Master Thesis
An explorative study on the perception of the facilitation needs toward middle management to optimize the managerial efforts by first-line supervisors to influence the
strategically aligned behavior of the subordinate
Name: Querine Kalma Student number: 10317430
Name University: Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam Master Program: MSc Business Studies
Supervisor: E. Dirksen MSe.
2nd supervisor: Dr. W. van Eerde
2 Preface
When I first started thinking about my thesis topic I immediately knew I wanted to do
something with business strategy. My interest in this topic stems from my work activities as a project manager at a.s.r., a large top-down organization where company strategy is formulated at the top and executed at the lower levels. As a project manager I carry out the execution of the strategic choices made by top management and I closely cooperate with the operational core in doing so. The process of transferring and implementing the strategy has always fascinated me as it is on the one hand a very abstract matter, but on the other hand a very practical issue when it comes down to executing it. And this latter is also the biggest challenge in business strategy; on paper you can formulate a perfect strategy, but when implementing it, it often turns out that there is a big difference between theory and practice. With this work, I hope I can bring theory and practice closer together by introducing nine concepts regarding the optimization of the facilitation efforts of middle management to perform the managerial actions by first-line management to align subordinate’s behavior with strategy.
First of all I would like to thank all the case study organizations. Without their response I was not able to write the thesis. I also would like to thank my tutors Mr. van Neerijnen and Mrs. O’Sullivan for guiding me through the process of defining a research gap and setting up the study. In addition to that I would like to thank my supervisor Mr. Dirksen who guided me through the whole thesis process from beginning to end.
Enjoy reading.
Querine Kalma,
3 Abstract
The managerial actions to inform the employee about the strategy, to motivate them to carry out the required strategic actions and to develop their capabilities to enable them to perform the required strategic actions all influence the degree of line of sight of the employee; an employee’s understanding of the organization’s goals and what actions are necessary to contribute to those objectives. Line of sight therefore affects the strategically aligned behavior of an employee. Strategically aligned behavior is of importance for all employee’s in the company but particularly important for employee’s close to the core processes and the
consumer, thus in the operational core. In traditional top-down organizations the employees in the operational core are managed by first-line supervisors and therefore have major influence on the strategically aligned behavior of the subordinates in the operational core. The first-line manager is in turn managed and accordingly facilitated by middle management to optimally perform these managerial actions. This work explores, by conducting a multiple-case study how first-line supervisors are best facilitated by middle management to optimally perform on the managerial variables informing, motivating and developing the capabilities. The study researches the perceptions of the first-line supervisor and the manager on the facilitation needs and based on these perceptions nine theoretical concepts are formulated regarding the required facilitation efforts by middle management to facilitate first-line management. This study enriches existing theory of aligning employee’s behavior by formulating nine
facilitation concepts by middle-management for the optimization of the facilitation of the first-line supervisors’ managerial variables informing, motivating and developing capabilities.
Keywords: strategic management, organizational strategy, employee alignment, facilitation efforts, first-line supervisor, middle management, top-down
4 Inhoud Preface ... 2 Abstract ... 3 Overview of figures ... 5 1. Introduction ... 6 2. Theoretical Background ... 8
2.1 Defining Strategy and Strategically aligned behavior ... 8
2.2 Importance of strategically aligned behavior ... 9
2.3 Factors that influence strategically aligned behavior ... 11
3. Data and Method ... 14
3.1 Research Setting ... 14
3.2 Case study organizations ... 15
3.2.1 a.s.r. – Business line Life ... 17
3.2.2 the Amersfoortse ... 17
3.2.3 SOS International... 18
3.3 Research Technique ... 18
3.4. Data Analysis ... 20
4.0 Analysis ... 22
4.1 Actions by first-line managers to inform, motivate and develop the capabilities ... 22
4.2 General needs of the first-line manager ... 25
4.2.1 General needs with respect to the strategy ... 25
4.2.2 General needs with respect to managerial support ... 27
4.3 Facilitating needs toward the manager ... 28
4.3.1 Non-variable specific needs ... 29
4.3.2 Variable specific needs ... 32
4.4 Perception of the manager on first-line managers’ needs ... 33
4.4.1 Non-variable specific needs ... 34
4.5 Similarities and differences between the perception of the first-line manager and the manager ... 36
5.Conclusion ... 39
6. Limitations and Further Research ... 44
References ... 46
Appendix 1 Interview Guide First-line Supervisor ... 51
5 Overview of figures
Figures
Figure 1. Managerial actions that influence Strategically Aligned Behavior ... 12
Figure 2. Conceptual model research ... 13
Figure 3. Organizational structure a.s.r. ... 16
Figure 4. General needs with respect to strategy... 27
Figure 5. General needs toward managerial support ... 28
6 1. Introduction
Today’s marketplace is characterized as turbulent and volatile as product-life cycles shorten and global economic and competition create additional uncertainty (Christopher, 2000). Key to survive or even to thrive in today’s market is through timely responsiveness to changes and rapid and flexible product and internal process innovation along with the
management capability to effectively coordinate and redeploy internal and external competences (Teece, 1994). This emphasizes the key role of strategic management in appropriately adapting, integrating, and re-configuring internal and external organizational skills, resources, and functional competences toward the changing environment (Teece, 1994). One of the key criteria for companies to ascertain responsiveness and to be able to quickly respond to changes in the market, is to align the behavior of the employees with the strategy of the company. Employees showing behavior that is in line with the strategy of the company will encourage behavior and actions that supports the firm’s interest and needs (Drucker, 1954), which will eventually lead to improved strategic performance (Boswell, 2000).
Previous research indicated that the degree of strategically aligned behavior is most important in companies where human capital plays a major role in creating value (Weatherly, 2003). In addition to this strategically aligned behavior is most important to employees in a position close to the customer and core organizational processes (Boswell, Boudreau 2001; Boswell, Bingham, Colvin 2006).
Boswell, Bingham, Colvin (2006) indicate that strategically aligned behavior can be influenced through the line of sight of employees; the employee’s understanding of the
organization’s goals and what actions are necessary to contribute to those objectives (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006). Line of sight can be influenced by the perceived managerial actions informing, motivating and developing the capabilities (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin 2006; Riel et al., 2009)
In a traditional top-down organization the subordinates in the operational core (Mintzberg, 1979) are directly managed by the first-line supervisor who in turn is managed by middle management. Thus the managerial activities of the first-line supervisor to inform the
7 activities and to develop their capabilities in order to enable them to perform the activities (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006; Riel et al., 2009), have a big influence on the degree of strategically aligned behavior of the subordinate. In order to optimally perform these activities, middle management facilitates the first-line manager. This prior work provides a foundation discerning first-line supervisors’ role on influencing the strategically aligned behavior of the subordinates. It does not, however, address one important question: how
should a first-line supervisor be facilitated by middle-management so that he performs optimally on the managerial efforts on influencing capability building, motivation and informing of the operational core?
