire distributed to
609 indigenous managers in four countries. Those of managers were employed in diversified
sectors such as manufacturing and services. Especially, the guanxi – the informal networks or
relationships- was utilized whist carrying out the questionnaire process in Malaysia and
Thailand.
The findings of this research demonstrated through three tables. In the table one,
firstly generally there was the dominance of male managers (Japan). Secondly, the number of
executive managers in Malaysia and supervisors in Thailand was the highest as compared to
other nations. Thirdly, the ages of managers were varied as well (oldest in Japan and
youngest in Thailand). Lastly, the education was heavily paid attention to in most of the
countries. In the table two, there were three key features. Firstly, in different countries,
managers considered the importance of managerial roles being not similar. Secondly, among
countries, the frequency of employment of these ten roles did not resemble. Lastly, the rated
importance and the usage of these roles were different as well in these countries. In the table
three, one important point thereof was that cultural and gender features influenced on
managerial roles across these nations.
There were two salient conclusions of this study. Firstly, the theories created and
built up by Mintzberg were depended on in the mono-cultural or culture-free environment.
That is, he did not take into consideration of the socio-cultural variables (ages, genders) that
control the managerial roles. Secondly, the managerial work in Asia countries relied
significantly on communication, coordination, information dissemination, people motivation
and constant engagement in the negotiation process rather than competencies and separated
roles in Western ones.
PHAN CAM TU
Management Principles and Practices 560
Page 11 of 13
The contribution of the study is to enhance the managerial role theories developed by
Mintzberg. Previously, roles of managers are supposed to be convergent, universalistic and
analogical in any places in the world. In fact, they have been underpinned and determined by
cultural and societal background. This means that different countries, cultures and genders
lead to a wide variety of managerial role importance, usage and employment frequency.
Generally, the roles of managers hinge on the “contextual nuance” or context-base indeed,
rather than the context free.
The limitation of this research, from my perspective, is the choice of sample nations.
Three countries such as Brunei, Malaysia and Thailand are developing countries; therefore,
they are suitable for the earlier hypothesis. Nevertheless, in case of Japan, it is a developed
and westernized one with modern society, systems, education, navy and so forth (Chatterjee
and Nankervis 2007, 114:5). For this reason, it should not be included in the list.
Overall, this is a valuable study. On the one side, the reading confirmed the
remarkable contributions of Mintzberg’s study for the modern theories of management. As
compared to the traditional ones, he expressed what he found out (managers dealt with a
diversity of issues and preferred using verbal communication) in a more clear-cut and
succinct way. On the other side, it expanded this by proving that there were more variables
(genders, cultures, ages) influencing on these roles as well.
Two more readings that substantiate for this study emphasize on the importance of
diversified contextual and cultural factors impacting on managerial roles. The first article
(Pearson, Chatterjee and Okachi 2003) showed that Japanese managers have been embedded
in uniquely traditional, cultural, social and economic factors of Japan. Unavoidably, the way
they do business and managerial employment or frequency are not absolutely and exactly the
same ways as Mintzberg’s theories. In the second article (Dvorak 2006), that is the case of
Japanese and Korean managers contrasted with the U.S. managers. Due to different cultures,
mindsets and working attitudes, these managers got stuck when carrying out corporate
strategies.
In sum, there are no universal strategy and model that could apply broadly around the
world. Instead, they should be adapted based on specific context and culture of a particular
country.
PHAN CAM TU
Management Principles and Practices 560
Page 12 of 13
REFERENCES
Chatterjee, S.R. and Nankervis, A.R. 2007. Asian Management In Transition: Emerging
Themes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dvorak, P. 2006. Theory And Practice: Making U.S. Management Ideas Work Elsewhere; A
Grasp Of Local Practices Helps Advance Strategies That Were Jarring Abroad. Wall Street
Journal.
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=24&did=1040104151
&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=
PQD&TS=1218531474&clientId=22212(accessed August 18, 2008)
Hickson, D.J. & Pugh, D.S. 2001. Management Worldwide: Distinctive Styles Amid
Globalization. England: Penguin Books Ltd.
Managerial Roles According To Henry Mintzberg.
http://www.bashedu.ru/konkurs/ibatullina/eng/rules.htm(accessed August 17, 2008)
Managerial Roles
http://telecollege.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/1overview/managerial_roles/m
grl_roles.htm(accessed August 17, 2008)
McNamara, C. 2008. Very Brief History Of Management Theories.
http://www.managementhelp.org/mgmnt/history.htm(accessed August 15, 2008)
Mintzberg: The Managerial Roles.
http://www.bola.biz/mintzberg/mintzberg2.html(accessed August 15, 2008)
Pearson, C.A.L. and Chatterjee, S.R. 2003. Managerial Work Roles In Asia: An Empirical
Study of Mintzberg’s Role Formulation In Four Asian Countries. The Journal of
Management Development 22 (7/8): 694-707.
Pearson, C.A.L. Chatterjee, S.R. and Okachi, K. 2003. Managerial Work Role Perceptions In
Japanese Organizations: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Management 20 (1):
101.
PHAN CAM TU
Management Principles and Practices 560
Page 13 of 13
http://proquest.umi.com.dbgw.lis.curtin.edu.au/pqdweb?index=121&did=342905421
&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=
PQD&TS=1218536190&clientId=22212(accessed August 18, 2008)
The Nature Of Managerial Work by Henry Mintzberg.
http://www.tiberius.ro/enter/ManagementLibrary/14MgmtLibrary-UK.pdf(accessed
August 15, 2008)
The Ten Management Roles Of A Manager Identified By Mintzberg!
http://www.123oye.com/job-articles/hr/management-roles-manager.htm(accessed
August 17, 2008)
PHAN CAM TU