0
MASTER THESIS
June, 2015
How line managers deal with HR responsibilities
Comparing successful with unsuccessful line managers
Author: Tom Blekemolen
Student number: 10572007
Topic: Line managers with HR responsibilities
Date: 28-06-2015
University: University of Amsterdam
Master: MSc. in Business Administration
Track: Leadership and Management
Supervisor: Dr. Corine Boon
Organization: Large multinational
1
Statement of originality
This document is written by Student Tom Blekemolen who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.
I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.
The Faculty of Economics and Business is responsible solely for the supervision of completion of the work, not for the contents.
2
Table of contents
Abstract ... 3
Introduction ... 4
Theoretical background ... 6
Line managers’ role in the HR function ... 6
Defining line managers ... 8
Why line managers? ... 8
Potential variation-factors in how line managers deal with HR responsibilities ... 9
Research gap and research question ... 14
Methodology ... 15
Sampling rationale ... 16
Sample selection ... 17
Research instrument ... 18
Strategy for analysis ... 19
Within-case analysis ... 19
Revealing the group composition ... 19
Within-group analysis ... 20
Between-group analysis ... 20
Results ... 21
Descriptive information ... 22
Category 1: Competences ... 22
Category 2: Time management... 28
Category 3: Motivation ... 35
Category 4: Policy and procedure ... 40
Category 5: Support by HR specialists... 45
Towards a conceptual model ... 49
Discussion ... 55
Practical implications ... 58
Limitations and Future research ... 59
Conclusion ... 60
References ... 62
3
Abstract
Nowadays, line managers play a crucial role in the HR function. With their HR responsibilities they have become responsible for eliciting desired outcomes on employees, which in turn should lead to desired outcomes on organizations. However, research has shown that line managers can show variation in how well they take on these HR responsibilities. Consequently, they can differ in how successfully they deal with their HR responsibilities and thus, how successful they are in terms of eliciting desired outcomes on employees. This qualitative study explored the commonalities and differences between successful and unsuccessful line managers. Based on interview data, differences were found in terms of a line manager’s focus when prioritizing, affinity with people management, and ability to always follow intended policies and procedures. Commonalities were found in terms of a line manager’s available time, perceived core competences, acquisition of competences, understanding of policy and procedure, and support by HR specialists. Based on these findings, a new conceptual model is introduced, which provides a detailed understanding of the highly complex role line managers currently play in the HR function. The theoretical implications of this model are being discussed, and practical implications, limitations and possibilities for future research are being provided.
4
Introduction
These days, line managers carry out more and more HR-related tasks and responsibilities as a part of their day-to-day job (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Dany, Guedri & Hatt, 2008; Sikora & Ferris, 2014). Nowadays, these HR responsibilities are designed to create a ‘strong situation’ in the organization (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). That is, the set of HR practices in place aims to elicit consistent effects on employee, which in turn result in attitudes and behaviors that contribute to organizational outcomes, such as higher performance or sustained competitive advantage (Boxall & Purcell, 2000; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007).
Now line managers are responsible for the implementation and execution of many HR practices, they have received the major responsibility to make sure that these HR practices consistently elicit desired outcomes on employees (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007). However, several researchers question whether line managers are equipped to assure that intended HR practices have their desired effects in practice (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Dany et al., 2008; Bos-Nehles, 2010). Van Iddekinge, Ferris, Perrewé, Perryman, Blass and Heetderks (2009) showed that even when organizations use effective HR practices, line managers can show variation and inconsistency in their implementation of these HR practices. And since there can be variation and inconsistency in how line managers take on their HR responsibilities (e.g. Van Iddekinge et al., 2009; Bos-Nehles, 2010), it is likely that there will also be inconsistency and variation in the outcomes on employees, which stands a ‘strong situation’ in the way (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004).
When organizations wish to create or maintain a ‘strong situation’ it is crucial to understand how variation and inconsistency, caused by line managers’ HR practice implementation can be minimized or even be avoided in order to elicit consistent effects on employees (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004). Research has already determined factors that can
5 potentially cause variation and inconsistency in the implementation and execution of HR practices, such as a line manager’s motivation or competences in people management (e.g. Bos-Nehles, 2010). However, Sikora and Ferris (2014) call for a more detailed examination of these factors to find out how they play a role in eliciting desired or undesired employee outcomes.
Answering the call of Sikora and Ferris (2014) and building on Bos-Nehles (2010) this study zooms in on several variation-factors in line managers’ HR implementation. To do so, this study builds on Purcell and Hutchinson’s (2007) “people management-performance causal chain (p.7)” by zooming in on how line managers actually deal with their HR responsibilities. More specifically, to deepen our understanding of how differences in outcomes on employees arise, this study and seeks to explore differences and commonalities between line managers that elicited different levels of employee outcomes, in terms of how they actually dealt with their HR responsibilities. That is, this study makes a comparison between line managers that were successful in eliciting desired employee outcomes with those who were not successful, and seeks for explanations for their differences in outcomes on employees. By exploring possible differences and commonalities between these groups of line managers, this study aims to provide new insights in and give a better understanding under which circumstances line managers are more successful in eliciting desired employee outcomes. A deeper understanding of differences and commonalities between successful and unsuccessful could potentially help organizations to understand where to focus on when helping, training, facilitating, rewarding and recruiting its line managers, so that they can be consistent in their HR practice implementation and execution.
The study is structured as follows: first, I will provide a theoretical background on the role line managers currently play in the HR function, including the proposed research question. Second, the methods design of the research and strategy for analysis will be
6 explained. Next, an extensive analysis of the results will be provided, followed by a discussion of the research findings. Finally, practical implications, possibilities for future research, limitations and a conclusion of this study will be provided.