Answer to this question is particularly important in a traditional top-down organization where the dependence of the facilitative actions of middle management is greatest as middle-management mandate is to transfer information vertically from higher-middle-management to the operational core and backward and where middle-management has to advocate the needs of the operational core in other company groups (Likert, 1961).
Therefore in this work, I explore how the first-line supervisor is optimally supported by his manager by researching the perception of both the first-line manager and the relating manager on the needs of the first-line supervisor toward middle-management to inform the subordinate about the strategy, motivate them and develop their capabilities. Based on the perception of the needs, the required facilitative actions by middle- management can be formulated. I do this by taking a multiple case study approach, studying three companies in the service industry, involving a total number of twelve in-depth semi-structured interviews. Finally, based on the researched data, concepts will be formulated which will give insights into the required facilitative needs from the first-line supervisor toward middle management.
I start defining strategically aligned behavior more explicitly, together with the variables that influence strategically aligned behavior. Thereafter I give a description of the exact methods used. Then I present my findings for the cases analyzed, integrating the findings into formulated concepts that can be tested in future research. Finally I provide limitations on the study and recommendations for further research.
8 2. Theoretical Background
2.1 Defining Strategy and Strategically aligned behavior
Before addressing the definition of strategically aligned behavior I first give a brief introduction on strategic planning and the definition and type of strategic planning which will be referred to in this work.
Strategic planning is the way an organization defines its strategy and implements it. In the mid-1960s, strategic planning became focus of management attention. Back then strategy planning was seen as the way to enhance the competitiveness of each business unit (Mintzberg, 1994). Strategy was defined as a pattern of decisions in a company that determines and reveals its objectives, purposes, or goals (Andrews, 1971). Andrews (1971) also introduced the distinction between the concept corporate and business strategy. The first is concerned with the businesses a company will compete in, the latter determines the how a business competes successfully in a particular market. In this work strategy is referred to the corporate strategy of a company.
In the sixties and seventies strategy planning was seen as ‘a process existing of a set of
rational techniques for manageing complex businesses in changing environments’ (Knights
and Morgan, 1999). The introduction of several strategy management tools like the BCG Matrix (the Boston Consultancy Group) and Porters’ five forces analysis strengthened the idea of strategic planning as step-by-step instructions for carrying out those strategies so that the strategy implementers could not get them wrong. Besides that the formulation and the implementation of the strategy were regarded as distinct processes (Aaltonen and Ikavalko, 2002).
Over the years it was proven that the process of strategy formulation and implementation is not rational decision based and authors started challenging this idea on strategic planning by questioning the extent to which strategy actually embodies rational processes (Aaltonen and Ikavalko, 2002). Among others author Henry Mintzberg (1994) who argues that strategy evolves over time and is therefore not static. From then on much of the academic literature emphasizes the socially constructed and thereby political character of strategic planning process and the inability of rational models to account for the uncertain speed and direction of organization change (Knights and Morgan, 1999). Besides that, authors more and more questioned whether strategy formulation and implementation are successive processes.
9 Among others is Pettigrew (1978) who suggested that strategic planning is an incremental process as the context and the process are intertwined and affect each other.
Strategy planning can be executed top-down and bottom-up. Top-down strategy planning keeps the decision making process at the senior level. The strategies and goals are determined on higher management level and implemented via middle management to lower management. Bottom-up strategy planning refers to a planning process were all employees from all levels are involved during each stage of the planning process (Gundlach, 2011).
The size of thecompany generally determines whether the company applies a top-down or bottom-up approach to strategy planning. As the firm grows, distance between higher management and lower management increases; and therefore additional levels of management are necessarily added. This gives increasing pressure to develop formal, and therewith top-down strategic planning processes (Banbury, Hart, 1994).
Top-down strategic planning processes often go hand in hand with pre-determined strategic plans, which implies carrying out a preset plan of action at a predetermined time (Mintzberg and Waters, 1985). Bottom-up strategic planning processes often apply an emergent view on strategy, which implies a strategy that emerges and evolves without interventions by the strategic planners, or in spite of them (Mintzberg, 1978).
In this work strategy is determined as an internally consistent and integrated set of goals that ensures that the basic objectives of the organizations are achieved. As I research medium- to large-sized organizations the strategy is predominantly pre-determined and the companies apply a top-down strategic planning process.
When an employee within a company has a thorough understanding of the organization’s strategy and accurately understands what actions are aligned with realizing that strategy the behavior of the employee is in line with the strategic goals the company wants to achieve (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006).
2.2 Importance of strategically aligned behavior
Strategically aligned employees show behavior that corresponds with the organization’s strategy (Gagnon, Jansen, Michael, 2008) and behave in a contributory way in order to support the firm’s interests and needs (Drucker, 1954). Strategically aligned behavior is beneficial to both the employee as well as for the company as it will lead to improved
10 employee attitudes, an improvement in key business processes and in the end higher
organizational-level outcomes (Boswell and Boudreau, 2001). In this section the effects of employee’s strategically alignment are discussed more elaborately based on existing theory.
When an employee is aligned with the company’s strategy, he not only understands the strategy of the organization, he also understands his role in context of the strategy and how he can contribute to the firm’s overall strategy in this role. Previous research indicated that this could facilitate an employee’s sense of belongingness and ultimately his attachment to the organization (Porter 1961, 2003; Boswell, 2000). Therefore strategically aligned behavior can be associated with strategically constructive employee attitudes e.g. job satisfaction,
commitment and employee retention (Boswell, 2000), which will ultimately lead to strategically higher performance.
In addition to this previous theory indicating that when employees have a thorough understanding of the companies’ needs in accordance to the organization’s strategic
objectives, it may also prevent employees from developing other, perhaps conflicting, goals that may interfere with an organization’s strategic objectives (Boswell, 2000). This is also suggested by Eisenhardt’ (1989) agency theory; this theory implies that conflicting interests may exist between principal (client) and agent (contractor) where the contractor is not only pursuing the interests of the client when performing task. Because the client is not performing the task himself there is information asymmetry; the client has not the full information to check whether the contractor acted on his behalf or on the behalf of the contractor himself.
