Aligning Managers with Strategies Management Development Versus Selection

...

the strategic part of the general manager’s job is, by nature, unstructured, non-routine, and idiosyncratic (Ackoff , 1978; Mintzberg, Raisinghani, and Theoret, 1976; Ramaprasad and Mitroff , 1984).

Finally, although the selection approach assumes that managers can be reallocated as different strategic behaviors are required, researches of managerial work propose otherwise. This ignores the associated disturbance of social and political relationships that form the foundation of organizational functioning.

A CONTINGENCY MODEL

Manager-strategy matching models assume that organizational efficiency is enriched by aligning strategic demands with managerial talent (Szilagyi and Schweiger, 1984). The subsequent discussion and propositions debates that the effectiveness of every alignment methodology is a function of its congruence or fit with the organizational environment in which it functions.

Strategy

The terms ’steady­ state’ and ‘evolutionary’ were used by Leontiades (1980) to describe differences in organizational growth strategies.

Steady-state companies count on long-term commitment to a steady set of businesses and on the effective management of shared resources (Kerr, 1985), management development contributes to the employment of this policy by exposing managers to a variable range of organizational activities (Edstrom and Galbraith, 1979) . Companies that follow a steady­ state growth strategy, will find management development more effective and will more frequently use the technique in aligning managers and strategies.

Evolutionary firms main mode of growth is through acquisitions, mergers, and further external activities, usually into unrelated areas, survival depends, to a great level, on selecting acquisitions widely and on divesting in a very timely manner. It furthermore depends on the capacity to manage divisions while not becoming excessively involved in their operations

This strategy mainly depends on top management’s ability to manage the portfolio insteadof the companies that consist of it (Leontiades, 1980). Selection helps in the implementation of this strategy by permitting top management to match strategic needs with a greater pool of possible nominees. Firms following the evolutionary strategy, will find selection to be the more efficient and more frequently used technique for aligning managers with strategies.

Structure

To support its strategy, the steady-state firm is probably going to develop a structure characterized by a high degree of monetary unit mutuality (Allen, 1978; Berg, 1973). The first organization structure is probably going to be increased by an outsized workers and by advanced coordinating mechanisms that replicate the complexness of interdependence and the need for control (Galbraith, 1982). Management development will be the preferred method of aligning managers with strategies for Corporations exhibiting a high level of interdependence and integration.

Given the low level of integration in the evolutionary strategy, selection is probably going to be more cost-effective than development,

Culture

Organizations tend to develop values and norms that support strategy, as part of the implementation process (Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Schwartz and Davis, 1981). ’Clan’ is a term used to describe an organizational culture known for long socialization, powerful norms, and adopted controls (Ouchi, 1980).

The development process is probably going to extend the manager’s sense of belonging to a social as well as economic entity (Asch, 1952; Wanous, Reichers and Malik, 1984). In organizations operating with a clan-like culture, it would be expected to see a greater dependence on management development as a way to align managers with strategies.

Organizations following an evolutionary strategy are more likely to develop values that inspire assertiveness and independence in division managers, and discourage a sense of community or permanence. The term ’market’ has been used in describing cultures known by few social and attitudinal norms and clear, measureable controls (Ouchi, 1980), companies operating with a such culture, selection will be the ideal technique for aligning managers with strategies..

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

It is vital to acknowledge that every technique derives from a specific view of the strategy­ making procedure and of organizational functioning generally. Selection is consistent with a mechanistic view of organizational functioning in which managerial characteristics and abilities are assumed as fixed. While, development is consistent with a fluid, organic view of organizations in which both managers’ skills and strategic demands are seen as progressing through time. Nonetheless the target of both selection and development is to contribute to the organization’s ability to adjust to environmental and strategic variation.