Theoretical background
Line managers’ role in the HR function
Nowadays, many organizations are integrating their HR function with their business strategy in order to make HRM more effective in its contribution to organizational outcomes, such as organizational performance (e.g. Ulrich, 1998; Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Teo & Rodwell, 2007). This transformation into strategic HRM demands HR specialists to focus on contributing to these organizational outcomes by developing strategic and effective HR practices (Whittaker & Marchington, 2003, Dany et al, 2008) that are aligned with the business strategy and with each other (Boxall and Purcell, 2000). The main intention of the designed HR practices is to consistently elicit certain employee behaviors and attitudes that eventually lead to organizational performance and sustained competitive advantage (Boxall & Purcell, 2000; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007).
As a consequence of this development, HR specialists have less time to focus on operational HR activities (Ulrich, 1998; Teo & Rodwell, 2007; Sikora & Ferris, 2014). And these operational HR activities are often devolved to line managers (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Dany et al., 2008; Sikora & Ferris, 2014). According to Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) line managers have two main HR-related responsibilities in the HR function. First, line managers have to ensure that the designed HR practices elicit the desired effects on employees in practice by implementing and executing these practices exactly in the way they are intended. Second, they are responsible for influencing and directing employees with leadership behavior. So, line managers have received a crucial role in the HR function
7 with the responsibility to make HR strategy become reality and thus make sure that desired outcomes are elicited on employees.
Employee outcomes can take shape in many ways. On the one hand, when line managers enact the HR practices as intended, it is likely that these HR practices result in positive effects on employees (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004; Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007). Examples of positive effects on employees are higher individual job performance, higher employee job satisfaction, higher employee engagement, organizational citizenship behavior and lower employee turnover intention (Boselie, Boon and Dietz, 2005; Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007; Brewster, Gollan and Wright, 2013; Sikora and Ferris, 2014). On the other hand, if line managers fail to enact the HR practices in the way they are intended, these practices could send different messages to employees and result in negative or inconsistent effects as a consequence (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004). Examples of negative effects on employees are lower job performance, lower employee engagement, counterproductive work behavior, higher turnover intention and absence (Wright and Nishii, 2007; Brewster, Gollan and Wright, 2013; Sikora and Ferris, 2014).
In sum, line managers have received a crucial responsibility in the HR function. How these HR practices are implemented and executed by line managers could result in positive or negative effects on employees. In order to elicit employee behaviors and attitudes that contribute to organizational performance, line managers must consistently implement and execute HR practices in the way they are designed and use their leadership skills (Bowen and Ostroff, 2004; Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007). I will now describe how line managers can be defined and why it are line managers who have received this major responsibility in the HR function, followed by an explanation of the factors that play a role in consistent HR practice implementation.
8 Defining line managers
Although many studies have been written about line managers with HR responsibilities (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Teo & Rodwell, 2007; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007; Dany et al, 2008; Bos-Nehles, 2010; Sikora & Ferris, 2014), very few provide a description or definition of line managers. Whittaker & Marchington (2003) describe line managers as “the people directly responsible for supervising staff (p. 245)”. Sikora & Ferris (2014) define line managers as “the firm’s operating managers, including positions such as customer service, sales, quality and / or manufacturing managers (p. 271)”. Some studies use other terms related to line managers. For example Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) use the term front-line managers and Teo and Rodwell (2007) talk about senior line-managers. Furthermore, Bos-Nehles (2010) provides descriptions of first-line managers: “the lowest level in the organisation’s management team: they oversee and supervise the work of operating employees (p.3)” and those “who manage a team of operational employees on a day-to-day basis and are responsible for performing HR activities (p. 15)”.
From these definitions and descriptions there is one clear commonality that could be derived: line managers are directly responsible for supervising and overseeing operating employees or staff. More specifically, front-line managers or first-line managers are directly responsible for supervising and overseeing operating employees or staff at the bottom or front-line of an organization. Senior line managers are often directly responsible for supervising staff at higher levels of an organization, for example the supervision of other (first-) line managers.
Why line managers?
Making line managers responsible for the enactment of HR practices has several advantages for the implementation and execution of those practices. First of all, Whittaker and
9 Marchington (2003) argue that line managers are in the best position to carry out these activities, since they are the directly responsible for the supervision of employees. Therefore, line managers seem to be in the position to act directly and appropriately in order to direct and influence their staff. Moreover, Whittaker and Marchington (2003) argue that line managers’ responses and actions are more likely to fit with the business strategy, organizational goals and performance towards those goals. Furthermore, Brewster and Larsen (1992) state that line managers can manage their employees more effectively when they have “the authority and responsibility to control and reward their employees (p. 413)”. Finally, Wright, McMahan, Snell and Gerhart (2001) argue that line managers are often aware of the importance of HR practices (such as employee “attraction, selection, retention and motivation (p. 118)”) to the success of their firm and thus should be motivated to use these practices.
So it seems that line managers are in the best position to implement and execute HR practices and operational activities and thereby influence and direct employees towards performance. Moreover, when line managers have the authority and responsibility to use HR practices and activities to do so and when they realize that the effective use of these HR practices and activities can elicit desired outcomes (e.g. lead to a higher performance), it seems a logical choice to devolve HR activities to the line.
However, devolving HR responsibilities to line managers because they are in the best position is not a guarantee for eliciting desired employee outcomes. There seem to be many ways in which line managers can vary in how they take on these HR responsibilities, which can lead to inconsistent outcomes on employees. These reasons for variation will now be described.
Potential variation-factors in how line managers deal with HR responsibilities
Although it seems logical to provide line managers with HR responsibilities, there could be factors that could potentially cause variation in how line managers take on these
10 responsibilities, which in turn could lead to inconsistency in the outcomes that are elicited on employees, and thus could make the HR function less effective. Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) state that “line managers need well-designed HR practices to use in their people management activities in order to help motivate and reward employees and deal with performance issues and worker needs (p. 3-4)”. However, Bos-Nehles (2010) argues that even well-designed HR practices that have shown to be effective are not a guarantee for a successful HR function, because “line managers do not know how to implement HR practices successfully (p. 16)”. Also Van Iddekinge, Ferris, Perrewé, Perryman, Blass & Heetderks (2009) showed that even though organizations use effective HR practices, line managers can show variation and inconsistency in how they implement HR practices, which could result in HR practices that do not stimulate the desired employee attitudes and behavior (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007). Several authors have already investigated these reasons for variation. For example Bos-Nehles (2010) names five overarching factors that could cause line managers problems with the implementation and execution of HR practices and responsibilities. I will now describe the most important potential reasons for variation.