A conflict of interest can especially occur when there is a high degree of non-discretionary tasks: tasks which cannot be defined in advance and therefore cannot be monitored, i.e. the grey-areas (Riggs and Knight, 1994). In tasks in the grey area strategically aligned behavior will matter most because non-discretionary tasks cannot be monitored, therefore it is
especially important to ensure employees behave in the interest of the needs to accomplish the goals of the company. As stated by Boswell, Bingham and Colvin (2006); strategically
aligned behavior equips employees to more effectively engage in those actions that are not readily controlled by management or defined by a formal job description.
Research carried out by Boswell, Boudreau (2001) indicated that strategically aligned behavior is considered important at all levels of the organization. But strategically aligned
11 behavior is of particular importance for employees in the lower level of the organization thus closest to the core organizational process or products and where employees have the most contact with customers. (Boswell, Boudreau 2001; Boswell, Bingham, Colvin 2006).
In addition to that, strategically aligned behavior is of greater organizational value in organizations where one of the main sources of value creation is human capital and thus determinant of companies’ success (Weatherly, 2003).
2.3 Factors that influence strategically aligned behavior
Strategically aligned behavior is attained and sustained through the employees’ degree of line of sight to the organization’s strategic objectives. Line of sight is an employee’s
understanding of the organization’s goals and what actions are necessary to contribute to those objectives (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006). Previous research by Boswell and Boudreau (2001) indicated that the supervisor of the employee plays a crucial role in the communication of group, division, and organizational goals to their employees, as well as managing their performance toward those goals. Thus supervisor-subordinate relations have an influence on developing line of sight of the employee.
Subsequent studies researched the particular managerial efforts that stimulate strategically aligned behavior of the subordinate. Several authors identified three managerial actions that influence the line of sight to the organization’s strategic objectives; capability building, informing and motivating (Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006; Riel et al., 2009). Capability building and informing influences the action alignment (Riel et al., 2009) of the employee; the ability of the employee to identify and engage in behaviors that most effectively lead to the realization of the goals of organizational strategy (Colvin and Boswell, 2007). Motivation influences the interest alignment of the employee, which is the willingness to engage in such aligned actions (Colvin and Boswell, 2007). Action alignment and interest alignment together influences the degree of strategically aligned behavior of the employee.
Riel et al., (2009) researched the managerial efforts within the variables capability building, motivating and informing and indicated that to motivate the subordinate, the manager has to create a rationale and should support a positive communication climate by creating openness, participative decision making, involvement and supportiveness. In order to
12 develop the capabilities of the subordinate a manager should supply sufficient training and resources. In order to inform the subordinate about the strategy, a manager should inform the employee on both the companies’ overall strategy and on role specific information. Figure 1 displays an overview of the managerial actions indicated by Riel et al., (2009).
Figure 1. Managerial actions that influence Strategically Aligned Behavior
Source: Riel et al., (2009)
In medium-sized and large organizations with a traditional, top-down company structure, first line supervisors are part of the operational core (Mintzberg, 1979) and represent the first level of management to whom non-managerial employees report. Their main responsibility is immediate direction and control of an area of work and day-to-day supervision of those who carry out the work in the operational core (Hales, 2005). Therefore they play a very important role in influencing the development of line of sight of the subordinates by informing about the strategy, developing their capabilities and motivating them through the managerial efforts within these variables as researched by Riel et al., (2009). To optimally perform these
managerial efforts first-line supervisors are highly dependent on middle management not only as their direct manager but also because of their intermediate position to higher management, the level where the strategy is formulated which the operational level has to execute (Floyd and Wooldridge, 1994). Because first-line supervisors play an important role in influencing
13 the behavior of the subordinates on the operational level, it is of great interest to optimally support the first-line managers in doing so. Despite its significance, the facilitating efforts toward the first-line supervisor are a relatively unexplored area. Since first-line supervisors are highly dependent on middle management, this work will research how first-line
supervisors can best be facilitated by middle manager to optimally perform on the managerial efforts to inform, motivate and build the capabilities. Figure 2 displays the conceptual model researched in this study.
Figure 2. Conceptual model research
Source: Riel et al., 2009, Mintzberg,1979; Floyd and Wooldridge, 1994; Boswell, Bingham, Colvin, 2006; Colvin and Boswell,2007; Boswell, Boudreau 2001.
14 3. Data and Method
With this study, I explore the research question ‘how should a first-line supervisor be facilitated by middle-management so that he performs optimally on the managerial efforts on influencing capability building, motivation and informing of the operational core? Since this is a relatively unexplored area and I want to understand instead of test, I will perform an exploratory study in order to elaborate existing theory on managerial efforts to influence the strategically aligned behavior of employees (Yin, 2009).
In addition to that I will perform a multiple case study by conducting research in more than one organization. The benefits of doing a multiple case study as opposed to a single case study is that it increases the likeliness of yielding accurate theory (Yin, 2009) as it enables the collection of comparative data since multiple cases within each category allows findings to be replicated within categories (Eisenhardt, 1989).
Furthermore by conducting a multiple case study it increases the between-groups variance (that is, variation across organizations) which provides an indication of the sensitivity of results to company specificity. Because of the limited time available for this study I will perform a study at three company cases. Important indicator is that theoretical saturation level is reached with the data of these three company cases. If not I will continue conducting interviews till saturation level is reached (Eisenhardt, 1989)
3.1 Research Setting
For the multi-case study a purposeful selection of potential respondents are selected which provides me with information-rich cases, necessary for the in-depth study (Patton, 1990). The conditions for the respondents are that they work in a company with a top-down structure and where strategically aligned behavior is of great importance. I therefore focused on medium and large-sized companies with a traditional organizational structure operating in the service industry. Other conditions for the selected companies are that human capital is the main source of value creation. Besides this in all three organizations there is a high degree of non-discretionary behavior.
15 In order to obtain rich data on the perception on how to optimally facilitate the first-line supervisors I interviewed both the first-line supervisor, referred to as research group 1, and the relating manager; research group 2. Another reason for interviewing both the manager and the first-line supervisor is to research whether discrepancies exist between the perception of the manager and the supervisors. If this is the case it could give reason for further research.
