APPLICATION EXPERIENCE

            The Congruent Management Strategy was applied in a large public sector institution. A majority of the unskilled and semiskilled employees were the second, third, and fourth generations of their family to have worked there. The upper management consisted of professionals who had moved into the area upon assignment and a few local people who had worked upwards through the organization. Recent policy and program changes had resulted in a rapid influx of young professionals who had, in the main, new program responsibility within the institution. Few of the new, younger managers were in positions above middle management.

            For the past three years an outside organization had been retained to advise and structure an organizational development program for the institution. The recommended approach was essentially participatory, democratic, group centered and unstructured in style. The top executive accepted this approach as being the modern, enlightened way to manage. The older, senior professionals were to involve the younger managers in the planning, recommendation, and decision making process. Rank, title, and legal responsibility was to be de-emphasized and open participation encouraged. Upper management was to become less directive by involving lower and lower levels in the management process, hopefully becoming more “democratic” as a result. An institution wide survey was conducted, after a year, to determine employee concerns and problems. The survey response was nearly unanimous, the employee felt upper management had the responsibility to lead and they did not, also they wanted to know what was expected of them and when. The older senior people saw the involvement of others, especially juniors, as a threat to position and prestige. The younger members saw the older as out of step with the requirements of changing times and more concerned for rank and privilege than for providing better public service. The employee began to see a management that apparently lacked direction and as fragmentation continued and solidified their suspicions were re-enforced. Accompanying this lack-of-direction concern was increasingly apprehension over job security. The top executive became increasingly frustrated as progress ground to a halt, great amounts of time were consumed to no apparent end, decisions were debated, areas of responsibility were debated and often denied, and the various groups become visibly polarized. However, the organizational development effort was continued in hopes of the promised rewards. Finally, over the course of many months, the situation deteriorated to the point that upper management was unable to agree on overall organization objectives and could not commence the required planning process. The final stage being the offer by the outside organization to undertake the planning process for the institution.

            At this point, we were asked to enter the situation and advise top management. Our response was to implement the Congruent Management Strategy as presented in this article. Top management was provided with an understanding of the strategy and guidance in implementation. The Congruent Management Strategy was presented to the institutional community through seminars open to all employees. With full support of the top executive, the ENTRY/RE-ENTRY phase was undertaken. Top management moved towards the RE-ENTRY style (in fact found it personally comfortable) by focusing on the organizations objectives. All three portions of POA were fully present.

           As much required direction, guidance, schedule and structure were provided as the organization could tolerate. Discussion and suggestion were invited. Those ideas or changes that were responsive to the objectives received greater support. Much less threat was felt by individuals and groups in the move to the RE-ENTRY style as the need for everyone’s contribution was not only recognized, but encouraged. Within a period of three months, the planning process was underway, with new concepts and programs under consideration, and with greater participation from individuals through out the institute. The move to group polarization had begun to reverse itself and concomitant with increasing unit interest in the overall mission, came greater cooperation. It also became apparent that as the transmission of managements directedness downward in the organization improved, so did employee morale and the sense of organizational and institutional security.  

            The ANALYSIS and movement to CONGRUENT has proceeded in the management structure with upper management beginning to establish CONGRUENCY with the middle managers reporting to them. Although this process is never-ending, the improved institutional performance and climate are already paying dividends.

            Another application concerned the evaluation of managerial performance. A first line manager in a centralized facility was under heavy pressure to improve unit performance. Upper management was concerned because there was a high degree of employee turnover, lateness and absenteeism in the unit. They laid these problems to poor performance on the managers part. Interestingly, there was no concern for the unit output which was at or above required levels. Upper management saw the problem not as getting the work done, but rather getting the employees to exhibit more regular behavior.

            Due to the nature of the work and the community from which the employees were hired (large metropolitan) there was a very large portion of Egocentrics in the Unit. They worked when they wanted to and as they wanted to. The manager having an intuitive feeling for this had naturally arrived at the TOUGHT PATERNALISTIC style, therefore, the required work was done each day. The lateness and absenteeism was handled at the immediate level through docking the employees pay each week. Through the judicious uses of “floating” personnel and a few “extra” people, the manager had assured that staffing was sufficient. Although the turnover was continuously high, there was a constant stream of applicants – often “referred” by the non-shows.

            Upper management’s message was clear. The rules were to be rigidly enforced, supervision was lax and must be improved. Our position was to show top management that, given the unit’s situation, there was near congruency of management style. To pursue any other managerial approach would not only fail to improve things, but would most likely result in deterioration. The first line supervisor was managing well!  A manager should not be evaluated by the process of management, but rather by the results achieved, i.e. accomplishing the unit objectives through others using a congruent management strategy. In this case, management was requiring the supervisor to do the job using their preconceived notion as to what was the appropriate managerial style.

IN SUMMARY

            The task of management has never been known to be easy. However, this task can be facilitated to the extent the available knowledge of human psychology is understood and utilized by management. In this regard, both the theory and management strategy presented should find an ally in the common sense feel and experience of practicing managers in stating organizational reality as: 

-     People are different - - they have different needs and motivations.

-      There is a discernable pattern to the differences.

In the organization this means:

-        The managed will prefer management congruent with their behavior level.

-        The work group will consist of individuals from different levels who must
      be managed both as a unit and individually - - a mixed group.

           The solution to many of the problems facing today’s organizations is learning to provide the congruent management style each individual finds most comfortable and has a right to receive. Management has no right to attempt to push the style it finds comfortable upon others. Many of the current efforts in Organizational Development will make little progress until this is appreciated.

            The Congruent Management Strategy, we believe, is truly what Douglas McGregor would term Theory Y management. It is also what Blake and Mouton would define as 9, 9 management. The concepts presented will help the individual manager cut through the confusion and contradictory advice on what is or is not the appropriate management style. As McGregor pointed out, a Theory Y manager has no preconceived notions as to what is an appropriate style and is capable of utilizing a wide range of managerial responses. It is the Theory X manager who perceives of people in a fixed and prescriptive way. (7, 8).

[Notes forthcoming]

 previous <<  |  14  |  >> top