Competences
In order to successfully implement and execute their HR responsibilities, line managers need HR-related competences that help them to manage their people (Bos-Nehles, 2010). However, in several studies it is argued whether line managers have these knowledge and skills, since they are not specifically trained and educated in those competences (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Keegan, Huemann & Turner, 2012). Thus, the amount of training and education in the management of people could be a reason for variation in how line managers take on HR responsibilities. Furthermore, Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) argued that line managers have the responsibility to use their leadership skills in order to elicit desired employee outcomes. In their extensive article about leadership in organizations, Den
11 Hartog and Koopman (2001) show us that a transformational leadership style is likely to lead to more positive employee outcomes. According to their article, a transformational leadership style contains four dimensions. First, the transformational leaders try to “excite, arouse, and inspire their subordinates (p.176)” with their charisma. Second, they inspire their subordinates with a compelling vision. Third, they aim to make sure that subordinates perform to their fullest potential by providing feedback, coaching and mentoring them. And finally, transformational leaders challenge and stimulate their subordinates to critically assess their current ways of thinking. Thus, it is likely that line managers that show transformational leadership behaviors are able to elicit higher levels of desired employee outcomes.
Capacity
Line managers must have enough time to implement and execute their HR responsibilities (Bos-Nehles, 2010). Where the devolution of HR activities causes HR specialists to have more room to focus on strategic aspects (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003), it causes line managers to have more tasks than before (Brewster & Larsen, 2000). A lack of capacity (i.e. time) could cause line managers to have conflicting priorities, whereby line managers could be forced to divide their effort and time between HR activities and strategic business goals, which could cause variation in the amount of time that line managers can or will put in their HR responsibilities (Whittaker & Marchington, 2003). Therefore, it is likely that line managers with sufficient time will be better able to implement and execute their HR responsibilities and consequently will elicit higher levels of desired employee outcomes.
Perceived importance
Another factor that will influence the amount of effort and time that line managers invest in HR responsibilities is the perceived importance of each HR responsibility by line
12 managers (Brandl, Madsen and Madsen, 2009), especially in situations where line managers work with limited capacity or time and thus must prioritize. Consequently, line managers could make the wrong decisions in which practices are actually most important in order to elicit desired employee outcomes. Furthermore, there could be differences between line managers in which HR responsibilities they perceive as important.
Desire and affinity
Bos-Nehles (2010) describes line managers’ desire (i.e. willingness) to implement HR practices as an essential precondition for successful implementation. In terms of variation this means that some line managers are willing and enthusiastic to take on their HR responsibilities, where others are not. Keegan et al. (2012) argue that line managers are often insufficiently motivated. Bos-Nehles (2010) distinguishes two reasons for a lack of desire: (1) lack of personal motivation and (2) institutional incentives to use and implement HR practices. So, on the one hand variation in how line managers take on their HR responsibilities could arise because line managers are (not) motivated or (do not) like to implement and execute these tasks. On the other hand, variation could arise because the organization or top management (do not) encourage or force line managers to take on these responsibilities in the way they are intended.
Policy and procedures
Line managers are responsible for the implementation and execution of HR practices. However, Keegan et al. (2012) argue that there is not a fixed list of HR practices, but that the set of HR practices in place are highly context dependent. In their article they name various studies describing that how a set of HR practices takes shape is highly context dependent (e.g. Brewster & Mayne, 1995; Poole and Jenkins, 1997). The list of context-factors Keegan et al. (2012) mention in their article, include size of the organization, industry, organizational
13 structure, national culture, organizational culture and business strategy. Thus, the set of HR responsibilities and practices can vary in each different organizational context. It is up to the line managers to adopt the HR practices in place and implement and execute them as good as possible in order to influence and direct employees in such a way that their behaviors and attitudes contribute to the achievement of the organizational goals and business strategy. Therefore, it should be clear to line managers what the aim is of the particular HR practices and policies in place and how it is meant to be implemented and executed in practice, in order to limit possibilities for variation among different line managers in their implementation (Bos-Nehles, 2010). So HR practices and policies must not only be well-designed (Purcell and Hutchinson, 2007), but line managers must also be informed and instructed about the aim and use of those practices.
Furthermore, in order to elicit consistent and positive outcomes on employees, several authors argue that it is highly important to follow consistent and fair procedures (e.g. Kernan & Hanges, 2002; Brockner, 2006). For example Kernan and Hanges (2002) have shown that leaders that use fair procedures elicit four employee outcomes: (1) higher organizational commitment, (2) higher job satisfaction, (3) higher trust in the management, and (4) lower turnover intention. Thus, line managers that are fair and consistent in their implementation in their execution are more likely to elicit positive employee outcomes.
Support
Since line managers do not always have the right HR-related knowledge and skills, they might need help (i.e. support, advice, coaching and training) from HR specialists in order to successfully implement HR practices as intended (Bos-Nehles, 2010, Whittaker & Marchington, 2003). However, variation could exist in the availability and quality of this support from HR specialists. Moreover, line managers might not realize they need support or do not seek support due to other reasons.
14 Research gap and research question
Altogether, it has become clear that line managers have received a crucial role in the HR function (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007; Bos-Nehles, 2010; Sikora & Ferris, 2014). How line managers are dealing with their HR responsibilities has consequences for the impact of HR practices on employees (e.g. Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007). Consequently, their responsibility to make sure that HR practices consistently have their intended effects on employees in practice is a critical element for the HR function to be effective (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004; Purcell & Hutchinson, 2007; Sikora & Ferris, 2014).