Within those company cases I conducted research on operational level, meaning that I primarily derived data from people close to the product and customer. I first derived
qualitative data from the first-line supervisors. Then I collected data through semi-structured interviews with the supervisors related to the first-line supervisors. In addition to that I used company information such as annual reports, assessment forms and other related data to complete the data. In total I analyzed three teams, one at each firm, per team one manager and three first-line supervisors.
In the following section I will describe the studied companies in more detail.
3.2 Case study organizations
The three company cases studied form part of the Dutch insurance company a.s.r1. a.s.r. offers a wide range of financial products covering life and income insurance, group and individual pensions, health insurance, travel and leisure insurance, and funeral insurance. In total a.s.r. employs approximately 3,800 employees servicing more than two million
customers. The company is structured into different product lines operating under the a.s.r. label, the entities Europeesche Verzekeringen, Ditzo, SOS International, De Amersfoortse and Ardanta, and a number of support services and departments. Each of these divisions has its own management team, whose chairman reports to a member of the Executive Board2.
a.s.r. originated in 1720 with the foundation of ‘de Maatschappij van Assurantie der Stad Rotterdam’. So the company has a long tradition in insurance. In 2000 ASR group merged with Fortis AMEV. But after the ABN/Fortis debacle in 2008, the company is nationalized and fully owned by the Dutch government. Over the years the company added different labels including case company two; Amersfoortse (1938) and SOS International, the third case
1 Note: since 2013 the company has changed its name to a.s.r., written in small letters 2 Source: a.s.r. 2013 annual report
16 company3. Figure 3 displays the organizational chart of a.s.r. and the three case study
companies, circled in blue.
Figure 3. Organizational structure a.s.r.
Source: a.s.r. 2013 Annual Report
Since the credit crisis a.s.r. and its entities are dealing with three types of challenges; first of all the customers have lost trust in the financial industry. In addition to that because of the credit crisis customers have less to spend which has a negative effect on sales. The third challenge the company is facing is that the insurance market, especially for less complex products, has moved from off-line (through intermediaries) to direct channels (online). Particularly the development of comparison sites has led to fierce competition, as the customer became price focused instead of quality focused. To overcome these challenges a.s.r. and its labels are currently in a transition phase. They are restructuring the product portfolio, the distribution channels, and customer services and marketing program. Therefore the company strategy is reformulated. This reformulated strategy is currently implemented across the company, which makes a.s.r. a very interesting case study company as strategy implementation is currently a hot topic.
3
17 3.2.1 a.s.r. – Business line Life
The first company case is a business line of the a.s.r.; a.s.r. – Life, offering individual and collective pension products. In total there are about 370 employees working for the a.s.r.-Life business line from which thirty percent is support staff and seventy percent is working in the operation, divided over more than twenty operational teams. The business line is managed by a director who reports to the Board of Directors of a.s.r. The business line is structured into four departments; all managed by under-directors who in turn report to the Director of the business line. Currently the business line is facing several challenges; due to legislative changes such as the increase of the retirement age, the business line is forced to reshape the products and the IT systems. In addition to that due to new quality standards on customer service the operational is under severe pressure to meet these standards.
The business line adopted the strategy of a.s.r. as formulated by the Board of Directors. The a.s.r. strategy is ‘helping people by taking action and avoiding waste. a.s.r. wants to position itself as the insurer that helps people by taking action and by launching new, easy-to-understand products and adapts existing products based on customer feedback. In addition to that a.s.r. wants to offer security to people living in uncertainty by offering financial
continuity in their lives and allowing them to take calculated risks’.4
I interview first-line supervisors of three front-office teams and their manager. The employees of the teams are in direct contact with the customer.
3.2.2 the Amersfoortse
The second organization is an independent label of a.s.r., called the Amersfoortse. The Amersfoortse recently changed its strategy and product portfolio to the business-to-business industry, offering a wide range of insurance products to business owners. The company is structured into three departments based on type of product: Pensions, Occupational Disability and Health.
The Amersfoorte is managed by a Director who reports to the Board of Directors of a.s.r. on financial status. The strategy of the Amersfoortse is determined by the Board of Directors of a.s.r., but implemented and executed autonomously by the Amersfoortse . In total 341 are employed by the Amersfoortse from which around 270 work on operational level, divided over 25 operational teams. In total I interview three front-office managers and their manager.
18 The strategy the Amersfoortse applies is the same strategy as a.s.r. with the addition of the emphasis on online services5. Due to the strategic switch to becoming an insurance label for business owners, the Amersfoortse is currently in a transitional phase and therefore there is currently a lot of emphasis on the implementation of this new strategy, which makes the Amersfoortse the second interesting case study.
3.2.3 SOS International
The third case company is SOS International, an independent label of a.s.r.
SOS International provides emergency assistance in travel and health insurance as well as other assistance services. SOS International offers its services to companies operating in the financial services industry like banks and insurance companies.
SOS International is operating completely independent from a.s.r., with the only relation a.s.r. being the sole stockholder of SOS International, to which it pays dividend on a yearly basis. The company has its own board of Directors, and is structured into four
departments; Front Office, Health, Mobility and business support. I interview three first-line supervisors from the front office and their relating manager. Currently SOS International employs 243 employees divided over five operational teams.
In January SOS reformulated the company strategy. Four keywords were formulated that represent the strategy; personal, openness, inventiveness and entrepreneurship. Personal refers to the capacity for empathy to the situation of the client. Openness refers to the open and informal culture, inventiveness is about the capacity to find creative solutions within a certain framework and entrepreneurship refers to the continuous improvement of the
processes6. Due to the reformulation of the strategy there is currently a lot of attention to the reformulated strategy, which makes SOS the third interesting case study organization to examine in this study.
3.3 Research Technique
I used one primary source of data, semi-structured interviews. The interviews were
conducted as the primary means of gathering data because they are well suited for exploration
5 Source: a.s.r. 2013 annual report 6 Sourse: Sociaal jaarverslag SOS
19 of people’s perception on a certain subject. As I want to ‘get inside the heads’ the respondents in order to hear them speak and reflect, face-to-face interviews seemed the most logic choice of research method (O’Dwyer, 2004).
Since I work for the parent company, a.s.r., I contacted the potential respondents at a.s.r. personally. For the other two companies I contacted colleagues who I know and asked them to send me a list of names of potential participants and their contact details.