Earlier research has showed us that line managers vary in how they deal with their HR responsibilities (Van Iddekinge et al., 2009). Several studies showed us potential causes for variation and inconsistency in the enactment of HR practices by line managers (e.g. Brandl, Madsen and Madsen, 2009; Bos-Nehles, 2010). However, these studies do not show us the consequences of these variation-factors for the effects on employees. In their recent article, Sikora and Ferris (2014) call for a more detailed examination of these factors to find out how they play a role in eliciting desired or undesired outcomes on employees. With this study, I aim to fill that gap. Building on Purcell and Hutchinson (2007) and Bos-Nehles (2010) this study seeks to explore differences and commonalities between line managers that elicited different levels of employee outcomes, in terms of how they are dealing with HR responsibilities. More specifically, I will compare line managers that scored high on eliciting desired employee outcomes with line managers that scored low on eliciting employee outcomes. To do so, this exploratory qualitative study will zoom in on how line managers actually dealt with their HR responsibilities, and seek for a more detailed understanding of how the different variation-factors play a role in the effects on employees. Such a comparison can help us to find explanations for how these managers dealt differently with their HR responsibilities and find out which of the factors actually played a crucial role in eliciting
15 different levels of employee outcomes. Thus, this study aims to explore differences and commonalities between groups of line managers that elicited different levels of employee outcomes in terms of how they deal with HR responsibilities and answer the following research question:
How do front-line managers that elicited positive employee outcomes deal differently
with their HR responsibilities than front-line managers that did not?
With the answer to this question, I aim to propose a new model that encompasses the complexity of the role line managers are playing in the HR function nowadays. Furthermore, the model should show how different variation-factors for line managers’ HR practice implementation and execution have influence on the outcomes of those practices on employees. Moreover, this new model could potentially be a more detailed revision of Purcell and Hutchinson’s (2007) “people management-performance causal chain (p.7)”. Furthermore, a new detailed model could potentially provide new insights for a more accurate way of operationalizing the line manager’s role in the HR function, than Sikora and Ferris’ (2014) quantitative operationalization of “Line Manager HR Practice Implementation Level (p.277)”. I will now describe the research design, methodology and strategy for analysis used to answer the research question in this study.
Methodology
This exploratory qualitative study at a large multinational, aimed to explore differences and commonalities between line managers that elicited different employee outcomes, in terms of how they dealt with HR responsibilities. Following Eisenhardt’s (1989) process of building theory from case study research, this section of the study explains the
16 adopted research design, including the sampling rationale, sample selection, research instruments, and strategy for analysis.
Sampling rationale
Because this study aimed to look for differences in the way line managers dealt with their HR responsibilities, the research design required a sample that consisted of multiple comparable groups of line managers based on the outcomes they elicited on employees. To get a suitable sample, I first had to make sure to select line managers that can be compared with each other. In order to reduce unnecessary differences between the line managers in the sample, I chose to select line managers that work in similar business units of the multinational. A major advantage of this choice is that the line managers within the sampling frame perform similar jobs, which makes it more likely that they had to make similar choices and faced similar issues.
Second, in order to be able to group and compare the sample of line managers, I had to operationalize “employee outcomes” as a variable. In order to do so, I used available survey results from the multinational as a secondary data source. These results contain measures that indicate how well line managers scored on employee engagement. The multinational where this study was conducted measured for each line manager how well they scored on eliciting employee engagement. This provided me the opportunity to select line managers that scored high, average and low on employee engagement. Thus, I used employee engagement as a measure for “employee outcomes”. Line managers that scored in the top quartile (TQ) in the employee engagement survey (i.e. that scored high on employee engagement) are selected for the group that was successful in eliciting positive employee outcomes. Line managers that scored in the bottom quartile (BQ) in the employee engagement survey (i.e. that scored low on employee engagement) are selected for the group that was unsuccessful in eliciting positive employee outcomes. The line managers that scored in the middle group (MG) in the
17 employee engagement survey (i.e. that scored average on employee engagement) are included as a third group in this study in order to cover the whole range of the employee engagement survey.
Finally, only line managers with a minimal team size of eight people have a survey score on employee engagement. Thus, as a consequence of using the survey, only line managers with team sizes larger than eight people were included.
Taken together, this study used the following sampling frame: Line managers that work within similar business units, with a minimal team size of eight people, and that have a score on employee engagement.
Sample selection
Because knowing to which group (top quartile (TQ), bottom quartile (BQ) or middle group (MG)) a line manager belongs could potentially cause interviewer bias, I have decided to let the multinational select a suitable sample. In total twenty line managers, which together covered all three groups, have been approached. Fourteen were willing to participate and were distributed between the three groups as follows:
Which exact line manager belonged to which of the three groups was revealed by the multinational in the final phase of the analysis, when I finished the within-case analysis and was ready to conduct the within-group and between-group analysis. A further explanation of the strategy of analysis will be given after the methodology section.
LM that scored low on employee engagement (BQ) 4 line managers LM that scored average on employee engagement (MG) 5 line managers LM that scored high on employee engagement (TQ) 5 line managers
18 Research instrument
The main research instrument used in this study is a semi-structured interview
(Appendix 1) with each participating line manager. The interviews have been held in random
order and lasted between 45-60 minutes on average. All the interviews have been recorded and transcribed in Microsoft Word. Furthermore, the interviews have not been linked to the participants’ names. Instead interviewee numbers will be used (i.e. interviewee # 1-14) in order to distinguish between the different line managers. The recordings were for research purposes only and were deleted after the study has been completed.
I used the same interview protocol for all managers in order to be able to compare between the managers. The interview questions have been formulated in such a way that no indication was given that the line managers belonged to a group. This helped to prevent interviewee bias.
The interview started with questions that identified personal differences or commonalities between line managers, such as age, years worked for the company, years of experience as a line manager and team size. Next, I asked questions that identify information about the factors that could cause variation in how line managers have dealt with their HR responsibilities. The interview protocol covered all variation factors described in the theoretical background, such as motivation, affinity, time, competences, perceived importance, and policy and procedure. Each topic started with a broad question that left room for other arguments and factors that could potentially play a role in how line managers deal with their HR responsibilities, that arose during an interview, but were not mentioned in the theoretical background.
19
Strategy for analysis
Within-case analysis
Before I was able to make a comparison between (groups of) line managers, I first needed to answer the question: How did this particular line manager deal with his or her HR responsibilities? To answer this question for each of the participating line managers independently, I used NVivo software to code the pieces of text in each of the interviews that provided information on how a particular line manager dealt with his HR responsibilities. In the coding process, I used the main variation-factors described in the theoretical background, but at the same time, I remained open for new emerging factors that could cause variation in how line managers deal with their HR responsibilities. When the coding process was done, I exported all codes and sub-codes to Microsoft Word and printed them. Then, I started analyzing the topics code by code. For each participant, I made a brief overview of what that participant was saying about a particular code.
Revealing the group composition
After I coded all of the interviews independently without knowing to which group the line managers belonged and after I made overviews of what each participant said about each code, it was the right time to reveal the composition of each group. That is, the multinational revealed to me which of the line managers scored high on employee engagement (TQ), which line managers scored average on employee engagement (MG), and which line managers scored low on employee engagement (BQ). At this point I united the information from individual line managers that had elicited similar levels of employee engagement. The group composition was as follows:
20 Within-group analysis
When the composition of the groups was revealed, I was able to look for patterns within the three groups. First, for each code and sub-code, I put the overview of the participants from the same groups together. Next, for each code and sub-code, I compared the overviews of the participants within each groups and answered the following questions:
How did line managers from this group (TQ, MG or BQ) deal with this topic? What are commonalities and differences within each group?
Then, I summarized the main findings, patterns and differences found within the groups in an overview per group. With these overviews I started to look for an answer on the research question (i.e. looking for differences between the three groups).
Between-group analysis
During the final phase of the analysis, I compared the main group findings of the three groups for each code and sub-code. I looked for answers to the following four questions:
What were commonalities between the three different groups in terms of how line managers dealt with their HR responsibilities?
What were differences between the three different groups in terms of how line managers dealt with their HR responsibilities?
Interviewee # 1 Interviewee # 7 Interviewee # 2 Interviewee # 6 Interviewee # 9 Interviewee # 3 Interviewee # 10 Interviewee # 11 Interviewee # 4 Interviewee # 13 Interviewee # 12 Interviewee # 5 Interviewee # 14 Interviewee # 8
Group composition sample
Top Quartile Group Middle Group
21
Results
Based on the analysis of the interview data, I found useful insights within five broad categories that each contains several sub-categories that help us understand the complexity of the role line managers currently have in the HR function. These categories are competences, time management, motivation, policy and procedure and support by HR specialists, and these
categories match with the five variation-factors that Bos-Nehles (2010) described in her article. However, I did not only find indications for differences and variation within these five categories between the different groups of line managers. I also found indications that some of the categories or sub-categories might not result in differences between successful and unsuccessful line managers.
In the upcoming section, I will describe the role that each of the five broad categories and its subcategories seems to have in how successful line managers deal with their HR responsibilities and thereby elicit desired outcomes on employees. Moreover, based on the interview data I will illustrate indications for differences and commonalities between the groups that arose in each of the categories. These findings are based on the experiences and perceptions of the line managers themselves and exemplary quotations will be provided to put the findings in perspective.
The results section is structured as follows. First, I will provide some background on the descriptive questions that have been asked in the interview. Next, I will provide results in the five broad categories in the following order: Competences, time management, motivation, policy and procedure, and support by HR specialists.
22 Descriptive information
By asking descriptive questions to the line managers about age, job title, team size, educational background, years in the organization and years in a hierarchical leadership role, I aimed to check for individual differences between the line managers. We see that in most of these areas there are hardly any significant differences within and between the groups (i.e. in age, job title, team size, educational background an years in the organization). What strikes is that four out of five line managers in the Top Quartile Group work only for less than five years in a formal hierarchical leadership role, whereas in the Bottom Quartile Group and Middle Group most of the line managers have been in such a role for more than ten years. Although we cannot draw conclusions based on this finding, I found it striking and worth mentioning that within this sample four people with fewer experience in a leadership role than at least eight of the other line managers, scored high on employee engagement.
Category 1: Competences
To get information about a line manager’s competences in people management, I explored three topics. First, I asked the line managers what they perceive to be the most important tasks and competences to fulfil their role. Secondly, I asked the line managers about the acquisition of their knowledge and skills in people management and if they think they possess enough knowledge and skills to do their job. And thirdly, I looked for experiences when the line managers were new in their role.
Core line manager competences
By asking line managers what they see as their most important tasks and competences, I aimed to get an overview of the core competences line managers must possess to successfully fulfil their role. Based on the interview data we can derive two broad sets of
23 competences line managers must possess to fulfil their role successfully: (1) technical competences, and (2) people management and leadership competences. I will now describe the findings of both.
In terms of technical competences, the line managers argue that it is crucial as a line manager to possess deep technical knowledge and skills. The interview data shows that these knowledge and skills seem to be necessary to coach and develop staff in the work that they do, and to manage the quality in their work. This was mentioned by line managers in all three groups (BQ, MG, and TQ), which indicates that all line managers see deep technical competences as a core competence to successfully fulfil their role. Although this finding is consistent with previous research (e.g. Whittaker & Marchington, 2003) I think it is necessary to highlight what can happen when a line manager does not have enough deep technical knowledge and skills in the area of their team’s work. Line manager # 1 from the Bottom Quartile Group gives us an illustration of how he experienced to work with insufficient technical competences:
“I had quite a lot of problems in my previous team. That they in fact... they even said:
The team lead needs to have intensive knowledge of the work which is performed in
the team. If you are running a team far beyond your own competences, than it is more
difficult to judge and to value their job and the content of their job, and how they are
performing in their job. That is difficult to appraise.”
In terms of people management and leadership competences we find that line managers in all three groups (BQ, MG, and TQ) seem to be well-aware that they are responsible for the management of their people and leading them towards high performance. Examples of competences that came across in nearly all interviews are coaching, developing, stretching, and giving feedback to staff. For example two successful line managers (# 5 and # 8) from the Top Quartile Group describe:
24 “An important thing for me is coaching people in my team. That is, to make sure they
enjoy the work, they don’t find too many hurdles and that they are able to overcome
hurdles, with or without me.