I send the potential respondents an email with a short description of the purpose of the research and whether they were willing to participate. In total I contacted twenty-six potential respondents. Eventually I collected qualitative data from nine first-line supervisor interviews and three manager interviews within the three case study organizations. I also retrieved secondary data from every case study organization, including company presentations, annual reports and strategy maps.
The interviews were always conducted with single individuals. Every interview took approximately one hour. Two days prior to the interview I sent a confirmation email to the respondent with additional information on the interview and location and time. This was also to develop trust of the interviewee. The interviews took place at the workplace of the
respondent. I reserved a room to make sure we were not disturbed during the interview. Prior to the interview I introduced myself and again stressed out the purpose of the research and the themes covered.
I used two different interview guides to remind me of the topic areas to be covered; one for the interview with the first-line supervisor (research group 1) and one for the manager (research group 2). The guide had an iterative design meaning I adjusted it when questions had to be further clarified as well as when new themes emerged during interviews (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Besides this the guides also included some standard questions. For the guide for the first research group I started with a brief explanation of the purpose of the research. Then I asked questions on how the efforts to inform, build the capabilities and to motivate are carried out. I did this on the basis of the argued managerial efforts of Riel et al., 2009. Then I asked how they need to be facilitated to optimally perform these managerial efforts. Subsequently I asked what kind of facilitation efforts they need from their manager. The interview guide is included in appendix 1. The guide for the interview with the second research group consisted
20 of the following constructs: first I explained the purpose of the interview. Then I asked how and when a supervisor optimally performs on the managerial efforts covering capability building, informing and motivating. Then I asked how the manager facilitates the supervisor on these variables. The interview guide for the manager is included in appendix 2.
In order to avoid respondent bias I applied several interviewing techniques. First of all I stressed out the fact that all research data is anonymized, which allows the respondent to talk freely about issues and does not constrain their responses through feeling that he or she is directly and personally involved in the answers he or she is going to give (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007). After the transcription of the interview I always send a copy to the respondent and asked whether there are certain parts that had to be disregarded from the interview before using the data for my analysis. During the interview I always made sure the respondent was feeling comfortable; prior to the actual interview I asked whether the
respondent had no problems with the interview being tape recorded, and I explained the purpose of the interview, structure and length. I also made sure the respondent actually answered by asking probing questions when he or she was too vague.
3.4. Data Analysis
Reduction and display of the collected data;
I already started reducing the data or better to say focusing the data prior to the collection of the data with anticipatory data reduction (Miles and Huberman, 1984). I did this by basing the interview questions I used for the interviews on the theoretical framework. In addition to that I purposefully selected the respondents based on the conditions of the theoretical
framework and the research instrument I choose was most appropriate to collect the data I needed to answer the research questions. In addition to this I composed a semi-structured interview guide in advance with all the topics I wanted to cover in the interviews.
During the interviews I applied interim data reduction. After every interview I took detailed notes on the interview; how it went, whether the respondent was talkative, whether the interview gave new insights on the subject. I also made a short summary after every interview in order to highlight the emerging themes, record general observations, identified contradictions, and to force me to form an overall impression of each interview (O’Dwyer, 2004). After the first two interviews I changed the formulation of the questions a little bit because the initial interview guide and questions were a bit abstract. After collecting the data
21 of the first three interviews I transcribed them. All together I produced up to one hundred ninety-five pages of transcribed evidence. After transcribing the first three interviews I started with open coding (O’Dwyer, 2004). I did this with the inductive codes based on the interview questions and theoretical framework and I complemented these with themes that emerged from the transcripts. After coding the first three interviews I changed or merged the codes when new insights were gathered that made that necessary. I undertook the coding by in depth reading of the transcripts with the tape of each interview running. I recorded and organized the data in Word Excel with the (open) codes and the page-numbers of the transcript from where the code was taken from. After coding the last interview I reviewed the coding matrix and if necessary changed codes or merged codes. I also divided the codes in core codes and sub codes. After this I re-read all the transcripts in search for extra codes, to make sure that all parts of the transcript were coded. Based on the open-code matrix together with the collected data; interview notes, tape records, transcripts I searched for patterns in the interview data and I wrote an initial summary of the data collected. Based on this I made a mind-map in Visio. With this mind map the main conclusions of the collected data are displayed. After
interpreting the mind map I rewrote the initial summary with the emerging results described below.
22 4.0 Analysis
In this section the data collected through the interviews will be discussed. I start with the data collected from research group 1, the nine first-line supervisors. First I will discuss the expressed general actions undertaken by the first-line supervisors to inform, motivate and develop the capabilities. Second the perception of the general facilitation needs and the specific facilitation needs toward the manager to optimally undertake the managerial actions will be treated. In the second part the data collected through the interviews with research group 2, the managers, will be discussed. I start with the perception from the manager of the facilitation needs of the first-line supervisor. In the final part the differences between the perceptions of the first-line manager and manager will be discussed.
4.1 Actions by first-line managers to inform, motivate and develop the capabilities
The actions undertaken by all first-line managers at all three case companies to inform, motivate and develop the capabilities of the subordinates are comparable to a great extent. An overview of the different actions undertaken by the first-line managers within the three variables is described below.
Informing
To optimally inform the subordinate about the strategy on an abstract and job level, seven respondents answered that the first step they undertake is to translate the company’s strategy to concrete objectives on department or team level. They do this in collaboration with their fellow first-line supervisors and or team members and or manager. As respondent five indicates; ‘the new strategy was presented to my fellow team managers and me during the
staff meeting at the beginning this year. The first thing we did afterwards was getting together to translate the presented strategic concepts to concrete goals on department level. Then we presented these translated goals to the team members’. And as respondent one demonstrates: ‘the strategy of the team is a derivative of the business line strategy, which in turn is a derivative of the strategy of the Amersfoortse…. On company level we have certain core values on client, shareholder and market level…. We translate these core values to concrete objectives on business unit level and subsequently on team level’. An example of the translation of the strategy to operational level, as mentioned by respondent four, is the introduction of the ‘expression of dissatisfaction process’. In order to increase customer orientation among employees the first-line supervisor introduced a form which the client can fill out when he
23 was not satisfied with the services after being helped by one of the employees; ‘With this
process we try to make the employees more customer aware and we want to increase the sense of ownership in the work process’.
The next step, as indicated by seven first-line supervisors, is to make the abstracted strategy part of the performance appraisal cycle of the subordinate. As respondent four points out; ‘one of the main things to concretize the strategic objectives on department level is by
making it part of the performance appraisal. Because with the performance appraisal you define the concrete strategic goals, and in that way the employee understands what concrete actions are expected from him in relation to the strategy’. An example of a strategic goal
included in the appraisal form as mentioned by respondent four is the degree of inventiveness in the behavior of the employee; ‘We expect from all the employees to come up with
improvement proposals for the customer service. The extent to which they do this, for example in the form of the reduction of waiting time, is part of the appraisal form’.
In addition to that in almost all the cases the first-line supervisors indicated that they
inform the subordinate by explaining and discussing the strategy during daily stand-ups and weekly meeting. During the discussions real-case examples on how to apply the strategy are discussed and reviewed in order to internalize an understanding of the strategy and how to act accordingly. An example of a strategy related issue recently discussed at one of the case company (no. 3) is that one of the strategic values is customizability. But the degree of customer service is determined by the limitations set out by the client (the financial service company). This can lead to friction as employees cannot always meet the demands of the client when it does not fall within the limits set out by the client (the financial service company).
Another commonly heard method to inform the team member is by visually displaying strategy charts on the department floor. This is demonstrated by respondent Frank who stresses that ‘another way of informing about the strategic plans is by emailing it to the team
members and by hanging strategy maps on the wall’.
Motivating
In order to motivate the subordinate to engage in aligned actions (Colvin and Boswell, 2007) two managerial actions are of importance; to create a motive for the strategy in order for the subordinate to believe in the relevance and feasibility of the strategy and to create a constructive communication climate (Riel et al., 2009). In order to create a motive for the
24 strategy eight respondents answered that they first need to abstract the strategy to department level. Some respondents expressed that they involve the subordinate in this process.
Abstracting the larger goals to team or individual goals will not only increase the feasibility of the strategic goals, but will also encourage the feeling of the employee that it is part of a team which will stimulate the dedicateness to the task at hand. Five first-line supervisors indicated that they motivate the subordinate by setting goals based on the abstracted strategy and by making the subordinates responsible for realizing these goals. As respondent three points out; ‘one of the elements to motivate the employee is by involving them and by making them
responsible for the work and stimulating them to express what you think, especially when they have a certain opinion about something..’. An example mentioned by respondent five, is to
challenge the employees on how to improve customer service; ‘one of the employees had an
idea to reduce customer waiting time by changing the scheduling process of break times. I subsequently asked the employee to take ownership of this new process. After this I could instantly notice the sense of ownership and improved motivation to fulfill the task’.
Subsequently the why and how of the strategy is explained to the team members during daily stand-ups, weekly meetings and performance meetings with the subordinate. As respondent six points out; ‘It is important to involve the subordinate in what strategic goals
you want to achieve and what you expect from the team members by having open discussions and by stressing out their contribution to the strategy’.
No respondent indicated that they undertake explicit steps to improve the communication climate within the team. However eight out of nine respondents mentioned factors that could disturb a constructive communication climate. As respondent one who demonstrates that certain factors will withhold you from speaking freely within your team; ‘If you have the
feeling that your team members will not take you seriously, or worse, will make fun of you when you speak up during a team meeting, it will stop you from giving feedback or speak up during the meetings’. When I ask the respondent what actions they would take to avoid such
a climate they answer that they would address the person causing such an atmosphere. Examples of climate disturbing factors are group forming within the team or a feeling of insecurity due to reorganizations. As respondent four illustrated this by pointing out that within her team different groups exist, often with a shared ethnic background. She indicates that some of these groups do not talk to each other but about each other.
25 With this theme the construct of day-to-day managerial activities of the first-line manager are researched and official trainings programs are out of scope. The reason for this is that these programs are commonly provided by the HR or external department of the company and since the purpose of this research is to investigate the relation between the manager and how the manager can best facilitate the first-line supervisor regular or official training programs are not in scope.
The most frequent mentioned managerial action to develop the capabilities is to make the strategy part of the performance appraisal cycle. In that way the first-line supervisor can monitor the performance and productivity of the employee in relation to the pre-established organizational objectives. If it turns out after reviewing the performance appraisal, that the subordinate is underperforming, the first-line supervisor will improve the capabilities through coaching and by jointly making up a development plan.
A third frequent managerial action to develop the capabilities of the subordinates is by having frequent discussions within the team about real-case examples and by giving feedback. As respondent six indicates: ‘When I hear certain things on the floor which do not fit in the
strategy I address these things to the employee by giving them feedback in a face-to-face meeting’. For example; the other day one of my team members was very impolite on the phone, I addressed this to her and explained her this is not the way we treat our clients. Ever since, she changed her tone of voice and is patience toward the client’.
4.2 General needs of the first-line manager
In this section the general needs and requirements indicated by the respondents in order to undertake the managerial actions as described in the previous section are discussed. Two sort of needs are expressed by the respondents; first needs or better to say conditions in relation to the strategy and second facilitation needs with respect to optimally carrying out the variables informing, motivating and building the capabilities of the subordinates. The reason the general needs are included in this study is that although these needs are expressed as general and not as needs for certain managerial support from the manager, the manager could in all likelihood also play a role in these needs.
4.2.1 General needs with respect to the strategy
More than half of the respondents expressed the need for a clear and unambiguous
26 by all members of the organization as respondent five notifies; ‘If our department works
according to the strategy but another department is not than sooner or later there will be a moment that you are going to work against each other’. The need for a common purpose and
commitment for the strategy is also argued by Bourgeois and Brodwin (1984) and Kaplan and Norton (2000) as the authors indicate that one of the key conditions for organizational
purpose and commitment to a strategy is that higher management should develop an
organizational purpose at the top and subsequently obtain support throughout the organization via open dialogue with organizational members about that purpose.
An additional important factor is that within the company great importance should be attached to the strategy. Which means that the company, and in this case higher and middle management, should show it places great importance on the implementation and execution of the strategy in the priorities the company sets and the choices it makes. Especially when there is an introduction of a new strategy; ‘For me it really depends on the way the strategy is
introduced to me; which interest is attached to it the moment it is introduced; are people from the board of directions present and how is the management team dealing with it ..’
(respondent three).
A third important factor is that the company should adhere to the strategy for a long period as respondent seven notifies; ‘Since 2007 so many different strategies have come
along… at one time people will not take it serious anymore and that makes it really difficult for us to motivate our people’. Figure 4 demonstrates an overview of the needs towards
strategy. The number of respondents that expressed the need in relation to the total number of respondents are displayed per need between brackets.