“…to ensure that the people face as few barriers as possible to complete their work in
a way that makes them happy.”
So we see that line managers in all groups have indicated that technical competences, as well as people management and leadership competences are necessary to successfully fulfil their role. The difficulty for organizations however, seems to be able to find the right balance between deep technical competences, and people management and leadership competences within their line managers. Line manager # 8 from the Top Quartile Group provides us an illustration of what such a balance should look like:
“I would think people who generally are successful individual contributors…to be
honest…they are chasing a promotion. So they view the leadership / management
track as a way to get to higher levels. Because there are not a whole lot of
opportunities to get into a higher job level in the technical ranks. So these people are
very successful at being individual contributors, they are very brilliant in terms of
science and technology. But at the end of the day, you have to be certain amount of
people person. And I would say a lot of people are generally not good at relationships
and you háve to be able to be good at that in order to be successful as a team lead.
Because a great deal of it is building and maintaining good relations. I think the
people that voiced some discontent would be a lot happier if they had the same job level in a sort of technical expert role.”
25 Acquisition of competences
To find out how line managers acquired their competences in people management I asked them to provide a background on how and where they have learned their knowledge and skills in people management. When we look at the interview data we can derive three main findings. One, most of the line managers across all groups (12 out of 14 line managers) mention that the acquisition of people management competences goes mostly through “on-the-job experience” and “learning by doing”. For example line manager # 6 from the Bottom Quartile Group describes:
“70% is on-the-job learning. You have to start by making some mistakes and find out
the hard way.”
Two, most of the line mentioned across all groups (11 out of 14 line managers) mention they have had some kind of formal leadership or HR-related training in their lives. For example line manager # 5 explains:
“Once I went to a leadership course, the mid-level leadership program.”
Three, we can see that the leaders of the line managers can play a role in acquiring HR-related competences by “helping the line managers” or being a “role model” for them. Line manager # 11 is an example that found useful support from their own line manager:
“My own bosses…I think they were very helpful to me in getting the skills faster.”
However, the frequency for this factor (6 out of 14 line managers) is much lower than for “on-the-job experience” and “formal training”, which could indicate that not all line managers receive useful help from their own leaders.
26 In table 1 we find an overview of exemplary quotations across all three groups that show us there are no big differences between the three groups in terms of acquisition of competences in people management. Furthermore, the exemplary quotations in table 1 indicate that “on-the-job experience” plays a much bigger role than “formal leadership or HR-related training”, because most line managers indicate that they somewhere in the past have had some kind of formal training, but none of them tells us they are continuously being trained in people management.
Besides the three ways of acquiring competences in people management illustrated above, the line managers have mentioned some other ways in which they have acquired their knowledge and skills in people management. For example one line manager emphasizes that being a line manager has a lot to do with your personality and your norms and values:
BQ # 6 On-the-job experience “70% is on the job learning. You have to start by making some mistakes and find out the hard way”
BQ # 1 Formal training “I had a short course on behaviors and management style types” BQ # 10 Support own manager “Working with some really good managers”
MG # 14 On-the-job experience “Well I think initially a lot of it was just being exposed and learning, you know, on-the-job if you want to call it that”
MG # 9 Formal training “In my previous organization I went to a lot of leadership programs”
MG # 11 Support own manager “My own bosses…I think they were very helpful to me in getting the skills faster”
TQ # 4 On-the-job experience “I am handling people for the last, maybe 15 years. I think my style of managing people I have grown or learned through my work”
TQ # 5 Formal training “Once I went to a leadership course, the mid-level leadership program”
TQ # 8 Role model “A good deal of it was from watching my line managers; that helped me to get an idea of what I thought would be good traits for a supervisor and poor traits for a supervisor”.
TABLE 1 Exemplary Quotation Description Interviewee Group Acquisition of competences
27 “So part of it is your own personality. I think it comes from my parents and my
interactions with close family I would say. So what I try to do is I try to treat my
colleagues and my staff in the multinational in the same way I treat my family. So again, I treat the people around me the way I hope that they would want to treat me.”
Based on the interview data we can see that there do not seem to be big differences between the three groups (BQ, MG, and TQ) in terms of how they acquired their HR-related competences. “On-the-job experience” seems to play the biggest role in all groups, and leaders in all groups seem to have had some kind of “formal training” in the past.
New in line manager role
The indication that “on-the-job experience” seems to be the most important source in the acquisition competences in people management can be backed up when we look at responses to the question how it was like when they were new in a team lead role. Again we see that there do not seem to be big differences between the three groups in terms of how they experienced their role when they were new in that role. Table 2 shows us exemplary quotations from all three groups that indicate that it when line managers start in their role they first have to experience how their role works and who the people are they can reach out to. This finding seems logical, but is important because it seems that if organizations want their line managers to be successful from the start, they initially need to support and help their line managers with onboarding in their role. Line manager # 4 explains us:
“When I started as a new team lead, of course I had lots of questions. I was still
grabbling to find out how the many systems and structures worked. I was not yet
aware of that. Because in this multinational there is no formal training that a team lead gets on the moment he becomes a team lead.”
28 Category 2: Time management
Time management refers to how line managers deal with their time in order to fulfil all the tasks they have. I have found two factors that could potentially play a role in how line managers deal with their HR responsibilities: (1) the available time (or capacity) they have, and (2) where they focus on when prioritizing between all their tasks.
Available time
The first ‘time management’ factor that plays an important role in how line managers deal with their tasks and responsibilities is the amount of time they have available to perform all their tasks. Table 3 illustrates exemplary quotations of how line managers responded to the
BQ # 6 New as line manager “It is fine now, but you have to understand how it works, right? And you need to know the people where you can go to.”
BQ # 13 New as line manager “In my last series of team leader roles I felt quite comfortable. When I did my first team leaders role, that was in 1981, yeah I found that much more an adventure”
MG # 9 New as line manager “My department is new and still being set up. Currently I am leaning a lot on my line manager. But maybe one year down the line things will change. I am going to be kind of a lot more self-dependent.”
MG # 10 New as line manager “When I started as a team lead it was difficult to deal with underperformance. I wasn't comfortable about that. I didn't know what to do, I didn't know how to deal with it. Whereas today it doesn't bother me anymore. ”
TQ # 3 New as line manager “Let's say, when you are a few years in this job, then it is no issue. Then you have seen how it works. But when you are on day one of being a manager, than you have no clue of the sitation or what your task is. You just do something”
TQ # 4 New as line manager “When I started as new team lead, of course I had lots of questions. I was still grabbling to find out how the many systems and structures worked. I was not yet aware of that. Because in this multinational there is no formal training that a team lead gets on the moment he becomes a team lead”
TABLE 2 New in line manager role
29 question if they have enough time to perform all their tasks. What we can see is that in all three groups of this case study there were line managers who mentioned in their interviews that they do not have enough time to perform all their tasks or that they are very busy and have long working days. Moreover, two line managers in the Top Quartile Group (#3 and #5) indicated that they have sufficient time as long as there are no issues. When there are issues in their team that they have to deal with, they indicate that they would need more time. So, overall line managers indicated that time is a scarce resource and that most line managers work on a tight, if not overloaded, time schedule and thus, there do not seem to be big differences between the three groups in terms of available time.
Furthermore, we can see that only two line managers (i.e. #10 in the Bottom Quartile Group and # 8 in the Top Quartile Group; see table 3 for their exemplary quotations) indicated that they do have enough time, but that they will work extra hours when it is necessary. Ironically these two line managers have the lowest and the highest score on eliciting employee engagement. This suggests that enough time is not necessarily a crucial factor in terms eliciting outcomes on employees.
There are two potential practical implications when line managers do not have enough time to do all their tasks. First, line managers are often in a position in which they have to choose how much time and effort they will put in a particular task that they have to do, and thus have to prioritize. As line manager # 11 from the Middle Group tells us:
“We have to manage our time well. That is something…ehh…we have to do all the time. So it’s quite possible that at some point in time we may not be able to focus
equally on all these things. There are times we have to prioritize. So it’s not
30 Consequently, the way line managers prioritize influences how they fulfil their role. In the next section we will discuss how line managers in the current case study prioritize.
A second implication of limited available time is that line managers can unintentionally cause extra pressure on their team members, which could potentially elicited undesired attitudes and behaviors on employees. The following quote tells us:
Interviewee # 14 – Middle Group
“People will tell me: ‘look you know, indeed you do a great job here, but in some
instances I feel a little bit pressured when you are sending me e-mails on the weekends or late in the evenings…you know…early in the mornings…I kind of feel that that
drives an expectation’.”
BQ # 6 Not enough time “It's more the time pressure I think. That is really my main worry.”
BQ # 10 Enough time “I do have enough time. And if I don't then I put in a littly bit of over-time once in a while” BQ # 13 Not enough time “No, I don't have enough time”
MG # 7 Not enough time “I don't feel I have enough time. That's why I have asked for two team leads.” MG # 9 Long working day “Typically I come to office at 9 AM…probably until 7:30 PM or 8:00 PM”
MG # 14 Not enough time “Me personally no, absolutely not. I am constantly running against the very full back law”
TQ # 2 Not enough time “I have indicated that I have not enough time”
TQ # 5 Depends on issues “If everything goes smooth and you know what to expect, you can manage it. As soon as you have an issue in your team, for example a person that doesn't perform well…then it suddenly becomes a lot of work.”
TQ # 8 Enough time “I generally manage to keep my weekends clean, yes. I would say I am full, but I am not overworked”
TABLE 3 Available time
31 This implication suggests that when line managers prioritize, they must not only choose how much time and effort they will put in a particular task, but also take into account when they perform a particular task, especially when a task involves team members or other stakeholders.
In sum, the findings show that in general line managers have a very busy role and that their time is a scarce resource that has to be managed properly. In the next section we will zoom in on how line managers manage their time. Where earlier research indicated that line managers must have enough time to fulfil their role successfully (e.g. Bos-Nehles, 2010), we see in table 1 that none of the line managers has a luxury of time. This finding could indicate that enough time is influencing the line manager’s role, but since we see no differences in the interview date, it does not seem to be a sufficient predictor of success for line managers in terms of eliciting high levels of desired employee outcomes.
Prioritizing
We have seen that line managers in all groups have a very busy schedule and thus have to prioritize continuously in their role. This means that how they prioritize, what they perceive as important, and what as unimportant will play a crucial role in how they divide their time and efforts between all their tasks. And thus, how line managers prioritize is likely to influence how well their tasks, including HR responsibilities, will be implemented and executed. The interview data shows several indications of how line managers try to deal with all their tasks in a limited amount of time. For example line manager # 6 says:
"When I did one-on-ones with my staff and I come back, in the meantime I received
twenty more e-mails. That is difficult for me, how to…ehm…how to decide what things
32 And line manager # 7 says:
"Every day when I come in I generally try and look at my e-mail first. Just to see what
the highest priority is. Some things I just do when I have time"
So clearly line managers are struggling with this tension and continuously have to make choices in terms of prioritizing. In this research we have asked each line manager what their top priorities are, which tasks they perceive as important or valuable, and which tasks they perceive as unimportant or not valuable. In table 4A (BQ and MG) and table 4B (TQ) exemplary quotations show us where line managers focus on when they prioritize. We see that line managers can focus on many different factors when prioritizing, including support of staff, business reality, health and safety, and their own boss. What strikes most is that all line managers in the Top Quartile Group (Table 4B) are focused on supporting their staff, combined with keeping an eye on business reality. For example line manager # 2 says:
“Most important is to motivate the people, and develop them. So they are doing their
current role well, and so they are enjoying it. And that everything keeps running.”