27 Figure 4. General needs with respect to strategy
Source: Interviews Research Group 1
4.2.2 General needs with respect to managerial support
The other general needs the respondents expressed are needs which have to do with support in the managerial actions that the first-line manager undertakes in order to inform, motivate and develop the capabilities. A couple of respondents indicated they need enough time to undertake the managerial variables to influence strategically aligned behavior. The factor time corresponds with the research by Alexander (1985) as one of the main conditions for successfully implementing a strategy; adequate time and attention given by top
management to the new effort, and not too many other competing programs demanding the time of affected employees who will implement the strategy. Especially when workload is high first-line manager might have the tendency to focus on achieving the short-term operational goals instead of focusing on the managerial activities with long-term strategic priorities (Kaplan and Norton, 2008).
Almost half of the respondents indicate that they need coaching and or a coaching partner other than their direct manager, for example with somebody from the HR department. In addition to that the respondents indicate a general need for feedback on the execution on the strategy, as illustrated by respondent four; ‘what I miss is that we never got feedback on the
way we interpreted and implemented the strategy in our day-to-day activities.. It gives me the feeling that higher management is not interested in the actual execution of the strategy they came up with’. Also insights in the results of the strategic performance of the team is an
28 important factor. Figure 5 displays an overview of the responses on the general needs with respect to managerial support. The number of respondents that expressed the need in relation to the total number of respondents is displayed per need between brackets.
Figure 5. General needs toward managerial support
Source: interviews research group 1
4.3 Facilitating needs toward the manager
Most of the required facilitation needs towards the manager are comparable to each variable. Thus almost all facilitation needs expressed per variable apply to the facilitation needs for the other variables. Therefore we call these needs non-variable specific needs. Only for the variable motivating two distinct facilitation needs were expressed by the respondents which were not mentioned explicitly at the other variables. In this section the non-variable needs are discussed followed by a more specific description of the indicated needs per variable.
29
4.3.1 Non-variable specific needs Clear strategy framework
First of all in order to undertake the managerial variables to influence the behavior of the subordinate seven out of nine respondents explicitly indicate the need for a specific strategic framework set out by the manager. This is consistent with previous research by Beer and Eisenstat (2000) demonstrating one of the key elements for effective strategy implementation is vertically communicating a clear and consistent strategy to lower levels of the organization. A clear strategic framework serves as input to enable the first-line supervisor to inform,
motivate and develop the capabilities of the subordinate in line with that strategy. As
respondent seven indicates; ‘You have a certain influence within a certain strategy framework
and that framework needs to be very clear as in ‘this year we are going to do this and next year we are going to do that’. And as respondent seven underlines this by expressing ‘I think it is very important that strategy frameworks are set top-down’. This is also in line with the
previously described need for a clear and unambiguous strategy and the role of management to create dialogue about the purpose of the strategy in order to instil an understanding and commitment to the strategy (Bourgeois and Brodwin, 1984, and Kaplan and Norton, 2000).
Clear performance expectations
In addition to the need for a clear strategy framework, five respondents indicated a need for the manager expressing clear performance expectations on the managerial activities. As respondent four indicates ‘what do you expect from me in this job because it's all nice to have
a job definition on paper but in practice this is not sufficient to perform my job’ and ‘how do you want to me to prioritize my tasks and if you see that I choose the wrong direction point that out to me and correct me… ‘.
Balanced leadership style
The third expressed general facilitation need is a balanced leadership style from the manager. The first-line supervisor needs a certain degree of directivity, as expressed with the need for clear performance expectations, but on the other hand the respondents also indicates the need for a certain degree of autonomy to fulfill their managerial tasks. Thus a certain freedom in executing their tasks in a way they choose; ‘I do not need him to hold my hand and
30
performing my tasks. I understand that there are guidelines which I need to follow, but I do not want them to get involved in all the details, in the end it is my team, my responsibility, and I will take care of it…’(respondent 7). The need for a balance between a directive or too
controlling and a disengaged management style also corresponds to previous research by Beer et al. (2005) implying that a management style should not be too top-down or, conversely, too laissez-faire in order to avoid managers from aligning their organizations with changes in strategy.
Mutual interpersonal trust
Another important need indicated by the respondents to perform well is the degree of mutual interpersonal trust between the manager and the first-line supervisor. A high degree of mutual trust can foster a cooperative relationship and an open communication climate, and it encourages the willingness of individuals to take cooperative action that increases their vulnerability (Mellinger, 1956). In addition to this, previous research indicated that
interpersonal trust will determine how successful the management interventions are perceived to be for the individual's job and for the organization as a whole (Scott, 1980). Respondents state that trust can be created by monitoring and modeling clear communications in
conversations, but more importantly by showing trustworthiness by competence, integrity, benevolence, and credibility in behavior (Savolainen and López-Fresno, 2012).
Coaching partner
Another important component is the need from the first-line supervisor for the manager acting as coaching partner. This implies managing expectations, monitoring performance, and giving feedback (Burdett, 1998) As respondent two expresses; ‘I need feedback on my
performance, or at least that opportunity to get feedback from my manager about the best way to get things done’… And respondent one; I need my manager to be open honest to me about his expectations, only in that way I will learn and I will improve my managing skills’.
Involvement inthe formulation of the strategy
Another variable; involvement of the first-line supervisor in the formulation of the
strategy, is contradictory as some respondent indicate that they have a need for it while others explicitly indicate that they do not. Respondent eight expressed the need to be involved in the formulation of the strategy; ‘the strategy is formulated by higher management but I think in
31
operation in formulating the strategy’. The importance to involve the affected employees in
the formulation of the strategy is in line with previous research by Alexander (1985). The author states that the affected employees need to participate in the strategy formulation process in order to reduce the resistance during implementation and to reduce the likelihood that the formulated strategy has major flaws in it. But other respondents demonstrate that they do not want to be involved in formulating the strategy and that it would even backfire carrying out the managerial variables. As respondent seven illustrates; ‘everybody always
emphasizes the importance of bottom-up participation in the formulation of the strategy, well last year we had an experience with not having a clear strategy framework set out by
management, and then you experience that this not works; I mean the boss should also act as a boss and I think that setting the strategy framework is his job’ and respondent five ‘I think if everybody would interfere with formulating the strategy than we would never finish it’. From
these conflicting needs we can conclude that it varies per first-line supervisor whether he wants to be involved in the formulation of the strategy. This might be an interesting topic for further research.