Whereas in the other two groups (BQ and MG; Table 4A) line managers have very different focusses and only a few line managers indicate ‘staff support’ as their top priority. This finding could indicate that it is not clear for the leaders in these groups where their focus needs to be or that they find it difficult to see what is really their top priority. For example line manager 13 tells us:
“Prioritizing is always a bit of a juggle…if there are requests from customers I have
to make a sort of judgment how important…and how urgent it is. Because some people, they
33 BQ # 1 Peak times "I focus more on people management tasks in the time of goal setting and appraisals."
BQ # 6 Support staff "Most important I think as a team lead is to be there for the people and to enable them to do their jobs. And that sounds easy, but it's quite difficult because it means that they have to be stretched, but not too much. Ehm motivated, but also being developed."
Boss "Of course everything your boss sends you is important"
BQ # 10 Recruitment "Half of my team are externall contractors. So it's hard to keep people. Recruitment of people is my most important task.
BQ # 13 Business reality "Prioritizing is always a bit of a juggle. Let's say if there are projects that we deliver for customers, that need immidiate attention, then I think by definition they get first priority. If there are also requests from customers, then I have to make a sort of judgement how important ..and how urgent it is. Because some people, they say that everything you need to do for them is a top priority or extremely urgent."
Support staff "To ensure that my staff delivers good quality for our customers. That staff gets good opportunities to develop themselves. Of course also have sufficient work to keep the team always occupied with work."
MG # 7 Clients + support staff "I think probably twofold. One is to be the main contact for clients. The other aspect is then of course supporting my team.
Health and safety "Personal issues, a health issue or something like that. I try and do those with all the highest priority"
MG # 9 Location ready "Getting the lab ready in the new location. That is actually my top priority. I must make sure that we have people who are skilled and who are well connected to the business."
MG # 11 Support staff "The tasks and activities we do towards development of people and engaging and enthusing staff, I think that is the higher priority for me."
Business reality "Projects have a time line. So clearly that is in mind when I prioritize some of the activities on the technical side. So ehh, if there is something that is approaching a deadline, obviously that goes higher on priority."
MG # 14 Health and safety "The most important thing is we want everybody to go home in as good or better shape than they came".
Support staff "Maybe the single biggest focus is engagement of staff."
Boss "When the supervisor raises the question, it raises priorities of those tasks." TABLE 4A
Focus when prioritizing (BQ +MG)
34 The exemplary quotations in table 4B do not only indicate that line managers in the Top Quartile Group focus on support staff. They also could be connected to a transformational leadership style. The following exemplary quote by line manager # 5 contains elements of the transformational leadership dimensions ‘individualized consideration’ (e.g. coaching) and ‘intellectual stimulation’ (e.g. overcoming problems by themselves):
“Most important is to make sure that our team can do the work that they intended to
do. A major part of my role is to make sure that everything keeps running. Important
for me is coaching people in my team. That is, to make sure they enjoy the work, they don’t find too many hurdles, and that they are able to overcome hurdles, with or
without me.”
This finding suggests that a focus on supporting and developing the people in your team plays an important role if line managers want to succeed in eliciting desired employee outcomes. Moreover, consistent with earlier research, this finding suggests that a line manager’s transformational leadership skills have influence on being successful in eliciting high levels of desired employee outcomes. Finally, if organizations want line managers to prioritize in similar ways, the quotes in table 4A and 4B illustrate that efforts are necessary to get everybody on the same page.
35 Category 3: Motivation
Line managers can be intrinsically and extrinsically motivated to perform HR-related tasks. On the one hand, to see if a line manager is intrinsically motivated to manage people, I aimed to find out if they have affinity with people management by asking them what they do and don’t perceive as fun in their role. On the other hand, I asked line managers whether they are being incentivized by their organization or the HR department to check for extrinsic motivation.
Affinity
When we look at what line managers perceive as fun in their role as managers of people (Table 5A), the interview data indicates that line managers in the Top Quartile Group have an absolute affinity with guiding, mentoring, coaching and developing their staff. They
TQ # 2 Support staff + "Most important is to motivate the people, and develop them. So they are doing their Business reality current role well, and so they are enjoying it. And that everything keeps running."
TQ # 3 Support staff "Most important ia let's say, yeah, lead my people and set priorities for them, and find work for them, check their work."
Business reality "You make choices. It is billable to give training to operators. It is not billable to develop things for the future. We get a target to be billable."
TQ # 4 Support staff "The most important role which I consider is developing the people, especially because my team is relatively new. My second priority is to get the right kind of work and gather the right kind of experience, and consolidate into my team"
TQ # 5 Support staff "Most important is to make sure that our team can do the work that they intended to do. A major part of my role is to make sure that everything keeps running. Important for me, is coaching people in my team. That is, to make sure they enjoy the work, they don't find too many hurdles and that they are able to overcome hurdles, with or without me."
TQ # 8 Support staff "My top priority is to ensure that the people have as few barriers as possible to complete their work in a way that makes them happy."
Business reality "In a big company, the priorities tend to shift, depending on external circumstances. If one of the sites has a major issue…we would probably drop a lot of things to support the site, because at the end of the day those are the places where the money is made."
TABLE 4B Focus when prioritizing (TQ)
36 are truly intrinsically motivated to get the best out of their people and find it rewarding when they are the person who achieved that. For example line manager # 2 tells us:
“It is really rewarding when you see that you make an improvement in the
performance of a person. That somebody develops, and you have worked on that.”
When we compare this finding with exemplary quotations from line managers in the Bottom Quartile Group (Table 5A), we can see that the focus of what is perceived is fun is completely different among these line managers. Line manager # 6 indicates that he likes his job when his staff is happy:
“When people are happy with what they need to be doing.”
Another line manager (#1) indicates to be happy when he can make his staff happy with extrinsic rewards:
“Make people happy with a salary raise or bonus.”
Line manager # 13 does indicate that he likes to develop his staff members, but he also indicates that this development is focused on preparing his staff for their next role, and not for their current role:
“Working with the people and developing them and trying to position them for future
roles.”
Thus, based on the interview data we can see a clear difference here in how line managers that scored high levels of desired employee outcomes perceive their role differently than line managers that scored low levels of desired employee outcomes, which might indicate that organizations should be looking for line managers that have affinity with the