Manager acting as a linking pin
Because of the intermediate position of the middle manager the first-line manager has certain needs for managerial support with respect to the role and the hierarchical position, which the manager has within the company. This intermediate position is referred to as linking pin. A linking pin positions span two or more distinct groups, in this case the operational core and higher management, and should facilitate flows of communications, influence, and resources between membership groups to enhance mutual understanding and cooperation and reduce mutual suspicion and competition Likert (1961).
Thus the first important mandate for a linking pin is to facilitate downward and upward communication between the two levels in the organization. As respondent one indicates:
because of the position of manager X he oversees the bigger picture and he receives information from higher management and other departments. It is his task to share this information with us’.
The second need is that the manager advocates the needs for each group as the manager is an integrated member in the two distinct groups (Likert, 1961); ‘Manager X is the link to
higher management thus it is important that he represents us to the board’ (respondent
four)…. Therefore the first-line manager has a need for the middle manager to fulfill this intermediate role well in order to optimally perform on the managerial actions.
32 In addition to this because of the intermediate position the linking pin is in a better
position to deal with pressures toward intergroup distrust and competition and foster commitment of members to both the unit and the larger organization (Graen et al 1977). As respondent five indicates; ‘Because of his hierarchically higher position in the company he
can achieve more on certain levels’ (respondent 5) and ‘if I cannot resolve an issue with another colleague from another department I do ask my manager to get it done’. In this
manner, the linking pin might become the mechanism by which overlapping teams are locked together in ways that enhance intergroup cooperation and contribute to organizational
effectiveness (Graen et al., 1977).
4.3.2 Variable specific needs Informing
For the informing variable all the needs were mentioned as described under the section non-variable specific needs. The most emergent facilitation factors mentioned in the variable informing is the need for the manager to act as a linking pin in order to transfer information, the need for the manager to act as a coaching partner, and the need for the manager to set out a clear strategic framework. The first factor, transferring information to the manager, implies providing information on strategic goals from higher management to the first-line supervisor. The manager needs the information in order to abstract the information and to translate the abstract strategy into concrete actions for the operational team. The second, acting as a coaching partner, is about discussing things in relation to how to interpret the strategy and on which parts of the strategy attaches the manager and the company great importance. The latter is about the need to have a clear strategy framework from which the first-line manager can inform its subordinates.
Motivating
The needs of the first-line manager for support of the manager in order to optimally undertake the managerial actions to motivate the subordinates are also mostly covered with the needs described under non-variable specific needs.
But two additional needs are explicitly mentioned at the variable motivation; role-model behavior of higher management and support for the strategy from higher management.
The need for managers to show exemplary behavior corresponds with previous research by Sims and Manz (1982) indicating that people with a higher position in an organizational hierarchy serve as a model to subordinates as employees are very likely to imitate the leader's
33 behavior. As respondent seven demonstrates ‘yes exemplary behavior of higher management
is very important because if my boss does not do it.. I will probably not do it …neither will my team members’. Thus it is very important for managers to show behavior from which they
want their subordinates to show this behavior as well. A manager shows role-model behavior by taking the strategy into account in his or her managerial actions like prioritizing the work tasks for the teams. Respondent 3 demonstrates this by expressing his expectations that the manager adopts the strategy in ’the things we are doing and that she constantly refers to the
strategy’.
The other important element, support for the strategy from higher management, is in line with exemplary behavior but implies here the explicit actions from the manager to show that he or she sponsors the strategy by ‘explaining the strategy to the team in person during team
meetings (respondent seven).
Capability building
All needs described under non-variable needs are important facilitation factors for the first-line supervisor in order to undertake the managerial actions to develop the capabilities of the subordinates. Most respondents indicate that to build the capabilities of the subordinates they first need to have insights, thus information, in what type of work the team can expect. Based on these insights the first-line manager can make an estimation of the kind of
capabilities are required to perform these tasks. Subsequently the tasks and required
capabilities are included in the appraisal form to monitor the progress of the performance of the subordinate. To coach the subordinates in their daily activities the first-line manager the most frequent mentioned need is the manager to act as a coaching partner.
4.4 Perception of the manager on first-line managers’ needs
The perception of the manager on the facilitation needs of the first-line supervisor in order to optimally perform on informing, motivating and developing the capabilities is included in this research by conducting interviews with the three related managers of the first-line supervisors. Purpose for taking their perception into account is twofold; first to obtain rich data on the relation between the manager and the first-line supervisor and second to research whether there are discrepancies between the perception of the manager and the first-line supervisors.
During the interview the manager was first asked about his vision when a first-line manager optimally performs on informing, motivating and developing the capabilities of the
34 subordinate. Subsequently the manager was asked on his perception on how a first-line
manager needs to be facilitated to optimally perform and how he is currently supporting the first-line manager in these variables. For the perception of the manager on the facilitation needs of the first-line supervisor also applies that the different needs indicated by the manager are not linked to one specific variable, thus are non-variable specific needs which are
applicable to all three variables. 4.4.1 Non-variable specific needs
Clear strategy framework and expressing clear expectations
All three managers indicate that they facilitate the first-line manager by stating a clear strategic framework and by expressing clearly what is expected from him, and that he is responsible for meeting these expectations. These expectations are also included in the performance appraisal cycle; to continuously monitor the performance of the first-line
supervisor the strategy performance agreements are part of the performance appraisal cycle’
(manager 2). Clearly expressing the expectations on the strategic performance mentioned by all three managers is the key activity to facilitate the first-line manager in his work. As manager three demonstrates; ‘I think that a first-line supervisor is best facilitated by being
very explicit in what I expect from him’. And ‘you need to make it clear what is important for you as a manager and which activities you therefore require from the first-line supervisor..’ It is important to give guidelines to the first-line supervisor so that the first-line supervisor can act autonomously within the framework(manager 2).
Mutual interpersonal trust
Giving trust and thereby creating openness is also an important factor to support the first-line supervisor in their work as notified by manager three ‘There are a number of elements
which ensure that the first-line manager is willing to perform the task from which one of them is getting support and the other, is to get trust’. Thus the starting point of good management
is creating trust between the manager and the first-line supervisor.
Coaching partner
Another managerial variable stated by all three managers is to act as a coaching partner; thus stressing expectations about performance, having discussions, giving advice and feedback to the first-line supervisor (Burdett, 1998). All three indicate they have weekly meetings with the first-line supervisors in which the manager gives pro-active and reactive
